Quantitative Evaluations of Teaching

 
The University of Minnesota requires end of term student evaluations.  The evaluation forms consist of fifteen questions on a 1-7 scale (1= very poor, 7= exceptional).  Most considered are these four questions: 1) instructor’s overall teaching ability, 2) instructor’s knowledge of the subject matter, 3) instructor’s respect and concern for students, and 4) how much the student learned in the course.

Discussion of Quantitative Measures
The first class I taught was Introduction to Sociology.  This was an approximately 100 person lecture in the evenings which also included labs before or after class. This was a challenging class because of the different ages of students (freshman to seniors) and I assigned a fair amount of work including weekly reaction papers and a final paper requiring ethnographic analysis of a public setting. Yet, as my qualitative evaluations show, students were pleased by my utilization of their mid-semester feedback. 

The first time I taught Sociology of Gender I decided to try service learning and made it a mandatory requirement of the class. This proved to be challenging, as not all students were keen to this and thus did not work out as I hoped. Subsequently, when I taught Sociology of Gender for the second time, I utilized the framework I had used for Sociology of the Family, did not require service learning, picked new course readings, and re-vamped my assignments and lectures, which resulted in a great course with high evaluations. 

At the University of Minnesota, writing intensive courses require students to revise their writing. The writing intensive courses I taught (Sociological Perspectives on Race, Class, and Gender) required a significant amount of work and my evaluations in these courses tended to reflect this.  I assigned weekly journals integrating course readings to answer assigned questions and a draft and a final paper.  In relation to writing intensive courses, many students struggle with having their writing constructively critiqued and difficulty with the idea of writing as a process.  Furthermore, the Race, Class, and Gender course tends to include students from a broad variety of majors because it fulfills a University requirement.  This poses not only a challenge in terms building a sociological foundation for the course, but in having non-social science majors write papers for a sociology course.  When I have discussed my teaching evaluations from these courses with a teaching professional from the Center for Teaching at Learning at the University of Minnesota, she stated my evaluation scores exemplified that these were classes with high standards in which students did learn.  Furthermore, upon recommendation from her, the second time I taught this class, on my course evaluations, I had the students answer specific questions about the course to assess students’ learning in regards to the course goals.  Many students in their qualitative comments on the course evaluations did state that they thought that the amount of writing was a lot, but at the same time they would not have learned as much without this amount and type of course work.

The classes I have received the highest evaluations in are Sociology of Family and Sociology of Gender. The reasons why I think these classes worked well link back to my teaching philosophy. I structured class assignments for students to be able to reflect on their lives using a sociological perspective. Furthermore, the final paper assignment for enabled students to pick from three options (personal narrative/family interview, content analysis, or critical book review) on a topic of their choice and interest.  Moreover, I spent a great deal of time prepping lectures for these classes, devising unique activities, and discussion questions. By creating a relaxed but structured atmosphere, students were willing to engage in the class through assignments, classroom discussions, and conversations with me during my office hours.