Quantitative Reasoning for the Public Interest

Content Analysis of Student Evaluations of Faculty

We coded evaluations of faculty written by students during the 2003-4 academic year. Some were evaluations of 4 credit courses. Most were evaluations of teaching in 8-12 credit programs. In all we coded about 500 evaluations representing the work of about 18 faculty.

The evaluation coding categories were designed by the students. They were drawn from official College statements about Evergreen’s teaching/learning methods and from pre-reading a series of evaluations to determine the topics of most interest to their student authors.

Coding Summary

Comments which fit into each of the coding categories are summarized in the charts and tables below by the following four descriptors:

'Named' means that a comment was made which fit the category but the comment itself did not appear to pass any sort of judgement.

'Negative judgement' means that a comment was made and it was clearly negative.

'Ambiguous judgement' means that a comment was made and it seemed to be judgemental, but the coders could not be sure whether the judgement was positive or negative.

'Positive judgement' means that a comment was made and it was clearly positive.

FACULTY EFFORT

I. Responsiveness to students:	Total Mentions	Named	Negative judgement	Ambiguous judgement	Positive judgement
1. Guidance and advice about student future	28			5	23
2. Prompt and/or helpful feedback about student work	182	1	8	12	161
3. Adapts to student input about program activities/changes/options	68	1	2	2	63

 

II. Fostering Specific Intellectual and Cognitive Abilities:	Total Mentions	Named	Negative judgement	Ambiguous judgement	Positive judgement
4. Opportunities for communicating effectively –writing/speech	168	34	2	10	122
5. Opportunities for scientific/tech/ quantitative work	34	14	1	5	14
6. Opportunities for creative work	57	17	1	4	35
7. Opportunities for integrative/interdisciplinary thinking	75	12	1	9	53
8. Opportunities for independent, and/or critical thinking	120	19		10	91
9. Opportunities for collaborative work	87	20	2	13	52

 

III. Creating an Environment Conducive to Learning:	Total Mentions	Named	Negative judgement	Ambiguous judgement	Positive judgement
10. Safe and/or supportive environment	210	11	1	10	188
11. Openness, and/or civility, and/or engagement with differences	96	7	3	8	78
12. Effective seminar leadership/facilitation	202	4	11	18	169
13. Stimulating and/or challenging environment	196	6	6	14	170

 

IV. Professional Competence:	Total Mentions	Named	Negative judgement	Ambiguous judgement	Positive judgement
14. Subject matter expertise	184	9	4	14	157
15. Appropriate use of lecture/seminar/field/lab strategies	201	9	15	16	161
16. Effective presentations	205	5	7	12	181
17. Effective faculty team	95	1	5	6	83
18. Clear program/course objectives	92	8	15	5	64
19. Good choice of materials/texts/assignments	157	8	7	16	126

 

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

	Total Mentions	Named	Negative judgement	Ambiguous judgement	Positive judgement
20. Effective learning of program material	175	8	2	14	151
21. Encounters with new subject matter	84	7	3	7	67
22. Encounters with new perspectives on self and identity	47	1		4	42
23. Changes/deepening of academic direction	29	2		5	22
24. Affirming an old or creating a new sense of purpose	15			4	11
25. His/her learning across significant differences	26	3		1	22
26.Taking responsibility for his/her own work	54	6	1	6	41
27.Taking action in response to the learning	23			2	21
28.Reflection on the personal consequences of the learning	71	4	1	7	59
29.Reflection on the social significance of the learning	45	3		7	35