Final course evaluations Sociology 740   Advanced Social Psychology II    Spring 2002

With the exception of the last question, scores range from 1 = Instructor is below average to 5 = Instructor is superior. On the last question, the range is 1 = YES, 0 = NO.

	Mean
Instructor demonstrates enthusiasm for the subject	4.7000
Instructor is effective in stimulating interest in the subject	4.3000
Instructor communicates a genuine desire to help students learn	4.4000
Instructor is willing to help students outside the classroom	4.6000
Instructor is always present in class and arranges a substitute presentation	4.8000
Instructor is prepared for each class meeting	4.8000
Instructor explains the material clearly and understandably	4.6000
Instructor's lectures are well organized	4.4000
Instructor gives directions for assignments that are clearly understood	4.4000
Instructor fully explains his or her grading standards and implements them accordingly	4.2000
Overall, how would you grade this instructor as an effective teacher	4.6000
Would you want to take another course from this instructor	1.0000

Valid N = 5

Evaluation of Lecturing Performance

n Overall, lectures were quite informative and presented in an interesting format. I would recommend more time be allowed for debate, if possible. Also, more applications to real-life events, past and present.

n Varied, but all instructors gave good lectures/facilitated good discussion. Some were exceptional.

n Overall, good.

n All the lectures seemed well-organized and were clearly delivered.

Evaluation of Reading Materials

n Overall, quite good. There were a few exceptions, e.g., Fiske & Kinder, but overall Handboo readings are quite dry.

n Relevant to the topics being discussed.

n Great. no complaints.

n Overall, good.

n The materials were generally interesting.

Level of Teaching Sophistication

n Good level - appropriate for this course

n I like having different lecturers, but communication amongh them as to what is expected for weakly writing was sometimes vague. I think some instructors had different meanings for the assignment then than the coordinator did.

n Great. no complaints.

n Very high, but also left time for general conversations

Rapport with Students

n Excellent. Coordinator Markus attended most lectures, even though he wasn't lecturing. His interest in the students was most evident. He is readily available by email, as well as other modes of correspondence.

n Excellent.

n Varied, but all instructors were good. Some were exceptional.

n The coordinator seemed to have a relatively high rapport with the students and weekly lectures went smooth. This indicates at least some sort of rapport.

n Very good.

Overall Evaluation of Instructor

n Excellent. See above. Guest lectures were also excellent - they too displayed interest in students' thoughts and work.

n All instructors were very competent in their areas and did a good job in sharing expertise.

n Seemed well prepared and always interested in the topics.

Overall Evaluation of Class

n Excellent. Assignments were most appropriate for grad level course. I have benefitted considerably from this course.

n Markus did a good job of coordinating the lecture topics in such a way that they were easily integrated with one another. (His attendance at each session, even when someone else was lecturing, facilitated communication and consistency in the class.)

n Good learning experience for me. Reaction papers and integration papers are a good way to "double back" on materials and reinforce what has been read previously.

n The description of weekly assignments did not seem accurate. I mean how the assignment was described, and how it was responded to seemed very different. Through trial and error I was able to improve my weekly assignment grades, but in the beginning my feedback was counter to what I thought was described in teh assignment description.

n Very enjoyable!