Dr. Snell's Summer 1997 Course Evaluations.  E-mail: WESNELL@semovm.semo.edu
_____________________Evaluations_Items__________________________ PY571.01 PY271.01
1. The instructor was enthusiastic about the subject matter. 5.00 4.812
2. The instructor generally encouraged class participation. 5.00 4.812
3. The instructor emphasized major points and made their relationship and significance clear. 5.00 4.750
4. The instructor seemed to be interested in teaching. 5.00 4.937
5. The instructor's use of examples helped to get points across in class. 5.00 4.625
6. The instructor encouraged students to express their own viewpoints. 4.25 4.687
7. Students had the opportunity to ask questions. 5.00 4.875
8. The course was well organized. 4.75 4.562
9. The instructor's presentations were well prepared. 5.00 4.500
10. The instructor appeared to be thoroughly competent in his/her area. 5.00 4.750
11. The instructor gave effective help when it was sought. 5.00 4.625
12. The tests adequately covered the course material. 4.00 4.125
13. The instructor returned tests and assignments within a reasonable period of time. 5.00 4.812
14. The instructor made her/his grading procedures clear. 5.00 4.687
15. The instructor's grading standards were fair and reasonable. 5.00 4.562
16. I gained considerable knowledge from this course. 4.75 4.375
17. The textbook used in this course was satisfactory. 5.00 3.867
(1 = Strongly Disagree) (2 = Agree) (3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree) (4 = Agree) (5 = Strongly Agree)
You are visitor number: Hit Counter
This site was last updated on June 17, 2007.
Copyright @ 1998       William E. Snell, Jr. All rights reserved.
AS REQUIRED BY UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES, The instructor was not present when the students completed these instructor evaluations, a student took the evaluations to the Chair of the department, and the evaluation summaries were given to the instructor after the semester was completed.
Back