MU Chemistry 8160 - Organic Spectroscopy - Fall Semester 2006

Teaching Evaluations 3.7 (scale 0-4, 4 is high)

Criteria of evaluation FS06
8160
FS97
416
WS96
416
FS93
416

Organization and preparation of lectures and discussions 3.57 4.00 3.55 3.33
Instructor's enthusiasm for the subject matter 3.84 4.00 3.82 2.87
Helpfulness in answering questions and clarifying points 3.78 3.86 3.45 2.73
Ability to lecture in a manner which is easily followed 3.52 3.57 3.36 3.00
Ability to stimulate interest in the subject 3.52 3.93 3.55 3.07
Overall rating of the instructor 3.63 3.93 3.80 2.67
Your rating of how much you have learned 3.47 3.64 3.20 3.13
Overall rating of the course 3.62 3.71 3.60 3.14
Overall rating 3.68 3.85 3.53 3.00
Students Starting (Test 1) 19 15 12 16
Students Finishing (Final) 19 14 12 15
Student Retention 100% 93.3% 100% 93.8%
Students Advancing (among stud. compl. course) 100% 100% 100% 93.3%
Evaluations Returned 19 14 11 15
Eval's Ret'd by Percent of Students at EoS 100% 100% 91.6% 100%
Online Student Comments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Online Materials & Technology Yes Yes No No



QUESTIONS
1. List strong and weak features of the lecturer and include 
   suggestions for improvement.
2. Compare the lecturer to other you have 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 
[Responses are complete and verbatim. Emphasis by way of bold face ours]


Student 1
1. Strong: has command over the subject and explains it easily.
2. He is much better than others.
3. Strong: Well worked problems sets.  Weak: Need to be more organized.
4. It better taught [sic]
5. A
6. N/A

Student 2
1. Strong features his exams were fair and relevant to what was 
   taught in class.  
2. He is very caring and always will to answer questions.
3. -
4. It is easy to follow, the professor does not want us to fail.
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 3
1. Lecture should focus more on research related material.
2. N/A
3. -
4. -
5. C
6. 3.8

Student 4
1. nothing special to mention
2. almost same as others
3. -
4. -
5. A
6. -

Student 5
1. Too much emphasis on tests should be reduced.
2. Pretty good.
3. Reduce the emphasis on test sand other things like assignments and 
   presentations should also be graded.
4. Pretty good.
5. A
6. -

Student 6
1. Enthusiasm and helpful.
2. Wonderful.
3. More practice problems.
4. -
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 7
1. humorous
2. very good
3. -
4. - 
5. A
6. 3.6

Student 8
1. humorous
2. very good
3. -
4. -
5. A
6. I don't know.

Student 9
1. Strong: humorous and enthusiasm.  Weak: organization.
2. Teach more basic knowledge before advanced questions.
3. Need homework.
4. This course is very useful
5. A
6. -

Student 10 
1. Was very clear with what we were expected to know on exams 
2. Interesting, usually engaging 
3. Perhaps a bit more organized.
4. - 
5. B 
6. 3.0

Student 11
1. Strong: good ability to clarify new and difficult things.  
   Weak: may go in details in certain topics which is too difficult.
2. The lecturer is good as general
3. The overall course is highly beneficial.
4. The course is important.
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 12
1. The organization of the lecturers is not very good and the 
    emphasis is not very clear.
2. -
3. -
4. - 
5. A
6. 3.5

Student 13
1. Strong: clarify points clearly, emphasize application and information nowadays.
2. Pretty good.
3. Strong: learn many stuff about NMR.
4. -
5. A
6. N/A

Student 14
1. Excellent teaching in quantum part.  Some time difficult to 
understand but Dr. Glaser always made it clear.
2. Good, the same!
3. Strong: grade topic argument [presentations?]
4. Ok, Good!
5. A
6. 4.0

Student 15
1. Good examples and use of technology.  Write more notes on the board.
2. -
3. Have more combination problems.  Book was easy to read.
4. -
5. B
6. 3.0

Student 16
1. -
2. -
3. -
4. -
5. A
6. -

Student 17
1. -
2. -
3. -
4. -
5. A
6. -

Student 18
1. - 
2. He teaches active but had better to give more interest to students [??].
3. Strong: basic theory and instruction of spectroscopy.  
   Weak: example of problems [??].
4. -
5. B
6. -

Student 19
1. Would like to do more problems.
2. Is equivalent to other great lecturers.
3. Should/Could be more problem based.  
4. Enjoyed the in-depth theory.
5. A
6. N/A