bjarniar@rhi.hi.is (Bjarni Armannsson) (11/19/89)
Hello, I'm a computer science student at the University of Iceland and I
was wandering about if there is anybody out there that could give me
some answers to these questions?
In your department, are there elected any best teachers,best courses
etc. And if so, by whom is it done? (The department itself, the
students etc.) And (these simple questions are getting complicated!)
are just part or all information of such surveys published? And if
so where are they published?
Hope to here some answers (both from teachers and students) because we
all have to improve the theaching in our departments, for our own sake!
with regards
Bjarni Armannsson bjarniar@rhi.hi.is
..mcvax!hafro!krafla!bjarniar
Physical address: Bjarni Armannsson
Styrimannastig 13
101 Reykjavik
Iceland (Europe)
shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) (11/29/89)
In article <1345@krafla.rhi.hi.is> bjarniar@rhi.hi.is (Bjarni Armannsson) writes
:
% In your department, are there elected any best teachers,best courses
% etc. And if so, by whom is it done? (The department itself, the
% students etc.) And (these simple questions are getting complicated!)
% are just part or all information of such surveys published? And if
% so where are they published?
Our university holds a campus-wide survey at the end of each
semester. The findings of the survey are relayed to the different
departments as well as to the teachers. Currently, the top teachers and the
course that they gave for each depatrment are published. The students here
are trying to have the complete findings published, especially the
worst-rated teachers but the university is unwilling to do so.
The public domain part of the surevy appears on all the department
billboards. The censored part of the sruvey appears as a computer printout
to the faculties, departments, and teachers, with each body receiving a
printout limited in scope to itself, i.e. no teacher necessarily knows the
ratings of the other teachers. The sole exception to this is the total
department rating which appears in all the printouts.
The computer science department conducts a special survey of its own
among the first year students in an effort to improve the courses.
This survey is usually conducted one month after the start of the semester.
Since the population polled is under 80 members, this survey has proven
very effective.
% with regards
% Bjarni Armannsson bjarniar@rhi.hi.is
% ..mcvax!hafro!krafla!bjarniar
%
%Physical address: Bjarni Armannsson
% Styrimannastig 13
% 101 Reykjavik
% Iceland (Europe)
%
%
%
%
%fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) (11/29/89)
In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > In article <1345@krafla.rhi.hi.is> bjarniar@rhi.hi.is (Bjarni Armannsson) writes > : > % In your department, are there elected any best teachers,best courses > % etc. And if so, by whom is it done? (The department itself, the > % students etc.) And (these simple questions are getting complicated!) > % are just part or all information of such surveys published? And if > % so where are they published? > > Our university holds a campus-wide survey at the end of each > semester. The findings of the survey are relayed to the different > departments as well as to the teachers. Currently, the top teachers and the > course that they gave for each depatrment are published. The students here > are trying to have the complete findings published, especially the > worst-rated teachers but the university is unwilling to do so. > > The public domain part of the surevy appears on all the department > billboards. The censored part of the sruvey appears as a computer printout > to the faculties, departments, and teachers, with each body receiving a > printout limited in scope to itself, i.e. no teacher necessarily knows the > ratings of the other teachers. The sole exception to this is the total > department rating which appears in all the printouts. > It is my impression that most US universities do something very much like the above. Here some 16 profs out of 200 have been removed or their position drastically changed on the basis of student evaluations. Our evaluation scheme has changed drastically over the last decade or so. First one of our student honoraries prepared the questionaires and administered the survey. Then we used forms from Kansas State then we used a sort of combination. This year we will use still a new system. Most faculty concede the need for student evaluation. The administration feels that such is the single most important parameter in faculty eval- uation, but in modern universities there are several other factors, including: Research Fund Raising Educational Innovation Publishing University Service Community Service Department Service In public universties, as the amount of money from the public decreases all of the above become more important. Professors with large research grants, that often pay much more than their own salaries, often are unable to teach as well as they know how. The arguments on faculty evaluation are myriad. It seems to be at the same time essential and impossible. Student evaluation should be formal, it is critically important, but is often missleading; e.g., Profs get tremendous ratings in one course and awful ratings in another. Good students often evaluate differently than the poorer students. It's a real zoo. -- INTERNET:: fhadsell@csm9a.colorado.edu BITNET:: fhadsell@mines Frank Hadsell, Prof. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado 80401 (303) 273-3456
shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) (12/02/89)
In article <2049@csm9a.UUCP> fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) writes: %In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: %> %It is my impression that most US universities do something very much like %the above. Here some 16 profs out of 200 have been removed or their %position drastically changed on the basis of student evaluations. Did student evaluations form the sole basis for these changes or were they merely contributing factors? One item not mentioned, which I am wondering about, are there any requird courses for Master and Phd degrees in which they can aquire the basic teaching skills? After all, teachers must be licensed by some Board of Ed., what about Profs? % %-- % INTERNET:: fhadsell@csm9a.colorado.edu BITNET:: fhadsell@mines % Frank Hadsell, Prof. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, % Golden, Colorado 80401 (303) 273-3456
fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) (12/03/89)
In article <555@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > In article <2049@csm9a.UUCP> fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) writes: > %In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > %> > %It is my impression that most US universities do something very much like > %the above. Here some 16 profs out of 200 have been removed or their > %position drastically changed on the basis of student evaluations. > > Did student evaluations form the sole basis for these changes or were > they merely contributing factors? > > One item not mentioned, which I am wondering about, are there any > requird courses for Master and Phd degrees in which they can aquire > the basic teaching skills? After all, teachers must be licensed by > some Board of Ed., what about Profs? > Student evaluations were the dominant reasons for the removal of the 16 "weakest" professors. Of course there were suspicions and informal complaints, the latter just being another form of student evaluation. In the last 30 years I have heard of a few departments that have required teaching courses for Ph.D.s. Usually the Ph.D. candidates just accumulate a little experience as teaching assistants. There is no license for College teachers in the US. Usually the Ph.D. degree is sort of a union card for those going into the professorial ranks. Recall that teaching is only one of the responsibilities of the professor. In the US, more and more, he/she is judged on the amount of money brought in. This money is essential to support graduate students. 16 "weakest" professors. Of course there were suspic tudent -- INTERNET:: fhadsell@csm9a.colorado.edu BITNET:: fhadsell@mines Frank Hadsell, Prof. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado 80401 (303) 273-3456
edm002@muvms3.bitnet (12/03/89)
In article <555@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > In article <2049@csm9a.UUCP> fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) writes: > %In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > > Did student evaluations form the sole basis for these changes or were > they merely contributing factors? Most schools/departments with an engineering/research basis do not evaluate faculty primarily on teaching skills. Although this is slowly changing in some institutions, the standard evaluation method in the research/scientific school or dept. is publication and/or fundraising through grants. Student evaluations might be used marginally to reinforce pre-established trends (for good or bad faculty), but I'd suspect that few institutions give credible support to teaching as a primary factor in faculty assessment. > > One item not mentioned, which I am wondering about, are there any > requird courses for Master and Phd degrees in which they can aquire > the basic teaching skills? After all, teachers must be licensed by > some Board of Ed., what about Profs? No requirements for teacher-training courses generally exist in higher education; the licensing function to which you refer is for grades K-12 (American grade system, for those reading this in a non-US context). Higher education has claimed open or tacit exemption on a couple of grounds, historically. First, the tradition of academic freedom in higher education is much stronger than in public ed--and licensure has historically been used in other situations (e.g., publishing) as a method of governmental control over ideas. Second, the nature of the process in higher education has always been assumed to be something special, not part of the mass educational system, even when reality belies this image. The professor, especially in the German university model that we copied so carefully in the USA in the 19th century, was foremost a researcher. In the course of his research (and I use *his* deliberately), the professor would be able to transmit new knowledge to a select number of students--and the emphasis is on *select*. This image doesn't fit the mass higher-education scene in the USA today, but, like outdated images of physicians that are used to strengthen or retain their control on society, the images live on. Since my own work is in higher-education administration, I could bore you with *screens* full of information about the curricular and personnel history of the Western university, so I'll close for now. At any rate, the key issue is that we have only recently encountered higher education as a mass cultural phenomenon on the same scale as elementary and secondary education, so we don't have the curriculum in place to address the problem of the professor as mass educator. Here at Marshall, for example, we're offering a trial course next semester through our College of Education that is essentially teaching methods for graduate assistants. -- edm002@muvms3.bitnet,Marshall University Fred R. Reenstjerna | I stick my neck out 400 Hal Greer Blvd | for no one. Huntington, WV 25755 | ---Humphrey Bogart (304)696 - 2905 | CASABLANCA, 1943
gvreugdenhil@violet.waterloo.edu (Gord V...) (12/05/89)
In article <555@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL> shaig%shum.UUCP@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Shai Guday) writes: >In article <2049@csm9a.UUCP> fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) writes: >%In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: >%> >%It is my impression that most US universities do something very much like >%the above. Here some 16 profs out of 200 have been removed or their >%position drastically changed on the basis of student evaluations. > >Did student evaluations form the sole basis for these changes or were >they merely contributing factors? > >One item not mentioned, which I am wondering about, are there any >requird courses for Master and Phd degrees in which they can aquire >the basic teaching skills? After all, teachers must be licensed by >some Board of Ed., what about Profs? As far as I know, there are no universities which require teaching courses as part of a C.S. grad curriculum. I am currently doing grad work at the University of Waterloo and there is only a requirement of one seminar presentation for a Masters and 3 for a Ph.D. In fact, this situation is consistent with the way education is normally viewed: an elementary level teacher has to be an expert in education and have a reasonable grasp of the subject matter; sec. teachers have to know how to teach and know their subject matter; university profs. have to be experts in their subject area but need to know nothing about teaching (at least formally wrt. education courses.). This is one of my pet peeves about most profs. A basic course in teaching methodology would do wonders for most profs (if they applied the methods). I intend to eventually teach at a university or college level; as part of my undergrad. degree I intentionally took the sec. ed. program in order to prepare for teaching. I am nearly qualified to teach high school and do not regret taking the ed. courses at all. Unfortunately, universities do not usually consider teaching as part of the weighting for tenure. Research is far more important in gaining tenure than is teaching quality. This attitude creates a disincentive for good teaching - good teaching takes time and effort and is not rewarded, so most profs prefer to spend the time in research. Teaching is the "necessary evil" of being a prof. > >% >%-- >% INTERNET:: fhadsell@csm9a.colorado.edu BITNET:: fhadsell@mines >% Frank Hadsell, Prof. of Geophysics, Colorado School of Mines, >% Golden, Colorado 80401 (303) 273-3456 Gord Vreugdenhil gvreugdenhil@violet.waterloo.edu or gvreugdenhil@watmsg.waterloo.edu
spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) (12/05/89)
Let me explain a somewhat abstract point that has bearing on this
discussion: university faculty are not supposed to be teachers. The
idea behind a university education is that students are supposed to
teach themselves...the faculty are a resource, similar to the library,
and the students are to take advantage of that.
Consider the higher education system in many European countries where
there are no registrations for class and no exams per class. Instead,
the students sit in on whatever lectures they feel necessary and then
take exit exams to prove they have learned the material.
Originally, all universities were structured this way. This is
precisely why "teaching" has not carried much weight in promotion and
tenure decisions at universities in the U.S. -- although many faculty
don't understand the real origins. Imagine signing up for "Philosophy
101" with Plato...and taking a midterm! That isn't the way things
worked.
We've now reached a state where the majority of undergraduates are not
prepared to learn on their own. They come to college because it is
expected of them in order to get a good job, or to please mom & dad.
They aren't motivated to learn, except through the fear of grades &
the pressure of regular exams. They bitch and moan about reading and
writing assignments, and they complain if they have to miss their
evening TV shows. They expect a huge curve in the grades because they
haven't learned the material -- and they blame the prof for that, not
themselves.
In other words, a university education is gradually changing from an
opportunity for motivated individuals to advance themselves, to an
extension of high school where the students expect to go, as a matter
of course, and between parties they expect the faculty to spoon-feed
them their education. If they don't get it, they blame the professor.
No, I'm not bitter (although I am a bit frustrated by many of my
current students) -- I like what I do, most of the time.. I'm also
not a "bad teacher" -- I generally get very high evaluations from my
students, and I've had some training in educational techniques.
What does bother me is the attitude of students who expect others to
"teach" them when they should be taking the responsibility of
"learning". College shouldn't be advanced high school. Of course, we
shouldn't be admitting students who cannot read or write above the 6th
grade level...even if they do have a high school diploma from
somewhere. But if Purdue (for instance) dropped our enrollment from
36,000 to 18,000 there would be some major logistical and financial
problems. So, most colleges and universities continue to accept
a certain percentage of the applicants in order to stay in
business.
This is also why so many undergrad course are not taught by full
faculty. It is why the grad students seem to have it so much better
(unless you are a grad student, of course). It explains a lot of
other things about the way higher education works, if you think about
it long enough, including why there are no "teaching" requirements for
PhD candidates. (Here at Purdue CS, we require that every candidate
instruct one full course before they are eligible for graduation.)
Of course, I'm presenting an extreme view here. Obviously, we need to
consider the realities of the situation. There are certainly members
of faculty at every institution who should not be in front of a class
full of eager (?) students. Often those faculty are important to the
grad students, however, and to the other faculty. Teaching
evaluations may serve some purpose, as a signal that those faculty
members should not be in classes of undergrads. Coupled with
evaluations by their peers, they may signal that the faculty members
shouldn't be in academia at all, but in some full-time research
position. But by themselves, evaluations are not a good indicator of
how well a faculty member meets the goals of the university.
The problem isn't necessarily where the good teachers have gone. It
is one of the changing nature of higher education, and the lack of
skill and motivation of far too many students entering college.
--
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spafrwaters@bbn.com (Rolland Waters) (12/05/89)
In article <8841@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford) writes: >Let me explain a somewhat abstract point that has bearing on this >discussion: university faculty are not supposed to be teachers. >[...] Imagine signing up for "Philosophy 101" with Plato...and >taking a midterm! That isn't the way things worked. [...] >No, I'm not bitter (although I am a bit frustrated by many of my >current students) -- I like what I do, most of the time.. I'm also >not a "bad teacher" -- I generally get very high evaluations from my >students, and I've had some training in educational techniques. But Plato isn't on the Purdue faculty, either. You make a very valid point, that at one time faculty had a higher place and ability, and this is clearly not the case now. (Actually, could it ever be the case, since part of what is happening is a relative comparison of faculty, with the question being "is the majority in the top 5%?"?) And if part of what you want is for your students to be well motivated, well rounded, observant, and integrated, it's probably a bit much to expect from somebody just out of high school, particularly when it's only a very small percentage of Amerika that is like that anyway. Some of the intent of college is to take random high school grads and give them a place to grow into being the students you want. Only a small percentage of them will actually make it. Success may be poorly correlated with previous educational success and knowledge background. On the other hand, how many of Plato's students made it into the Big Time, and how are is our system doing in comparison? Getting a little deeper, one might even consider the notion that the value of higher education has changed fundamentally. In the dim and distant corners of human history it was easier to have one's innate animal characteristics fully functional (athleticism, ability to deal with fear, love and those other icky emotional and artistic tendencies), and so it was the development of the mind that was required to be well balanced and high on Maslow's hierarchy of wants and needs. Today, with many college types having well developed abstract reasoning capabilities, today's Plato and Aristotle equivalents are probably out windsurfing the Columbia River Gorge and free-climbing 5.12 in Yosemite, since it's these more basic aspects of us that is weak and in need of development. But unless one is there one will never know. Rolland
mac@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Myron A. Calhoun) (12/06/89)
In article <18994@watdragon.waterloo.edu> gvreugdenhil@violet.waterloo.edu (Gord V...) writes: [many lines deleted] >Unfortunately, universities do not usually consider teaching as part of >the weighting for tenure. Research is far more important in gaining >tenure than is teaching quality. This attitude creates a disincentive >for good teaching - good teaching takes time and effort and is not rewarded, >so most profs prefer to spend the time in research. Teaching is the >"necessary evil" of being a prof. Many years ago when my Department experimented with LARGE class sizes as a response to ever-increasing enrollments and same-size faculty, another Professor and I taught different sections of the same course. This is Kansas State University (mentioned in an earlier posting), and as a matter of Department policy our courses were both evaluated using the official questionaires. Somehow the other Prof. had been able to MOTIVATE his 200 students more than I had been able to motivate mine. (How do we know this? The questionaire had a question: "Were you motivated in this course?", and the average response by his students was higher than the average from my students.) But the average response for all other questions was statistically the same. The net result was that I received a HIGHER rating than he did! Why? Because (according to the official interpretation of the evaluation), if his more-motivated students didn't give higher "votes" in the other questions, he must have been the poorer teacher! Personally, even though I "won", I think "student evaluation of instruction" sucks! I have learned other ways to influence the ratings: for instance, give an EASY pop-quiz the class period BEFORE the rating, give high scores when grading, and return the papers just before the course evaluation is made. Happy students give higher evaluations. My best results came when I (inadvertently) scheduled the evaluation on the same day as a university-wide convocation (which most students do NOT attend anyway). When I learned of the conflict, I told my students they were free to attend the convocation, but for those who wished to come to "class" I would hold a "help session" that day. The poorer students skipped the class (and the convocation, I'm sure), but the better students came. Better students give better evaluations, and again I came out smelling like a rose, so to speak! Not that I would ever consider manipulating evaluations, of course, but I consistently rank high in the evaluation game. :-) I think the BEST student evaluation comes about five years after the student has graduated, when s/he has had a chance to realize that I really tried to teach her/him to the best of my ability. I have received a few letters of that sort, and the glow they produce in me is one of the major rewards I have in teaching. --Myron. -- Myron A. Calhoun, PhD EE, W0PBV, (913) 532-6350 (work), 539-4448 (home). INTERNET: mac@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu BITNET: mac@ksuvax1.bitnet UUCP: ...{rutgers, texbell}!ksuvax1!harry!mac
sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (12/07/89)
From article <8841@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, by spaf@cs.purdue.edu (Gene Spafford): > > Let me explain a somewhat abstract point that has bearing on this > discussion: university faculty are not supposed to be teachers. The > idea behind a university education is that students are supposed to > teach themselves...the faculty are a resource, similar to the library, > and the students are to take advantage of that. > ... > We've now reached a state where the majority of undergraduates are not > prepared to learn on their own. They come to college because it is > expected of them in order to get a good job, or to please mom & dad. One of the reasons that the nature of "higher education" is changing is because the world/job market has become more complex. In my case, I couldn't have become a good computer programmer on a high school education alone. If I wanted to be a programmer, which I did, then I pretty much _had_ to go to college. No computers in high school at that time; college was the only way to go. So for me, college wasn't intended to be a place where I would become worldly, it was a place I needed to go to get "training" in my field. > "learning". College shouldn't be advanced high school. Of course, we > shouldn't be admitting students who cannot read or write above the 6th > grade level...even if they do have a high school diploma from > somewhere. But if Purdue (for instance) dropped our enrollment from > 36,000 to 18,000 there would be some major logistical and financial > problems. So, most colleges and universities continue to accept > a certain percentage of the applicants in order to stay in > business. > ... > The problem isn't necessarily where the good teachers have gone. It > is one of the changing nature of higher education, and the lack of > skill and motivation of far too many students entering college. So you admit that schools such as Purdue are having to change their admission policies because of the realities of today. It seems they can respond where their bank accounts are concerned but not always where their students needs are concerned. There are some instances, CS is one of them, where the only "job training" that can be had is at a University. Not high school, not Fred's College of Electrical Engineering ("Learn to repair VCR's and computers in four months!"), but at a college. Many students are unmotivated but don't blame the ones who are for wanting a job after school. It's just one of today's realities. -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. San Dimas, CA
manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) (12/07/89)
In article <1989Dec6.220957.26182@aqdata.uucp> sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: > There are some instances, >CS is one of them, where the only "job training" that can be had is >at a University. Not high school, not Fred's College of Electrical >Engineering ("Learn to repair VCR's and computers in four months!"), >but at a college. I don't know how it works in the US, but in Canada we have two year community colleges and four year universities. I've taught in both, and have had really outstanding students (and turkeys :-( ) in both. The colleges are very explicitly career training institutions. The Computing Technology program I taught in at Camosun College included courses in programming and software design, real time systems, operating systems, and file management. The students did really outstanding projects (Camosun College projects have placed among the finalists in the BC Technology Showcase for years [advt]). With college (2-year) students, I have found that the lure of money is a very strong one. `Gee, why do we have to learn this junk?' `Because there are jobs in it.' `Wow, what exciting stuff we're studying!!!' This is as it should be. Perhaps what Michael and Bill Wolfe are talking about could be best acccommodated in a four-year technical college, which is specifically aimed at career preparation, yet which deals with serious computer science/engineering. (Germany, for example, has both universities and `technical institutes', both of which issue degrees.) However, I do not feel that this sort of thing belongs in a university. (This is not an expression of snobbery; technical college graduates would expect to be paid more, for example.) As an aside, if (as Bill Wolfe said) I were forced to teach Ada, CASE, etc., I'd cut my throat. -- \ Vincent Manis <manis@cs.ubc.ca> "There is no law that vulgarity and \ Department of Computer Science literary excellence cannot coexist." /\ University of British Columbia -- A. Trevor Hodge / \ Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1W5 (604) 228-2394
cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) (12/13/89)
In article <555@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > In article <2049@csm9a.UUCP> fhadsell@csm9a.UUCP ( GP) writes: > %In article <552@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL>, shaig@shum.Huji.AC.IL (Shai Guday) writes: > %> > %It is my impression that most US universities do something very much like > %the above. Here some 16 profs out of 200 have been removed or their > %position drastically changed on the basis of student evaluations. > > Did student evaluations form the sole basis for these changes or were > they merely contributing factors? > > One item not mentioned, which I am wondering about, are there any > requird courses for Master and Phd degrees in which they can aquire > the basic teaching skills? After all, teachers must be licensed by > some Board of Ed., what about Profs? As you can see from my Summary: line, the answer is no, at least in the universities with which I am familiar. The licensing requirements are so many credits in such-and-such courses with satisfactory grades, and have nothing to do with understanding and anything meaningful about teaching. The university faculty at good universities can evaluate their candidates. They neither need or want some certifying agency. Evaluations are not unanimous, and strong disagreements arise about candidates for positions. Even second-rate schools can probably evaluate the candidates adequately themselves, but they rely more on credentials and evaluations by their teachers. But they do not ask for teaching courses. Most candidates will have done some teaching. Now public schools are very rarely in a position to evaluate their candidates. So they rely on an almost meaningless piece of paper, or occasionally an examination which tests whether the indoctrination of the teaching courses has been appropriately memorized. If you ask the good people at the universities, they will advise against the courses taught by the Departments of Miseducation. The good teacher is the one who gives insights into the subject and makes the students think. It is probably the case that there is little relation between student evaluations and the quality of teaching. I know of faculty who get outstanding student ratings, but the students have only learned the unimportant material. Many teachers cater to the type of "learning" which goes on in the elementary and high schools, and essentially concentrate on getting the answers on the tests. This does absolutely no good after the end of the course. Few students are interested in learning; only in the grade in the course. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet, UUCP)
gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu (12/15/89)
Yes, to be truly meaningful, evaluation should not be done until 2-3 years after the course was taught. Only then will the student know if they have learned something useful, or not. Some of the very best teachers work their students to death, and are only appreciated years later.