| The strengths of this course were: | The weaknesses of this course were: | Suggestions for improvement or additional comments: |
| Subject matter is relevant to education background. | Professor's opinions override any others'.
I did not realize I was doing this. I will do my best to avoid such impressions in the future. |
No ambiguous instructions. Do not change instructions mid-assignment. Make expectations more clear. |
| Exploring social psychological concepts within the context of school environments. I especially enjoyed the interactive class discussions. This was a true doctoral level class. | I found it quite informative. | I think it is excellent as it is. Dr. Whatley is extremely educated on the subject matter. |
| I really enjoyed reading the text. I have used it in other courses. I also like the video segments. They reinforced the content of the discussions. | No comment. | He has a great course. If he had a better relationship with the students,
I think he would be an outstanding teacher. He has a tendency to try and
put himself above the students. While I recognize his expertise, he needs
to recognize mine. I have many more years of teaching experience than he
does. I think that he could learn some things from his students. However,
I recognize that he is new at teaching and probably feels a need to prove
himself. He is doing a great job. Relax, continue to be creative, and take
advice from others. Sometimes, we do not know everything.
Thank you for the feedback. Comments such as this will help mold me into a better instructor. |
| The hands-on experiments conducted during class were beneficial to help students relate course readings to social psychological methods. | Writing a paper each week was very time intensive, and I did not feel I had enough time to make the paper high quality. | For the final paper, allow students more flexibility in the design of their research project. For example, methods of design were required for this paper that some of us had never seen before (power analysis). I had to spend a lot of time researching and learning a power analysis, and that detracted from time I was able to spend on the actual research for the project. I would have rather focused on the content and research for my paper and used design methodologies that I was comfortable with. |
| The text was very informative, gave excellent background and resources. Reading the articles gave additional input. Writing a paper on each topic allowed us to apply the information to our own life and experiences. Dr. Whatley's presentation of the course using video and actual interaction supplemented the course work. Self-selection of topics for proposal was helpful. Also, enjoyed the web discussions. | Could use more clarity in syllabu concerning the dates, assignments, and due dates. Some confusion on assignments could be cleared up with contact via e-mail to remind us of changes in dates/assignments ahead of time. | Provide feedback on the work turned in weekly, possibly via e-mail.
This was very helpful the first time we submitted our paper. I appreciate
having feedback to be sure I am on the right track.
When students got off-track, I provided them with feedback. Because the critiques were not "formally" graded, I only gave feedback when someone was off track. |
| Weekly papers were an effective way for me to gain understanding of the material we read. The convenience of having articles available was most helpful. They were directly related to the topics, which was nice. | I do not believe that the proposal was of any great value.
I am sorry to hear that the proposal was not of value to you. Do you have any suggestions for projects that would be of great value to you? |
|
| Correlation of text readings with and web page resources by chapter. Instructor's web page in general, not just the area specific to this course. I used resources for his other courses listed as well. Video clips were an excellent supplement to text readings. Loved Seinfeld. Although I struggled with the quantitative nature of some of the articles, reading them did improve my understanding of research methods and data analysis. About 80% of the text. | The proposal. The literature review was a great benefit to my understanding of my topic, but I felt I forced the methodology. Since I am so grade conscious, I was uneasy about the grade distribution: 25% presentation, 50% paper, 25% participation; as I type this I am only "sure" of 25% of my grade. | Overall, I would not change much. If the proposal stays as is, I'd recommend that doctoral students have a more extensive background in statistics, but that is not the concern of this course. |
| Psychology topics were interesting to read about and discuss in class. Class activities were related to the topic of the week and reinforced the information from readings. Class discussions clarified some things from the readings that were not clear. | No feedback on weekly responses except the first, and that feedback
was mostly on grammar. If the responses count 25% of my grade, then I would
like to have had specific feedback about how mine were.
These papers were part of the course participation grade, in that, if the student did them well they received full-credit for course participation. When a student did poorly on a critique, they were contacted and informed how they could improve. Fortunately, this did not occur in this course after the first reaction. |
Try to include discussion of the topics in an educational setting more. Yes, these topics are relevant outside of the classroom. Turning in a paper that counts 50% of my grade while not knowing but another 25% made the paper seem to be too important, however, I do think that 50% of the grade for this course for a paper (not a research class) was high. |