The University of Missouri at Columbia, Chemistry 2100, Organic Chemistry I, WS07

Teaching Evaluations - Overall Rating 2.8/4.0

Criteria of evaluation W07 W04 W02 F01 W01 F00 S99 W99 W97 F92 W92 F91
Org. and prep. of lectures and discussions 3.18 2.68 3.66 3.83 3.70 3.50 3.85 3.55 3.54 3.40 3.39 3.70
Instructor's enthusiasm for the subject matter 3.75 3.75 3.86 3.94 3.80 3.59 3.88 3.70 3.76 3.54 3.60 3.75
Helpfulness in answering questions and clarifying points 2.55 2.63 3.01 3.56 3.10 2.61 3.55 2.75 2.74 2.54 2.62 2.92
Ability to lecture in a manner which is easily followed 2.25 2.00 3.06 3.33 2.90 2.49 3.40 2.50 2.32 2.45 2.79 2.98
Ability to stimulate interest in the subject 2.62 2.70 3.12 3.56 3.00 2.53 3.47 2.82 2.66 2.67 2.90 2.91
Overall rating of the instructor 2.72 2.61 3.30 3.89 3.30 2.87 3.61 3.01 3.02 2.94 3.00 3.24
Your rating of how much you have learned 2.54 2.04 3.00 3.67 3.10 2.62 3.27 2.46 2.74 2.75 3.20 2.90
Overall rating of the course 2.61 -.-- 3.07 3.78 3.00 2.61 3.38 -.-- 2.71 2.77 -.-- 2.88
Overall rating 2.80 2.59 3.26 3.69 3.28 2.89 3.57 2.97 2.97 2.90 3.05 3.19
Students Starting (Test 1) 210 232 177 32 197 233 - 199 187
Students Finishing (Final) 204 224 149 29 182 214 - 184 173
Student Retention 97% 97% 98% 94% 92% 92% - 92% 93%
Students Advancing (among stud. compl. course) 97% 98% 87% 100% 92% 79% - 92% 77%
Evaluations Returned 109 211 102 18 119 133 - 108 122
Eval's Ret'd by Percent of Students at EoS 53% 94% 68% 62% 65% 62% - 59% 71%
CIITN Level 0 4 5 4 4 2 - 4 4* 0 0 0
TAs 1 5 2 0 2 1 - 1 0 0 0 0
Online Notes Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y** Y* Y* Y*
Online Student Comments Y Y Y Y Y Y - - - - - -

1. List strong and weak features of the lecturer and include
   suggestions for improvement.
2. Compare the lecturer to other you hove had (especially with 
   those in science courses at this level...)
3. List the strong and weak features of the overall course (not the
   lecturer) and include suggestions on how its quality might be improved.
4. Compare the course with the others you have taken.
5. Your overall rating of the course (circle letter grade).
6. My approximate GPA prior to the current semester was _____.

Responses for Chemistry 2100
[Responses are complete and verbatim.  Emphasis by way of bold face ours.  
Instructor comments provided in "{}" parentheses.]

Student 1
1.  Dr. Glaser is very good at explaining things to students in ways that pertain 
to things outside of chemistry.  He is very informative and gets everyone involved.
2. He is one of the best lecturers I have had in all of my college courses.
3. It is a great course.
4. Very good.
5. A
6. 3.2

Student 2
1. Dr. Glaser is an excellent lecturer and he has a way of getting to and 
focusing on what is important in our subject material.
2. This is the first chemistry course in my entire college career that I have 
actually learned something from- I feel I will apply lessons I learned in here to the 
rest of my life. {That is the goal.}
3. I think the course covered almost too much too quick- so there were areas I 
didn't feel as strong as others.
4. See above
5. A
6. 3.35

Student 3
1. left blank
2. very knowledgeable
3. I would like more reinforcement of the material like every time methane is 
said we see the shape.
4. Compares better
5. A
6. 2.4

Student 4
1. Teaches way too fast and never stops to see if everyone is still following 
2. They always ask for questions and make sure we understand before going on.
3. Well organized.
4. Website was easy to follow and organized.
5. C
6. 3.00

Student 5
1. Strong: enthusiastic, has a sense of humor, thinks logically.  Weak: gets 
carried away in material, drowns students with material.
2. Much better teaching, although makes the course harder.
3. lots of material
4. more work
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 6
1. Test were very difficult, lecturer would go through notes very quickly so 
much time was needed to be spent outside of class to learn the material.  
{Even the best & brightest cannot learn a science by just attending lectures.  That 
is no longer understood?}
2. Pretty good.
3. I wish they offered this class later in the afternoon.
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.0

Student 7
1. He seemed like a very good professor with no noticeable weak points.
2. very enthusiastic
3. In addition to test posting, a general study guide would be great.
4. much
5. B
6. 3.2

Student 8
1. Strong: Professor is defiantly [sic] organized, it is really helpful that he posts 
notes online; he is also very helpful in office hours and review sessions.
2. I really appreciate Dr. Glaser's availability and willingness to help.  If 
you are really trying he defiantly [sic] helps you work through the material.
3. I don't really think there is any way to make Organic super exciting, so I 
say change anything.
4. Better than most.
5. A
6. 3.42

Student 9
1. left blank
2. left blank
3. left blank
4. this was awful
5. C
6. 2.85

Student 10
1. Strong: helped with adding review session on Wednesday nights.  Weak: went 
fast during class lecture couldn't keep up.
2. About the same
3. Strong: some sections made sense.  Weak: Will I ever use half of this if not 
a science major? {I hope so.  Science literacy is needed when reading the newspaper.}
4. A lot different from others, much harder.
5. D
6. 3.5

Student 11
1. Lecture did not enhance book & did not help for tests.  Need to do more 
problems in class that will be given on test for better understanding.
2. Not good!
3. This course is a challenge but a good teacher would have easied [sic] the 
4. The other chemistry were better.
5. E
6. 3.0

Student 12
1. Dr. Glaser had a lot of enthusiasm and was very nice to those who didn't 
understand and had helpful review sessions.  Dr. Glaser lectures were hard to 
follow and tests seem to be a bit too hard.
2. Ok, very nice though.
3. It would help if we had other opportunities to earn points in the class.
4. Ok
5. C
6. 3.15

Student 13
1. Strong: makes you think. Weak: you never know what you're going to get with your 
tests, quiz questions and your grade.
2. Compared to Chemistry 1330 this class is much better.  I like this class. 
{The ultimate compliment and rare for teacher of Organic Chemistry.}
3. Have homework to keep me on track.
4. Better than most.
5. B
6. 3.1

Student 14
1. He seems to know a lot, so much about the subject that when he gets to 
lecturing and explaining, most of it is beyond me.  If this class had a recitation 
that brought things down to my level I would do a lot better.
2. He moves a lot faster and has more vague explanations than previous teachers.  
Also, he doesn't use the book but rather his own knowledge to make tests. 
{Yes, I am writing my own tests.}
3. As said above, a recitation would help a lot.
4. Much harder than other courses.
5. C
6. 3.5

Student 15
1. Giving analogies to follow when describing how reactions work. Slow down 
when going through notes.
2. About the same
3. Break it up, have one class that deals with the reactions and another that 
deals with mass spectrometry.
4. a little better
5. B
6. 2.5

Student 16
1. Strong: High interest in material.  Weak: ability to get point across.  
Rather than simply using the note packets {I wrote those notes; these are not 
publishewr supplied packets}, work out problems.  In the first part of 
the course we went through 6 chapters and were required to cover 4 chapters in two 
weeks time.  Poor planning.  {QUITE TO THE CONTRARY:  Excellent planning!}
2. In comparison to lectures I would say below par.
3. Course strong, good amount of information.
4. About average
5. B
6. 3.2

Student 17
1. I was impressed at the beginning of the semester on how he was excited about 
chemistry and told us he loved to teach it.  But as the semester went on he seemed to 
assume that we know things that we had never learned before which caused me to start 
falling behind.  {I started to build on materials we had already covered.}
2. I think he is way over our heads compared to others that I had others were 
better explaining subjects and making sure we understood.  
3. The course was hard but seemed fine.
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.6

Student 18
1. Strong: excited by material, provided analogies, review sessions are very 
helpful.  Weak: slow in beginning, then had to speed up way too much at end.
2. provides good examples to work on in class, really wants to make sure we 
3. Strong: Old tests online/good website.  Improve the pacing.
4. Difficult material
5. A
6. 3.8

Student 19
1. Jumps around a lot, makes it hard/a guessing game to figure out what he wants 
us to know.  State goals, start review sessions earlier in semester.
2. Very unorganized {??} but notes helped a little once he started to put them up.
3. Clearer objectives and goals.
4. Very unorganized {??}, hard to see what we should be learning.
5. C
6. left blank

Student 20
1. He does not cover anything he puts on the test.  He teaches general 
mechanisms then expects you to know all the complexities.  {Two thirds of the 
tests are straight from covred materials; the rest includes tiny and simple 
modifications and less than 5 percent on a test qualifies as "hard".} 
2. worst ever
3. The course is fine, a little dull and fast paced.
4. Not my favorite.
5. E
6. 3.8

Student 21
1. Knows a lot about subject, but can't convey in a learning conducive way.  Needs 
to slow down and give extra material to help practice concepts. {Slow down and 
add extra material?  Hmmmm.}
2. He rates about the same, maybe a tad below.
3. Too much info in too little time, and the whole chemistry department writes 
tests, grades and teaches will below par.  Improve by slowing down, giving extra 
problems to help work and more time with TAs. 
4. Terrible compared to any non-chemistry course.
5. B
6. 3.66

Student 22
1. Very excited about the subject, however intimidating when it come to asking 
questions.  Students afraid to go to review sessions because instructor singles 
students out and made them feel stupid. {This is simply not true.}
2. Tests were nothing like his review sessions, making them useless (this is 
factually  not true), unlike other teachers who provide study material.
3. Too many chapters and not enough time.
4. More time consuming even without a lab.
5. C
6. 3.75

Student 23
1. Enthusiastic and doesn't bore his listener.
2. Pretty comparative to other lectures, but more enthusiastic.
3. no comment
4. Like I said in #2. Pretty comparative to others I have taken.
5. B
6. 3.95

Student 24
1. He spoke well and was easy to listen to.  He did occasionally bring up 
politics in class, which I think he shouldn't have. 
2. I'd rate him among the better lecturers I've had.
3. A lot of the material was very tedious.
4. Average
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 25
1. Good explanations and enthusiasm.  Maybe a little more chalk talk driving lecture.  
Awesome review sessions.
2. I had [name of colleague omitted] the first time I took this course and I feel I 
actually understand now.
3. Good course, good pace.
4. Excellent.
5. A
6. 3.0   Thank you!

Student 26
1. I like the personification of atoms and molecules.  {Thanks for noticing.  
That strategy really does help, doesn't it?}  He made the subject seem less dry.  He 
clearly cares about out grades based on his willingness to do weekly review 
sessions. He once or twice for too inverse on some topics.  I agree with his 
points but sometimes its best to tailor to your audience.
2. He was among the best.
3. I like emphasis on only a few exams.
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.3

Student 27
1. Strong: He gives quizzes to help boost grades.  Weak: he just rambles on 
about the material, but it is not explained thoroughly.  it feels rushed, should slow 
2. Mush less organized than other science lecturers.
3. Strong: a lot of new interesting material.  Weak: hard to understand.
4. A lot harder, because it is hard to understand.
5. D
6. 3.2

Student 28
1. Very enthusiastic, and gives detailed explanations.  it would be confusing 
when the lecture did not go in the same order as the book.
2. Information is presented much more clearly than most science classes.  Also 
Dr. Glaser was very helpful in office hours.
3. It feels that we are going faster at the end; maybe spread it out more 
4. Information is reasonably easy to understand.  Test asks a reasonable amount 
of information.
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 29
1. He knows a lot about the subject, but does a terrible job of teaching it.  He 
needs to slow down on his notes and make the notes follow the book. {Even 
when the book makes little sense?} He expects is to know things we'd have not way of 
2. My other science lecturers are amazing compared to him.  I actually feel like 
I learned something in my other classes.
3. The course is good, difficult but good.
4. Others are more beneficial.
5. D
6. 2.9

Student 30
1. Lot of chemistry not enough time.
2. Test us on material we have been taught.
3. Lot of chemistry not enough time. {So true!}
4. difficult
5. B
6. left blank

Student 31
1. He is very knowledgeable and kind.  Conveys information in a way that is 
easily followed and is really interesting, the review sessions were extremely 
helpful.  The last week of the course was taught really quickly.
2. I enjoy his manner of teaching.  You can tell he is genuinely concerned if 
students understand the material and not just the exams.  {Thank you.}
3. The course was very solid.  I felt I learned a lot.
4. Very good, I enjoyed it.
5. left blank
6. 3.6

Student 32
1. Dr. Glaser was very interested in the subject matter.  I would suggest 
spreading the material evenly throughout the semester though.  5 or 6 of the 12 
chapters on the final is a lot.
2. He is by far the most effective lecturer I've encountered.
3. Course was relatively well put together.
4. Very good.
5. B
6. 2.89

Student 33
1. Strong: Can give good explanations and is enthusiastic.  Weak: unrealistic 
expectations for students.  Moved slowly at first then did several chapters in one 
week.  Test over material that was vaguely covered.
2. As a lecturer similar.  Lectures difficult to follow.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.98

Student 34
1. Strong: very enthusiastic and passionate about class and subject. Weak: 
expects us to know things that are not common sense to us even thought it is to him.
2. A lot easier to follow and more outlined approach than other teachers I've had.
3. So much to learn in so little time.
4. Hard but more practical.
5. B
6. 2.7

Student 35
1. Good at making [sic] & easy to follow.
2. very good.
3. It is a difficult class and lots of work
4. about the same
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 36
1. Strong: enthusiasm of subject, knowledge of material. Weak: went into too 
much detail and ran out of time by the end of the semester.
2. Left more learning up to the student
3. More background information needed.
4. More difficult to understand and grasp.
5. C
6. 3.96

Student 37
1. Go slower in lecture.  Lectures are hard to follow.  Use chalkboard more for 
2. Less structured lecture seemed to jump around and goes to fast.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.79

Student 38
1. Too fast, not enough explanations and examples, very hard to follow.  Need 
more board examples to follow step by step.
2. Too fast to follow you skip too many steps.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.5

Student 39
1. Very enthusiastic, gets going a bit fast though.  Seems like you have to 
choose between listening well or taking notes, don't have time to do both and keep 
2. Only other chem. professor I've had was Dr. Jurisson they re comparable. 
(though Chemistry 1330 was defiantly [sic] easier.)
3. Seems like we rushed through material to get done.  Maybe small quizzes 
sometimes? Exams were the only grades.
4. Difficulty to manage and decent grade.
5. B
6. 3.25

Student 40
1. Strong: good notes, helps having them posted.  Weak: moves way too far over 
the notes.  Does not go over test type problems in class only in review.  The test 
questions are not specific enough.  Be as specific as possible with test and quiz 
2. All my upper level science lectures have been BAD, the worst of any.  Go over 
what we go over in review in class.  Do problems like what we will see on the test in 
class, trust me it will raise attendance.
3. Slow down on notes, they are all typed out in front of you and you fly 
through them.
4. left blank
5. left blank
6. 4.0

Student 41
1. Strong: powerpoints, so we can review the material that we are lost on.  
Weak: moves to quickly that I do not know what we are talking about so I have to 
teach myself.  His tests are too long and very wordy.  
2. With the lecturers there was some confusion, but not as much as there is 
here.  I think Organic is nice thru general where all you did was problem sets, but I 
feel that he pay to much attention on simple things then the bigger picture.  Where 
as other lecturers concerned themselves with the bigger picture.
3. Strong: Powerpoint
4. There is a lot of work that you have to do yourself.
5. B
6. 3.57

Student 42
1. The lecturer was hard to understand at times and lost interest quickly.  His 
enthusiasm helped a bit. 
2. Most of my other lecturers have kept my attention during class.
3. Course moves a bit too fast for the last one.
4. This is the worst course I've taken at Mizzou.
5. D
6. 3.6

Student 43
1. Enthusiasm- strong. Weak- ability to cover required material in an 
appropriate manner. Don't wait to cover last 4 chapters in last 2 weeks.
2. Not able to effectively prepare the class with knowledge needed to succeed in 
Organic 2.
3. left blank
4. Learned more in intro biochem than in here.
5. D
6. 2.6

Student 44
1. The material presented in slides didn't seem to coincide with the chapters, 
generally yes but sometimes confusing.
2. left blank
3. Good that it builds on itself as course progressed.
4. left blank
5. B
6. 2.5

Student 45
1. Strong: notes and tests online, review sessions, explains clearly gave us 
areas to study and made organic doable. Weak: moved too fast at end, tests although 
like the ones online are not like what we learned.
2. Good- really interested in the subject. I haven't had any other chemistry teachers 
but he seems good.  Tests more difficult than biochem, but the subject matter is too.
3. Strong: good intro into organic, good honors learning-by-contract.  Weak: 
Maybe should spend more time familiarizing with all the different compounds and 
naming instead of having to learn them on the fly- I liked how we learned them in 
biochem better and I feel without that background I might have been lost some.
4. A bit more difficult and time consuming.  Hard but certainly not impossible.
5. A
6. 4.0

Student 46
1. Dr. Glaser is a nice guy, but teaching is not his thing.  I feel entirely 
unprepared going into Organic Chemistry II.  We were never given a reading list.  The 
course schedule was only updated after the fact.  He did not follow or respect the 
book at all.  Lectures were not organized and did not build upon each other at all.  
He assumed we all had too much prior knowledge.  Expectations were not clear at all.  
We had ~30 lectures for chapters 1-6 and ~10 lectures for Chapters 7-11.  That is 
unacceptable.  I am considering retaking this course, not because of my grade which 
will be A/B but because I learned so little.  Very disappointed in this course.  
2. Worst one I have had. I had previously been impressed with the chemistry 
3. Loved the book
4. This was much disorganized.
5. D
6. 4.0

Student 47
1. Strong: smart guy, knows his organic chemistry. Weak: assumes everyone knows 
exactly what is going on; assumes everyone is an organic chemist.  His notes only 
make sense if you truly understand what is going on.
2. Compared to other teachers, Glaser is not as good.  He moves much to fast and 
throws out way to much information.  Makes it very difficult to keep up with 
understand it.
3. Weak: a lot of material for one semester.
4. Defiantly has a faster pace than other courses.
5. C
6. 3.5

Student 48
1. Enthusiastic, but moves very quickly through subject matter.  Sometimes 
difficult to grasp.
2. Good professor, obviously very knowledgeable but takes notes too fast for 
people that haven't seen the material before.
3. A lot of material to cover in a semester, difficult material interesting 
concepts and ideal to learn.
4. Very difficult, but interesting.
5. B
6. 3.5

Student 49
1. Entertaining individual.  Class was always very rushed and I feel it would 
have been better as a 4-5 hour course.  Or with smaller sections, lectures were just 
too rapid.
2. Dr. Jurisson was much more suited to the large chem. lecture in 1330.
3. It needs to be broken up somehow, 3 hours was simply too little teaching 
4. Hands down most difficult/confusing/demanding. I am in Calc3 and Physics.
5. C
6. 4.0

Student 50
1. It was difficult for me to study the material when the lectures only loosely 
followed the book.  I think extra supplemental readings or problems that are 
congruent with the lecture material would help.
2. Lectures were very interesting but sometimes more difficult than other 
lectures for me to follow.
3. Grading is not always related to the amount of work put in or even a strong 
understanding of the material. I think graded assignments would be a good addition.
4. Grading is not always related to the amount of work put in or even a strong 
understanding of the material.  I think graded assignments would be a good addition.
5. B
6. 3.5

Student 51
1. Strong: knowledge and enthusiasm.  Weak: Do you hair at least 50% of the 
time, tests are longer, especially Test 3
2. Pretty tough
3. More blackboard integration, I like notes before lecture.
4. tough
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 52
1. Strong: very enthusiastic about subject matter, willing to help when needed.  
Weak: not always good at providing alternative explanations.
2. Doesn't focus on things you would expect and doesn't give as good of notes as 
others [sic].  Might want to try condensing notes gives a lot of unnecessary 
3. Weak: had to memorize things that most teachers give a periodic table for I 
never had chemistry class where didn't provide periodic table. 
4. Needs better communication, think it would be better if all course 
information was on WebCt instead of other website.
5. D
6. 2.9

Student 53
1. Do not spend so much time on review at the beginning of the semester, spend 
more time on the later chapters, those the ones harder to learn and are the ones we 
must know well for Organic II and tests like the MCAT.
2. I felt the lectures were poor.  I learned more by reading the book.  I also 
felt new material was introduced at optional study sessions.
3. Exams questions and examples were nothing like the textbook, either dump the 
book or start doing related work so students learn.
4. I was disappointed in the course.
5. E
6. 3.9
7. I felt this course did not prepare me for future classes, professional exams 
or my career.  I felt the pacing of the course was horrible.  Too much time was spent 
on review and not on new material and the harder material.  Optional review sessions 
are not the time introduce new material or problems similar to the exam.  I got the 
feeling of students being penalized by not attending  optional reviews.

Student 54
1. Give a schedule at the start of the semester. Don't go into complex molecules 
that are supposed to be introduced 3 chapters later.
2. I found it very hard to follow this course in lecture, however, the book was 
much better and great help.
3. Course is fine.
4. fine
5. A
6. 3.8

Student 55
1. Very hard to follow, many examples made it seem unorganized, lacked 
2. Others used the book for material.  We were told to study the book, but tests 
correlated more to lecture.
3. What is expected for test and practice examples in class, examples explained 
are easier to understand.
4. I had a difficult time following.
5. C
6. 3.8

Student 56
1. Using the board more would help.
2. left blank
3. left blank
4. aren't the same
5. B
6. 3.8

Student 57
1. Wasted too much time in beginning of the semester and rushed through the 
complicated stuff
2. Less interesting and more random.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.0

Student 58
1. Strong: high enthusiasm, model usage. Weak: spent too much time on the basics 
and ended up doing the last 5 chapters in 3 weeks.
2. By far the worst, my two other were clearer and paced themselves better.
3. Strong: all
4. Okay, Chemistry 1330 was better.
5. C
6. 3.2

Student 59
1. He has examples in his notes, but we don't do any of them in class, just look 
at them not very clear on what to study.
2. I really like my chem. 1320 lecturer better he made us do problems in class.
3. Not enough practice with instruction.  Maybe a recitation per week would help 
with a TA.
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.87

Student 60
1. He knows his material for the class. But he didn't prepare the class enough 
for his test.
2. left blank
3. the course is good.
4. this course is a lot of work.
5. C
6. 3.3

Student 61
1. Go a little slower, and start review session earlier, do problems on the 
2. They were a little easier because they worked problems on the board.
3. Test not well written, sorry.
4. a lot harder than chem. 3
5. B
6. 4.0

Student 62
1. Good lectures, tests were extremely hard.
2. Good lecture, tests were extremely hard.
3. Lecture was good, test were extremely hard.
4. On par with other classes, tests were extremely hard.
5. B
6. 3.79

Student 63
1. Needs to augment the notes rather than simply go over them in class.
2. Well organized, and enthusiastic about the material.
3. More reactions should be discussed.
4. left blank
5. A
6. 3.91

Student 64
1.	He knows what he's talking about but he doesn't teach very well.  The way he 
lectures isn't very effective for learning organic and he needs to work more examples 
in class. 
2. He would probably be toward the bottom.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. 3.5

Student 65
1. Dr. Glaser is obviously very knowledgeable in the course matter and is always 
very enthusiastic.  But he doesn't explain things in a way that most undergrad 
students could understand.
2. He has more energy than most, but I had the hardest time understanding 
material in his class.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.4

Student 66
1. I felt even if I was fully prepared studying the text and his notes I still 
did horrible on the exams.  This should not happen.  
2. Knows his stuff.  Rushed too quickly at end of the semester.
3. Interesting material
4. Very difficult and quite unreasonable exams
5. B
6. 3.3

Student 67
1. Seems to focus too much time of basic principles that we should already know 
from previous chemistry classes.
2. left blank
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. C
6. left blank

Student 68
1. Lecture notes were choppy as compared to book, often made reading book and 
comparing notes difficult. 
2. Only one other lecture to compare to.  Other lecturer seemed to relate 
subject to a students life.
3. left blank
4. ok
5. B
6. 3.8

Student 69
1. Strong:  knowledgeable and application of the subject however he needs to do 
more of the rxns on the board rather than telling us and expecting us to understand 
the rxn.
2. Other classes seemed to allow the students to group the concept better before 
moving onto other lectures.
3. Strong with content, poor with presentation.
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.00

Student 70
1. left blank
2. left blank
3. website is a good resource
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.3

Student 71
1. Needs more clear examples
2. Doesn't explain things as well
3. Course was good
4. Harder which is expected.
5. B
6. 2.823

Student 72
1. Weak: organized, spent too much time on some things not enough time on others 
hard to pay attention, often lecturer about unimportant things that were irrelevant. 
Strong: notes, very detailed, a lot outside of class. Went to slow at beginning of 
semester too fast at end.
2. Really liked enthusiasm.
3. Tested over details, went way too in depth.
4. About the same
5. B
6. 3.99

Student 73
1. Very enthusiastic, offers good answers good applications, very good 
2. One of the best, if not the best chem. teacher.
3. left blank
4. Decent
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 74
1. The lecturer knows the material extremely well but knows it so well that it 
was hard to understand some of the concepts he discussed.  He made the material too 
2. I've had other lecturers who are very smart but teach their material better 
than Glaser.  Glaser knows too much to effectively teach Organic I.
3. Strong features are a good book and good comprehensive material.
4. It is harder than other courses I have taken.
5. B
6. 3.9

Student 75
1. Is able to maintain interest level of the class and clarify when we have 
difficulty while working on examples.
2. Encourages self motivation. Has good review sessions and points out the 
important subject matter.
3. Has no lab therefore requires a lot of exercise outside of class (good).
4. Its more detailed in work level per topic.
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 76
1. I think that mostly he just goes kind of fast, which sucks if you forgot to 
printout your notes.  Overall he's great. He has lots of nice analogies that make 
it easier to learn.  Giving focus areas for test was a huge help.
2. Way better than physics.
3. There is a heck of a lot of stuff to learn. I think a weekly recitation would 
be really helpful.
4. It's hard like all engineering curriculum courses.
5. B
6. 3.91

Student 77
1. It is sometimes hard to follow notes online.  I suggest more working of 
examples instead of just looking at them on the screen.
2. He seemed to be very knowledgeable and showed great interest in his subject.
3. The quizzes were good from encouragement to keep up with the coursework, I 
suggest have more smaller pop quizzes.
4. It was challenging compared to other courses.
5. B
6. 3.98

Student 78
1. Strong: posts notes up online and know the material very well.  Weak: covers 
material too quickly and does not use enough examples.  Need to work more problems on 
the board.
2. Other lectures did problems on the board, which helped out a lot.
3. Weak: tests were quite demanding.
4. it was quite difficult.
5. D
6. 3.90

Student 79
1. Weak: he needs to do more on the chalkboard rather than writing 
molecules/reactions in the air.  It's hard to follow.
2. He doesn't have enough examples of how he wants the reactions to look.
3. Have a RSD.
4. It is a very difficult class.
5. Left blank
6. 3.4

Student 80
1. Strong points were his enthusiasm and good presentation of material. Weak 
points were relating learned material to how it would be used on the test.  Perhaps 
offering more review sessions or online review.
2. This lecturer was much better than others I have overall not the best but 
very good.
3. Strong features of the course were it was challenging.  Weak features was 
there was an abundance of material.  Offering a RSD could help with that.  
4. It was a difficult course but well organized.
5. B
6. 3.11

Student 81
1. The exams focused on information that was not stressed in class, good feature 
was he was easy to talk to.
2. This lecturer was the worst I have had.
3. Course moved to quickly and had no RSD lab.
4. C
5. 3.0

Student 82
1. Knowledgeable, would like to see more practical applications.  I liked the 
2. Comparable, I like Dr. Tanner's note style better.
3. Book sucks
4. I love it, my favorite this semester.
5. A
6. 2.8

Student 83
1. I thought that this class would benefit from some more chalk talk time, although 
the review sessions were helpful.
2. He rates well, again though I feel more time at the board in other classes is 
3. Course is well designed and has logical sequence.
4. Difficult, challenging but good.
5. A
6. 4.0

Student 84
1. Sometimes he spent too long on things that could have been explained quickly.  
He gave too many specific examples and not enough generalizable ones.
2. Compared to others in science courses he would be about average.
3. There was a lot of new material to take in and it got overwhelming at times.
4. I would say it falls in the midrange for my enjoyment of it compared to other 
courses overall.
5. C
6. 2.8

Student 85
1. Strong: compiles notes, gives lots of examples.  Weak: exams don't follow 
material.  Poor use of time.
2. This professor is not nearly as helpful as prior ones.  Questions immediately 
are not allowed and it is intimidating to got to office hours.
3. Weak: book it is poorly written and not helpful.
4. Very weak in getting people to understand.
5. C
6. 3.85

Student 86
1. Strong: very knowledgeable, energetic.  Weak: a lot of information in one 
2. I enjoyed this class very much.  related things to everyday use.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.6

Student 87
1. Thinks he cares and maybe he does but he believes we are way better at 
chemistry then we really are.  I have an A and never know what he is talking about.
2. Not as good or structured.
3. Good lecturer, but tests too tough.
4. Don't feel that I'm getting as much out of it.
5. D
6. 3.6

Student 88
1. Teach better and don't make the test full of stuff we've never seen before.
2. Way worse than other teachers.
3. It was okay
4. Don't like any chemistry
5. E
6. 3.4

Student 89
1. Moves quickly, no examples on board, does not explain ideas, expects you to 
understand what he is talking about.
2. Below average.
3. left blank
4. very challenging
5. B
6. 3.4

Student 90
1. great energy
2. goes at a good pace to follow
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. left blank
6. left blank

Student 91
1. Strong: his understanding of the material. Weak: his ability to specify the 
forrest [sic] from the trees for the students?
2. Chemistry 1320 lecturer was much more straight forward and easier to follow.
3. left blank
4. requirements reasonable, teachers guidance through material subpar.
5. C
6. 4.0

Student 92
1. left blank
2. More clear and easy to follow
3. Huge workload can overwhelm add optional RSD.
4. left blank
5. A
6. 2.3

Student 93
1. Work more examples in class. Great notes and direction.
2. One of the best I've had in a science course.
3. Slow down on the pace, have a RSD for those with questions.
4. Good course.
5. B
6. 3.65

Student 94
1. Organized, maybe give the review sheet a couple days before the exam.
2. More organized, knew the information well.
3. N/A
4. the same
5. A
6. 3.0

Student 95
1. Enthusiasm- strength.  Participation of class- weakness.
2. He did very well
3. left blank
4. very good.
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 96
1. Sometimes goes off on tangents, becomes hard to stay focused.
2. not as enjoyable as last lecturer, demos were included in the last course for 
3. Show me what I need to know this.
4. Worst class I've ever taken.
5. E
6. 3.6

Student 97
1. Strong: great knowledge of subject. Weak: this is organic one sometimes the 
amount of material mixed with the detail required was overwhelming.
2. Very demanding, but pushed students to learn.
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 98
1. Hand drawn examples
2. much better
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. B
6. 3.6

Student 99
1. He is very enthusiastic for the subject but he does not teach well.  He 
discusses topics too briefly.
2. He is the below average compared to my other teachers.
3. Hard subject to understand.
4. OK
5. C
6. 3.3

Student 100
1. Lecture can be confusing, but there are lots of good examples of reactions.
2. A lot quicker and expects to know more.
3. Don't pile in so much material at the end of the year.
4. More interesting.
5. B
6. 3.4

Student 101
1. Do more examples and have more points in the grading to help students.
2. Average.
3. Study sessions Monday and Wednesday helped.  Classroom stuck, no periodic 
table, but a map of Missouri.
4. It was hard.
5. C
6. 2.4

Student 102
1. He kind of goes fast over his notes.  We can't take notes and listen at the same 
2. He is a lot better. Easier to understand.
3. Hard course.
4. Physics sucks.
5. A
6. 3.6

Student 103
1. Strong features: enthusiastic. No weak features
2. Way better than Ganley.
3. Too specific for someone not in chemistry major.  Sucks for Nutrition and 
Fitness, will never matter to me.  Need non major course.
4. Sucks.
5. E
6. 3.2

Student 104
1. They can be more organized and maybe spaced things a little better because at 
the end we were left with 5 chapters to have on one test.
2. He was satisfactory to the others.
3. Strong: online tests. Weak: not spaced out enough.
4. It was beneficial like others.
5. B
6. 4.0

Student 105
1. I thought that notes were good and you have us plenty of enthusiasm to learn 
2. Like I said very good, though the material is more interesting too.
3. Not much
4. Great
5. A
6. left blank

Student 106
1. left blank
2. left blank
3. left blank
4. left blank
5. B
6. left blank

Student 107
1. Very enthusiastic maintains interest in subject matter.  Interested in how 
students were doing.
2. Very well compared to previous chemistry professors.
3. The book stumbles at points to maintain fluidity of the material.
4. One of the better courses, one of the most interesting.
5. A
6. 3.59

Student 108
1. I like how Dr. Glaser is very dedicated towards students learning.  I found 
it beneficial when he made us think in lecture (by writing out reactions, structures, 
etc.) I wish we would have had to write more rxns in class.
2. Dr. Glaser has been my best science professor in my two years at MU.
3. I thought the book was fairly good.  The only improvement I would like to see 
is more practice problems available to work or study on. 
4. This has been my favorite science course.
5. A
6. 3.9

Student 109
1. left blank
2. Easy to understand, expects us to show up on time and be prepared.  Pretty 
3. lot to learn in a semester (could be more background.)
4. left blank
5. A
6. A