Appendix G

Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Results Shaffer BIO 642 Special Topics
Information about the Students 1. What is your year in school?
Count %

First Year Sophomore Junior Senior Grad Student PostBacc Missing Total

0 0 2 9 2 0 0 13

0.0% 0.0% 15.4% 69.2% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

2. What is your gender?

Count %

Male Female Missing Total

3 10 0 13

23.1% 76.9% 0.0% 100.0%

3. Race Are you

Count American Indian Asian Black or African-American Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White Multiracial Missing Total 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 % 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

4. How many semesters of biological science course work have you had prior to enrolling in this course?
None One Two Three Four or more Missing Total Count 0 0 0 1 12 0 13 % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 92.3% 0.0% 100.0%

SPIRE Descriptive Data Tables for Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Forms Prepared by Strategic Evaluations, Inc. (Submitted December 9, 2012)

1 of 5

Appendix G

5. Which best describes you?

I am a science major. I am a non-science major. I am currently undecided on my major. Count 13 0 0 % 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Course Ratings 6. Instructor

a. The instructor was organized and presented material in a logical order. b. The instructor presented material clearly. c. The instructor clearly communicated the goals and objectives of the course. d. The instructor showed enthusiasm for the subject matter. e. The instructor developed a good rapport with the students. f. The instructor was available to students outside of class. g. The instructor provided helpful feedback. h. The instructor varied class activities over the course of the semester. i. The instructors lectures were at an appropriate level for me. j. The instructor taught in a manner that served my needs as a student. k. The instructor used technology appropriately for the course material and course objectives. l. The instructor evaluated my work and performance fairly in this class. m. The instructor made connections to current topics in science research throughout the semester. Strongly Disagree 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Disagree 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Neutral 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Agree 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 7.7% 0.0% 7.7% 7.7% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% Strongly Agree 84.6% 84.6% 84.6% 100.0% 100.0% 92.3% 92.3% 92.3% 92.3% 92.3% 100.0% 92.3% 100.0% Mean STD 4.85 .38 4.85 .38 4.85 .38 5.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 4.92 .277 4.92 .28 4.77 .83 4.92 .28 4.92 .28 5.00 0.00 4.92 .28 5.00 0.00

A higher mean response indicates higher level of agreement, as Strongly Disagree equaled the value of 1 and Strongly Agree equaled the value of 5.

SPIRE Descriptive Data Tables for Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Forms Prepared by Strategic Evaluations, Inc. (Submitted December 9, 2012)

2 of 5

Appendix G

7. Course Format
a. The textbook used was current and comprehensible. b. Lectures were delivered in a clear and interesting manner. c. Lecture material was relevant to the course objectives. d. In-class activities (e.g., labs and discussions) were interesting, relevant and helped me understand the concepts better. e. Out-of-class activities (e.g., group projects and assignments) were interesting, relevant and helped me understand the concepts better. f. Writing assignments were interesting and helped me understand concepts better. g. Instructional technologies and media used in this course contributed to me learning the concepts. h. Exams were clearly written and fair.

Strongly Disagree 0.0%

Disagree 0.0%

Neutral 7.7%

Agree 0.0%

Strongly Agree 0.0%

N/A 92.3%

Mean STD 3.00 N/A

0.0%

7.7%

7.7%

0.0%

84.6%

0.0%

4.62 .96

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

7.7%

92.3%

0.0%

4.92 .28

0.0%

0.0%

7.7%

15.4%

76.9%

0.0%

4.69 .63

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

30.8%

69.2%

0.0%

4.69 .48

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

23.1%

76.9%

0.0%

4.77 .44

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

23.1%

69.2%

7.7%

4.75 .45

0.0%

0.0%

7.7%

38.5%

53.8%

0.0%

4.46 .66

A higher mean response indicates higher level of agreement, as Strongly Disagree equaled the value of 1 and Strongly Agree equaled the value of 5.

Course Ratings cont 8. Student Expectations

a. This course taught me what I wanted to know about the subject matter. b. This course challenged me to think critically and in new ways about the subject matter. c. Taking this course has motivated me to pursue a career in the sciences. d. Taking this course has motivated me to pursue additional courses in this field. e. This course helped motivate me to attend graduate/professional school after I complete my undergraduate degree. Strongly Disagree 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Disagree 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Neutral 7.7% 8.3% 46.2% 46.2% 38.5% Agree 30.8% 33.3% 15.4% 38.5% 30.8% Strongly Agree 61.5% 58.3% 38.5% 15.4% 30.8% Mean STD 4.54 .66 4.50 .67 3.92 .95 3.69 .75 3.92 .86

A higher mean response indicates higher level of agreement, as Strongly Disagree equaled the value of 1 and Strongly Agree equaled the value of 5.

SPIRE Descriptive Data Tables for Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Forms Prepared by Strategic Evaluations, Inc. (Submitted December 9, 2012)

3 of 5

Appendix G

9. Overall
a. b. Overall, considering content, design, and structure, this course was excellent. Overall, considering the syllabus and objectives, the organization of this course was excellent. Overall, considering course content and objectives, this instructor was an effective teacher.

Strongly Disagree 0.0% 0.0%

Disagree 0.0% 0.0%

Neutral 7.7% 0.0%

Agree 15.4% 23.1%

Strongly Agree 76.9% 76.9%

Mean STD 4.69 .63 4.77 .44

c.

0.0%

0.0%

7.7%

7.7%

84.6%

4.77 .60

A higher mean response indicates higher level of agreement, as Strongly Disagree equaled the value of 1 and Strongly Agree equaled the value of 5.

Open-Ended Comments (Alphabetized and edited for student anonymity)

10. Describe ways this course was different from other science courses you have taken at this university.

His teaching methods clearly stood out, it was a lot of information that he clearly taught and we could comprehend. In this course we had a more hands on approach which helped me to understand the objectives that were being taught at that time. Instructor exhibited enthusiasm, explanation of material were clear. Instructor was knowledgeable and enthusiastic. Course introduced lab methods that I was unfamiliar with. Course tied into real life. Real life application Received hands on experience about the process of protein design, no textbook. Small class, more one on one with teacher/students The way that the course was taught, made an impact on how much I retained from each lesson. Having a professor that shows enthusiasm about the subject matter, makes it easier for one to be enthused as well. There was a lot of group work and discussions, lectures first half of semester, lab second half. This course was different from other science courses because of the professor teaching style and the way he conducted his class. This course was more interactive. We did one lab the last few weeks of class which differed from my other classes because we usually changed labs every week.

SPIRE Descriptive Data Tables for Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Forms Prepared by Strategic Evaluations, Inc. (Submitted December 9, 2012)

4 of 5

Appendix G

11. What aspects of this course were most valuable?

Design project and lab project. I appreciated that the instructor took time to make sure that we understand every single subject and allowed us to work together to find answer to questions we did not know. It's easy Learning how the lessons we were taught are being used in everyday life. Learning other careers in science beside academia. Take home exams, never would I be asked to memorize the steps to make a recombinant protein but only if I could do it. Teacher and student relationship. Effective feedback on assignments. Clearly presented material. The aspects most valuable were actually learning what recombinant proteins are and how to make them. The lab part provided good hands on experience. The lab portion, applying knowledge and skills. The physical lab. The lecture slides. The breakdown of the objectives. Instructor's knowledge and experience with proteins. The projects assigned gave a more hands-on approach that assisted in my learning.

12. What suggestions do you have for how the instructor can improve the teaching of this course?

Have student to actually produce their individual proteins. He did an excellent job. Maybe find another way to present lectures but not much way around the way he did it. Hopefully Dr. Shaffer will remain as enthusiastic about teaching this course for future students. I have no known suggestions, other than to continue the teaching style that you brought to our class. I thought he was an excellent and lively instructor. It could be a little boring at times, do something to keep me interested. No suggestions. Dr. Shaffer covered every positive aspect of teaching thoroughly and effectively. Awesome teacher. None Nothing, it was great. Overall, I think the professor did an excellent job at teaching this particular course.

SPIRE Descriptive Data Tables for Fall 2012 Course Evaluation Forms Prepared by Strategic Evaluations, Inc. (Submitted December 9, 2012)

5 of 5