Student Assessment of Instructors

Clemson University Student Evaluation of Teaching

Evaluation Report for Brian Croxall teaching ENGL 399 003 during Spring Semester 2010
Respondents = 11 Enrolled = 20 Response rate = 55%

Global Questions

G1. The instructor clearly communicated what I was expected to learn.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	4	36.36%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.455	0.688	5	11
Same Level	4.214	1.050	5	934
Same Discipline	4.250	0.987	5	3012

G2. The instructor made the relevance of the course material clear.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	4	36.36%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.455	0.688	5	11
Same Level	4.243	1.059	5	934
Same Discipline	4.229	1.011	5	3008

G3. The course was well organized.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	4	36.36%	4	36.36%	1	9.09%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.200	0.789	4	10
Same Level	4.085	1.142	4	932
Same Discipline	4.193	1.056	5	3006

G4. There was a positive interaction between the class and the instructor.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	0	0.00%	3	27.27%	8	72.73%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.727	0.467	5	11
Same Level	4.310	1.091	5	926
Same Discipline	4.417	0.949	5	2987

G5. The instructor's teaching methods helped me understand the course material.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	4	36.36%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.455	0.688	5	11
Same Level	4.010	1.207	4	929
Same Discipline	4.095	1.114	4	2997

G6. The instructor's verbal communication skills helped me understand the course material.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	2	18.18%	8	72.73%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.636	0.674	5	11
Same Level	4.137	1.172	5	926
Same Discipline	4.221	1.068	5	2989

G7. The instructor clearly explained what was expected on assignments and tests

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	2	18.18%	6	54.55%	1	9.09%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.400	0.843	5	10
Same Level	4.171	1.145	5	930
Same Discipline	4.186	1.093	5	2995

G8. The instructor kept me informed about my progress in the course.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	5	45.45%	3	27.27%	3	27.27%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	3.818	0.874	4	11
Same Level	4.144	1.085	4	928
Same Discipline	3.966	1.143	4	2992

G9. The feedback I received on assignments and tests gave me the opportunity to improve my performance.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	6	54.55%	4	36.36%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.273	0.647	4	11
Same Level	4.203	1.092	5	929
Same Discipline	4.123	1.088	4	2995

G10. Overall, the instructor is an effective teacher.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	0	0.00%	4	36.36%	7	63.64%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.636	0.505	5	11
Same Level	4.199	1.139	5	931
Same Discipline	4.261	1.049	5	2995

G11. The instructor's grading procedures gave a fair evaluation of my understanding of the material.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	4	36.36%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.455	0.688	5	11
Same Level	4.188	1.060	5	927
Same Discipline	4.149	1.073	4	2983

G12. How much work did you put into this course relative to your other courses?

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	7	63.64%	3	27.27%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.182	0.603	4	11
Same Level	3.781	1.055	4	930
Same Discipline	3.813	0.970	4	2991

G13. How difficult was this course for you relative to your other courses?

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	2	18.18%	1	9.09%	6	54.55%	2	18.18%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	3.727	1.009	4	11
Same Level	3.178	1.178	3	932
Same Discipline	3.299	1.099	3	3000

G14. To what extent was this course a requirement for you?

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	9	81.82%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.818	0.405	5	11
Same Level	4.407	1.010	5	928
Same Discipline	4.316	1.024	5	2994

G15. Was this course in your major?

Type: Yes - No

Yes		No		NR
11	100.00%	0	0.00%	0	0.00%

G16. Was this course team-taught?

Type: Yes - No

Yes		No		NR
1	9.09%	10	90.91%	0	0.00%

G17. Please indicate your satisfaction with the availability of the instructor outside the classroom by choosing one response from the scale. In selecting your rating, consider the instructor's availability via established office hours, appointments, and other opportunities for face-to-face interaction as well as via telephone, email, fax and other means.

Type: Satisfaction

1		2		3		4		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	5	45.45%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
This Class	3.545	0.522	4	11
Same Level	3.530	0.754	4	934
Same Discipline	3.559	0.697	4	3008

G18. Please comment on the strengths of the instructor and the course.

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	I liked how he gave us background information to connect the literature to what was going on at the time.
#2 -	Liked the instructors obvious passion for the material he was teaching.
#4 -	He makes the course as a whole tell a story about American literature. Therefore, everything is very well organized.
#5 -	Incorporating technology and historical context so much into the literature discussion offered a new and different perspective on material that most students in the class are already familiar with.
#6 -	Loved this course. Readings were interesting and entertaining. Class discussions were interactive. Great instructor and favorite class at Clemson.
#7 -	The instructor made sure he got the class involved in the discussion instead of him just talking the whole time. It was very easy to participate as long as you read the stories and were prepared for class that day.
#8 -	Professor Croxall was really animated in class, and he had a good relationship with his students, in that he was always available for help. I found his online office hours to be very helpful. I also liked the way he tied in modern technology with the texts we read.
#9 -	Professor Croxall really knows his stuff. He makes the class really interesting and makes us students really think about what we are reading.
#10 -	fantastic teacher. very knowledgeable, great use of technology to relate the material to the class. good choice of texts. clemson is stupid not to pay him more

G19. Please comment on the weaknesses of the instructor and the course.

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	I think he wanted to cover more pieces of literature than we had time for, but overall I still felt the course was really good.
#2 -	What exactly we were expected to know could be improved upon, though I understand that this course and courses like this tend to be very open ended and based on our opinions and interpretations of text and readings.
#3 -	a lot of additional assignments. ie wiki notes, timeline
#4 -	On tests, I do not believe memorizing the dates of the stories is important. Students would benefit more from memorizing the time periods they fit into and then perhaps put those periods in order. When you have to memorize the dates, you memorize them the night before and then forget them after the exam. (Everything else stays with you because you teach it so well and it is interesting. I'd just forget about the dates)
#5 -	Professor Croxall often failed to keep up with his plans for the course which resulted in elimination of a majority of the less traditional choices on the syllabus. It was frustrating to have him spend so much time focusing on how little time he has, and how unhappy he is with his salary.
#7 -	Sometimes the instructor would ramble and not cover all of that days material. He should of either assigned less or spent less time on each story so that whatever was on the syllabus for the day actually got done.
#8 -	The class was a bit disorganized. Having two different schedules was hard to keep up with, and we often had too much material to cover in class.
#9 -	He takes a while to return assignments. And I feel like we did this huge timeline project but then never really used it.
#10 -	very few. faster grading of assignments would be nice but delay is understandable

G20. Please comment on any teaching methods you found particularly helpful, and suggest alternative methods that you feel would improve the course.

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	I liked the wiki notes and I felt the class discussions made the material make sense and allowed us to see a deeper meaning to the works and how they related to other works.
#2 -	Really liked the timeline. Keep it. Maybe provide opportunities for more creative papers than simply making an argument or assesment of the texts we were assigned.
#3 -	Everything was explained very well. I liked the background information on the material we were reading
#4 -	I like that each class has a point, an overarching theme. I would present less material per class. (You could still assign as much reading, just cover less in class.) When there are too many stories presented, it is harder to understand the overall theme of that story (the large point you are trying to prove/explain).
#5 -	Having the wikinotes, while tedious to do, made it helpful to study for tests dominated by names and dates. The timeline assignment, however, offered little to no value in studying for the test or learning new ways to read literature.
#7 -	Discussion based class
#8 -	The online office hours were really good. I liked how the wiki notes helped our grade. The organization could be improved.
#9 -	Croxall is a great teacher. I liked how he infused history with the movements in literature. Overall, the class was just taught really well.
#10 -	videos, music, and other technology used in class did a great job tying everything together. methods would be hard to improve on

G21. I would recommend this instructor to a friend. Yes or no? Why?

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	Yes. He is really cool and a great teacher. The assignments seem relevant and I didn't feel like we had too much work.
#2 -	Yes. The instructor kept the course interesting and lively.
#3 -	Yes. Very enjoyable class and professor.
#4 -	ABSOLUTELY! Outstanding professor who puts an extraordinary amount of time preparing his lectures. He is interesting and students learn a lot. There is a good interaction between him and his students. I feel as though I could ask him for a letter of recommendation because he gets to know each student.
#5 -	No. I felt like he had such an obvious agenda with each reading we did that he failed to facilitate student thought and readings of the texts which, in my opinion, significantly detracts from the value of a literature course.
#6 -	Yes. Great class, great reading material.
#7 -	Yes - He knows what he's talking about.
#8 -	Yes, I would definitely recommend Croxall to a friend. I actually looked forward to class because he somehow made everything we talked about fun. The day he broke chalk against the board to get our attention- best day of the semester. I think I'm walking away a much better writer.
#9 -	Yes absolutely! The class is just super interesting and cool.
#10 -	absolutely. very knowledgeable about both what he is teaching and how to teach it

Departmental Questions

D1. I learned to apply principles from this course to other contexts.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	3	27.27%	2	18.18%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.273	0.905	5	11
Same Level	4.101	1.062	4	912
Same Discipline	3.938	1.075	4	2919

D2. I developed more confidence in my ability to communicate effectively through writing.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	3	27.27%	4	36.36%	4	36.36%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.091	0.831	4	11
Same Level	4.033	1.124	4	912
Same Discipline	3.957	1.099	4	2914

D3. As a part of my overall course load, this course was a priority to me.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	1	9.09%	2	18.18%	1	9.09%	7	63.64%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.273	1.104	5	11
Same Level	3.498	1.210	4	914
Same Discipline	3.577	1.155	4	2923

D4. This course challenged me intellectually.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	1	9.09%	1	9.09%	6	54.55%	3	27.27%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.000	0.894	4	11
Same Level	3.475	1.243	4	914
Same Discipline	3.710	1.146	4	2917

D5. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	2	18.18%	7	63.64%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.455	0.820	5	11
Same Level	4.432	0.966	5	911
Same Discipline	4.479	0.886	5	2910

D6. The instructor treats students with respect.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	1	9.09%	9	81.82%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.727	0.647	5	11
Same Level	4.526	0.917	5	908
Same Discipline	4.582	0.822	5	2910

D7. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	1	9.09%	1	9.09%	9	81.82%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.727	0.647	5	11
Same Level	4.504	0.930	5	908
Same Discipline	4.553	0.841	5	2902

D8. The instructor sets high standards for students.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	1	9.09%	8	72.73%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.545	0.820	5	11
Same Level	4.279	0.909	5	907
Same Discipline	4.309	0.852	4	2904

D9. The assigned reading is well integrated into the course.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	0	0.00%	2	18.18%	3	27.27%	6	54.55%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.364	0.809	5	11
Same Level	3.811	1.229	4	910
Same Discipline	4.078	1.117	4	2902

D10. The assigned writing is well integrated into the course.

Type: Agreement

1		2		3		4		5		NR
0	0.00%	1	9.09%	2	18.18%	3	27.27%	5	45.45%	0	0.00%

Focus	Mean	Stdev	Median	Observations
Class	4.091	1.044	4	11
Same Level	4.219	1.040	5	915
Same Discipline	4.243	0.992	5	2920

D11. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	I felt that learning about a variety of types of American literature has helped me to have a better understanding of the type of writing that has come out of our country and the influences of the writing.
#2 -	The range of readings we covered broadened my repetoir of texts I have read.
#4 -	I genuinely learned and will remember the stories he taught. I have learned to read from multiple perspectives and apply history, technology, and other themes to the literature I read.
#5 -	It was nice to have a refresher on American Lit that I haven't read since high school.
#7 -	Discussions
#8 -	His availability and feedback on papers/assignments
#9 -	I'm not really sure what to write for this. I feel like everything I learned was valuable and helpful as an English major.
#10 -	the way he tied everything together

D12. What would you like to see changed in subsequent offerings of this course?

Type: Essay

Student	Comments
#1 -	I think a few of the readings were boring and could be changed. I didn't like The Open Boat, A Plea for Romantic Fiction, and any of Ernest Hemingway.
#2 -	Chances to cover more materials in class as per our reading.
#4 -	I'm not sure how important the timeline assignment was. I would agree that learning how to use technology is important. Perhaps make the timeline about stories we read and integrate that with the wiki summaries/quotations/terms. That could help with memorizing, or really learning, the years of the stories. Besides that one assignment and the publication years, the course was great. I really wouldn't change anything about his teaching methods. Students feel free to say what they think and aren't afraid of being "wrong."
#5 -	I would like to see the incorporation of a more diverse author and style list because the way it is being taught makes it seem like there is always only a single literary movement occurring at any given time.
#7 -	Not so much reading assigned
#8 -	The organization needs to be improved.
#9 -	No wiki pages or timeline project (even though the timeline did look super cool).
#10 -	very little.