OK, so they came and I looked. I seem to have escaped the falling sword, at least this time around; most of the evals were fine and the ones from the Shakespeare course, which I was the one I was most worried about, were positively glowing.
Curiously, the lowest ratings came from the 11 a.m. section of Brit Lit II -- the class that I had personally enjoyed the most and thought went the most smoothly. Three or four students said they thought I was pitching the class toward the English majors too much and ignoring the non-majors. (Hmm, maybe that's because the English majors are the ones who talk and ask questions and seem engaged? You think?) Anyway, I'm not sure what to do with this, especially since the 8 a.m. students -- almost all non-majors -- seemed to have no such complaints.
As per usual, there were a handful of comments about how I was too nervous and fidgety and moved around the room too much and it was distracting. One student expressed the opinion that I might have a disability. Harrumph. Another one -- referring to me by last name only -- wrote something along the lines of "Porpentine does not know how to relate to her students. She kept telling us about things* that she said were only studied on the graduate level. WE DO NOT CARE." Somehow, I don't think my chair will take this as the damning indictment it was evidently intended to be. And there were the usual demands for PowerPoint, and complaints that I asked open-ended questions and wouldn't just tell them the answers, none of which really bothers me.
More worrisome, I think, is the fact that the one question on which I seem to be getting consistently low ratings is "This instructor conducted class in a way that stimulated interest." After three semesters, it's clear that this is a pattern and not a fluke, but I'm not sure what I can do about it, short of getting a personality transplant. I mean, I do show images and video clips, and they say they like that; they say I'm enthusiastic and they like that; and nobody has given me any concrete suggestions about how to be less boring, other than not telling them about stuff they DO NOT CARE about. Blah.
Oh well. I don't think I'm going to get fired for being boring, so it's all good.
* Incidentally, I have absolutely no idea what these "things" might be. I do remember saying something like "Nobody reads the Parson's Tale except grad students because it's a really long sermon on the Seven Deadly Sins," but we did read the Parson's Prologue, so it's not like it wasn't relevant. Other than that, I haven't a clue. Honestly, I think this is the real reason why course evals bother me as a general concept; so many of the comments bear no obvious relationship to anything I remember saying or doing, so it's hard to know what to make of them.
ETA: Please note that I'm dwelling on a handful of negative comments because they tend to loom large in my own head -- this was an overwhelmingly positive set of evals, and I'm not sure they can be improved all that much while still holding students to reasonable standards of college-level work. I thought of deleting this post when I read it over this morning and realized how negative it sounded, but I don't like to delete posts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
First, I love that you shared your evaluation comments: this is the sort of discussion that happens usually one on one, or between chair and faculty member, but it needs to be a general discussion we have as a faculty particularly since the evaluations are weighted so highly by many (having said that, I will note that our faculty has tried this, with mixed results).
Since I have worked with some faculty to help them address consistent evaluation feedback, I can address at least one of your concerns. Though obviously, please take my advice as coming from my college's culture--and culture is everything:
Quills admits: "More worrisome, I think, is the fact that the one question on which I seem to be getting consistently low ratings is "This instructor conducted class in a way that stimulated interest." After three semesters, it's clear that this is a pattern and not a fluke, but I'm not sure what I can do about it, short of getting a personality transplant."
Perhaps you can have a trusted colleague, even from a different discipline (though one where lectures are a key component), visit your classes and offer advice? Or are there other instructors you could visit for some ideas? Some of the braver faculty at my cc actually have some of their classes videotaped so they can see themselves. Others leave the room and have a trusted, experienced colleague come into the room to chat with the students to get more specific feedback.
We have had faculty use these techniques to help address the exact concern you have noted, with positive results. No, the student evaluations will never be suddenly perfect and glowing, but those consistent naggy ones may be able to be addressed. And it sounds like, since you were very worried about these evals, you truly want to address them.
Good luck!
And it sounds like, since you were very worried about these evals, you truly want to address them.
No, actually it's more that I'm always very worried about evals -- I find the whole process stomach-churningly terrifying for reasons that are wholly irrational and probably have to do with the fact that the experience takes me straight back to junior high school, not because there's any pressing professional reason to address them. That said, thank you for the suggestion.
"nobody has given me any concrete suggestions about how to be less boring, other than not telling them about stuff they DO NOT CARE about. Blah."
A former colleague of mine told his students that however irrelevant what he taught might seem to them - it yet might very well pop up again as expected knowledge in later exams.
Some of my students asked me to present the texts I teach about as texts that are part of a revolution the effects of which are still felt today. I consistently refuse to do so (for various reasons). But, if asked, I'm willing to state that dealing with text X they acquire lots of skills and openness of mind and other habits which are useful and relevant.
Concerning the "why do I have to learn in my first term something which I won't need for several terms to come, and perhaps only when I start a PhD?"-argument my standard response is "because the wisdom of those designing this course decided it should be taught already to first term students so that they can check their teachers' claims".
I agree with Annie Em: please take what I say "as coming from my college's culture--and culture is everything".
And: I will get into problems if my students should think that my courses are boring.
HCK -- You're in Europe, correct? Am I right in thinking that the gen ed curriculum (all students must take at least one literature course, one philosophy course, one laboratory science, etc., regardless of major) is primarily a US phenomenon? My "WE DO NOT CARE" student self-identified as a non-major, so I think we are probably talking about different types of students with different goals (and it's generally taken for granted, at my institution anyway, that you're not going to win over all your gen ed students). That said, I like your point about emphasizing skills, and I'm thinking that it might be a good idea to talk about the purpose of the literature requirement early in the semester and get the "what good is this for non-majors?" question on the table.
Hmm... I don't mind being evaluated, but I always take the bad evals with a grain of salt. I usually get good evals, but there are always one or two people who just don't like my style -- or me, for that matter. Of course, it's always great to hear glowing things about your teaching and your text selections. But mainly, I want to know if they learned anything. The evals really shouldn't be SO much about me, but about what they got out of the class. If I can improve the usefulness of the class or teach in a better way somehow, that's good to know -- all in the interest of the students learning more.
That's part of the reason why I do midterm AND end-of-term evaluations. Midterm evals can have an impact on how I'm doing things in THIS class RIGHT NOW, whereas end-of-term evals will only benefit future students, not current students. Maybe that's why my "official" evals are generally good. I listen to the students at midterm and adjust to their needs. Sometimes it's a really big adjustment; sometimes it's subtle. But in the end, I think it helps a lot.
As far as gen ed evals go -- I "should" pay more attention to them, but I don't. No one really wants to take a composition class, so I tend to focus less on entertaining them and more on getting them to take writing seriously and spend time doing a lot of useful work. My current school makes a lot of their hiring decisions based on evals, but I refuse to let that be a factor in my teaching. I need to maintain my own integrity as a teacher -- that is, I have high expectations and I don't give out easy grades. I want students to learn something, not skate through their required writing class. If I get low evals for that, well, that's the way it goes. I don't think I will, though. Students tend to respect teachers who won't let them get away with murder.
(My word verfication is hyperapo. Is that significant in some way?)
I think that the mixture of majors and non-majors in these classes is a bad one. The majors, even if they don't care for the period or genre or theme or what have you, have an investment in succeeding in the class--it's in their major.
Non-majors have no investment. The majority of them are there to get their card punched: I passed a class that fulfills a requirement and this one fit my schedule. Can I go now?
It's impossible to design a course that will appeal to both crowds and impossible to teach to both crowds simultaneously. Like serving two masters, you'll pay attention to one side of the group to the detriment of the other: either you'll cater to the English students because they're engaged and speak up, or you'll cater to the non-major group to try and get them engaged and so leave aside the majors....it is a very, very difficult balancing act.
That said, I wonder if the comments re: boredom are largely generated by non-majors as opposed to majors.
Fie -- I admire your detachment! You're absolutely right that course evals shouldn't be personal; I just have a hard time detaching myself (and on the one occasion when I tried mid-semester evaluations of my own design, I found that the taking-things-too-personally problem got even worse).
theswain -- I think you've put your finger on it. In some ways, those classes where almost all of the students are nonmajors are easier, even though I don't enjoy them as much, because that whole balancing act doesn't come into play. (And welcome, by the way, since I don't think you've commented before.)
Hiya Fretful,
Yes, my first visit to your blog. I found you linked off another blog I frequent.
I might be hitting you up for some Shakespeare advice...I'm preparing my first Shakespeare class for next semester and while I know the plays I'm teaching, I don't know the criticism.
@FP:
Sorry about replying that late: these are very busy days for me.
Yes I'm from Europe, Old Europe.
And yes: "general education" is here seen as something that falls into the competence of schools, not universities. (Though I do admit that at least where I live and teach the schools don't always deliver on this.)
We do have students asking "why should I learn X, as I'm only studying Y because of Z". And sometimes they are right at least to some extend. In such cases I talk about skills and perspectives and knowing even better why Z is more relevant to them than Y.
If you get a personality transplant, lemme know. I think I might need one myself.
My favorite recent evaluation comment:
"the course was cool and all, but the instructor had her own agenda (feminism.) It would have been better if we could have read other forms of criticism like New Criticism and Historicism."
The student did not acknowledge that the reason s/he even had the vocabulary to name New Criticism was because I had required students to write papers in which they independently researched other critical methods and analyze them. I sigh.
TRL -- Ha! That reminds me of the student who said we should be reading more of the early plays and the sonnets in the Shakespeare course. Which would be a reasonable suggestion, except that the course is CALLED "Late Shakespeare," and is clearly identified as a late Shakespeare course in both the catalogue and the syllabus!
I never got stressed out over evaluations until I got on the tt in a department where the average "scores" are stratospheric and the teaching bit of the triathlon is measured mostly by student evaluations. So I feel for you, Fretful.
I agree about being observed and/or videotaped. The latter especially is quite terrifying but can be enormously informative. I recall that you've been using your uni's teaching resource center? I've found mine useful mostly as a place to compare notes with/steal techniques from colleagues in various disciplines.
I've also found it particularly helpful to approach each class by asking myself not what I'm going to teach, but what I want my students to learn. If there's time at the end of the session, they volunteer what the take-home lessons are. I've come see my job as manipulating them into being able to teach themselves–teach a person to fish and all that. In the classroom, this approach manifests itself in more small-group discussion than used to make me comfortable, but it's very carefully structured small-group discussion, and the students got to know each other.
Depending on how big your classes are, I've found learning their names on the first day of class seems to go a long way in making them feel invested in the class. Attendance improved conspicuously the past two semesters I've been pulling that stunt. Or maybe it's because the economy cratered, and, without a job or money to waste time with, students can no longer afford to miss or retake a class.
Our classes serve disparate populations, too, so I've often found it tricky to decide what I want a group to learn. I too do midterm evals and adjust accordingly, but when I get dinged it's always for grading "too hard," which women aren't supposed to do.
Ouch. I've written a novel. Haven't got dinged for that—yet.
I recall that you've been using your uni's teaching resource center?
No, we don't have a teaching resource center (no money for stuff like that); maybe you're thinking of something else?
Thanks for your comments (although honestly, I think I'm probably just fine as far as numbers go; the problem is that I just do not deal well with criticism, period, and have a tendency to get morbidly obsessed with every single negative comment).
I just do not deal well with criticism, period, and have a tendency to get morbidly obsessed with every single negative comment.
I dwell on those, too, and we're not alone. Before we switched over to e-vals, several of my colleagues and I had a ritual of reading our paper evals over drinks. I've decided it will be time to retire once we stop caring about the negative comments.
And oops, I guess I left out the "thesis" of my previous comment, which was that the students who think they're bored are less inclined to feel that way if they're made to take responsibility for their boredom. That worked for me, but then of course teaching is so highly situational. And that's pretty great, actually.
"As per usual, there were a handful of comments about how I was too nervous and fidgety and moved around the room too much and it was distracting."
I wonder how much you are worried about comments like that. I have not seen such comments in my evals yet, but I dread to see them because I think I do look nervous. I am not a native speaker, which in itself makes me uncomfortable. I desperately need to talk to somebody about this issue. What do you do about your nervousness?
I also feel that students expect to see a very optimistic looking, energetic lecturer. They want to feed off my energy, especially in large lecture classes. I always remind myself about that, but I do not always come across as enthusiastic, optimistic and energetic lecturer, even though I do love my field. Students often acknowledge my expertise but they always rate me low on 'enthusiasm".
My evals are generally good - 6 or 5.5 out of 7, but like you, I am obsessed about critical comments.
Post a Comment