Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective...

25
Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT 30823-01 1/31/2012 Comparative Programming LEC 001 372 CSC Christian S Fall-11 - 5,550 45 3,261 C_SCALUH Enrollment: Sections: huge class, 60 or more enrolled Comp Group 2: CSC Upper Division Undergraduate Comp Group 1: 5 or more enrolled Sections: 127 C_SCALU0 Enrollment: (62%) Response: 53 Enrollment : 85 Instructor Question / Instructor Frequency Mean 95% CI 95% CI Mean 95% CI Dev. St. Mean Comparison Group Descriptions Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia Fall and Spring 1 . - 4.24 4.66 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13 - 4.22 4.0 4.5 0.77 Overall rating of teaching effectiveness 0 0 9 11 33 62% 0% 0% 21% 17% almost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective 2 . - 3.84 4.39 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84 - 3.92 3.7 4.1 1.01 Overall rating of the course 7 0 3 20 23 43% 0% 13% 38% 6% one of the worst worse than average about average better than average one of the best 3 . - 3.80 4.28 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04 - 4.05 3.9 4.0 0.88 Amount learned 2 0 13 19 19 36% 0% 4% 36% 25% almost nothing less than usual about as much as usual more than usual an exceptional amount 4 . - 3.88 4.46 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82 - 3.90 3.7 4.2 1.05 Overall instructor comparison 7 0 4 15 27 51% 0% 13% 28% 8% one of the least effective less effective than most about as effective as most more effective than most one of the most effective 8 . - 4.33 4.76 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61 - 4.70 4.6 4.5 0.80 Students treated with respect 2 0 4 10 37 70% 0% 4% 19% 8% strongly disagree disagree uncertain agree strongly agree 10 . - 4.14 4.70 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15 - 4.20 4.0 4.4 0.86 Value of time spent on course 2 0 3 10 23 61% 0% 5% 26% 8% almost none valuable less than half valuable about half valuable more than half valuable almost all valuable 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 1 2 3 4 8 10 1 2 3 4 8 10 For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U L - Low CI, M - MEAN, U - Upper CI Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals Questions University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120) 432

Transcript of Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective...

Page 1: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

30823-01

1/31/2012

Comparative ProgrammingLEC001372CSCChristian S

Fall-11

-

5,550 45 3,261

C_SCALUH

Enrollment: Sections:

huge class, 60 or more enrolled

Comp Group 2:

CSC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(62%)Response: 53

Enrollment : 85

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 4.24 4.66 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13- 4.22 4.0 4.5 0.77Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

9 11 33 62%

0% 0%

21% 17%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.84 4.39 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84- 3.92 3.7 4.1 1.01Overall rating of the course

7 0

3 20 23 43%

0% 13%

38% 6%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.80 4.28 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04- 4.05 3.9 4.0 0.88Amount learned

2 0

13 19 19 36%

0% 4%

36% 25%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.88 4.46 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82- 3.90 3.7 4.2 1.05Overall instructor comparison

7 0

4 15 27 51%

0% 13%

28% 8%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

8. - 4.33 4.76 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61- 4.70 4.6 4.5 0.80Students treated with respect

2 0

4 10 37 70%

0% 4%

19% 8%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

10. - 4.14 4.70 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15- 4.20 4.0 4.4 0.86Value of time spent on course

2 0

3 10 23 61%

0% 5%

26% 8%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

8

10

1

2

3

4

8

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)432

Page 2: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

30824-01

1/31/2012

Comparative ProgrammingLEC002372CSCChristian S

Fall-11

-

5,550 36 319

C_SCALUS

Enrollment: Sections:

small class, fewer than 20 enrolled

Comp Group 2:

CSC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(83%)Response: 5

Enrollment : 6

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 4.06 5.00 4.1 4.05 - 4.19 4.46- 4.22 4.3 4.6 0.55Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

0 2 3 60%

0% 0%

40% 0%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.02 4.98 3.8 3.76 - 3.85 4.11- 3.92 4.0 4.0 1.00Overall rating of the course

0 0

2 1 2 40%

0% 0%

20% 40%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.76 4.64 4.0 3.90 - 3.92 4.16- 4.05 4.0 4.2 0.45Amount learned

0 0

0 4 1 20%

0% 0%

80% 0%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.06 4.14 3.8 3.71 - 3.86 4.16- 3.90 4.0 3.6 0.55Overall instructor comparison

0 0

2 3 0 0%

0% 0%

60% 40%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

8. - 4.36 5.00 4.7 4.62 - 4.73 4.87- 4.70 4.8 4.8 0.45Students treated with respect

0 0

0 1 4 80%

0% 0%

20% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

10. - 3.17 5.00 4.1 4.06 - 4.23 4.46- 4.20 4.3 4.3 0.96Value of time spent on course

0 0

1 1 2 50%

0% 0%

25% 25%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

8

10

1

2

3

4

8

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)432

Page 3: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

36236-01

1/31/2012

Principles of CompilatiLEC001553CSCChristian S

Spring-11

-

1,307 Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

CSC

Graduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 79

C_SCALG0

Enrollment:

(90%)Response: 9

Enrollment : 10

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 3.92 4.53 4.3 4.27 -- 4.43 4.2 0.44Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

0 7 2 22%

0% 0%

78% 0%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.69 4.53 4.1 4.00 -- 4.17 4.1 0.60Overall rating of the course

0 0

1 6 2 22%

0% 0%

67% 11%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.18 4.16 4.0 3.95 -- 4.12 3.7 0.71Amount learned

0 0

4 4 1 11%

0% 0%

44% 44%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.32 4.24 4.0 3.85 -- 4.09 3.8 0.67Overall instructor comparison

0 0

3 5 1 11%

0% 0%

56% 33%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.99 4.68 4.3 4.17 -- 4.34 4.3 0.50Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

0 6 3 33%

0% 0%

67% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.05 5.00 4.3 4.27 -- 4.42 4.6 0.73Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

1 2 6 67%

0% 0%

22% 11%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 4.08 4.81 4.3 4.19 -- 4.34 4.4 0.53Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 0

0 5 4 44%

0% 0%

56% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.66 5.00 4.7 4.65 -- 4.75 4.9 0.33Students treated with respect

0 0

0 1 8 89%

0% 0%

11% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.57 4.65 3.7 3.64 -- 3.82 4.1 0.78Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

2 4 3 33%

0% 0%

44% 22%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.76 4.68 4.3 4.26 -- 4.39 4.2 0.67Value of time spent on course

0 0

1 5 3 33%

0% 0%

56% 11%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 4: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

14876-01

1/31/2012

Comparative ProgrammingLEC001372CSCChristian S

Fall-10

-

5,550 45 3,261

C_SCALUH

Enrollment: Sections:

huge class, 60 or more enrolled

Comp Group 2:

CSC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(59%)Response: 42

Enrollment : 70

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 4.01 4.41 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13- 4.22 4.0 4.2 0.67Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

6 21 15 36%

0% 0%

50% 14%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.69 4.26 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84- 3.92 3.7 4.0 0.94Overall rating of the course

2 0

12 12 16 38%

0% 5%

29% 29%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 4.03 4.49 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04- 4.05 3.9 4.3 0.76Amount learned

1 0

5 18 18 43%

0% 2%

43% 12%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.54 3.99 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82- 3.90 3.7 3.8 0.75Overall instructor comparison

1 0

15 19

7 17%

0% 2%

45% 36%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.66 4.20 4.0 3.87 - 3.68 3.96- 4.04 3.8 3.9 0.88Usefulness of the in-class activities

3 0

8 19 12 29%

0% 7%

45% 19%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.38 4.76 4.3 4.19 - 4.13 4.31- 4.32 4.2 4.6 0.63Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

2 12 27 64%

0% 0%

29% 5%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.47 4.17 3.8 3.76 - 3.54 3.76- 3.91 3.7 3.8 1.10Usefulness of course materials (new question)

2 2

9 14 12 29%

5% 5%

33% 21%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.25 4.73 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61- 4.70 4.6 4.5 0.80Students treated with respect

2 0

2 12 26 62%

0% 5%

29% 5%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.38 3.78 3.9 3.80 - 3.75 3.98- 3.95 3.9 3.6 0.66Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

22 16

4 10%

0% 0%

38% 52%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.98 4.49 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15- 4.20 4.0 4.2 0.84Value of time spent on course

1 0

7 14 20 48%

0% 2%

33% 17%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 5: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

15549-01

1/31/2012

COMPAR PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001372C SCChristian S

Fall-09

-

5,550 45 3,261

C_SCALUH

Enrollment: Sections:

huge class, 60 or more enrolled

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(38%)Response: 26

Enrollment : 67

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 4.18 4.74 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13- 4.22 4.0 4.5 0.71Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

3 8

15 58%

0% 0%

31% 12%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.81 4.50 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84- 3.92 3.7 4.2 0.88Overall rating of the course

1 0

5 9

11 42%

0% 4%

35% 19%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 4.37 4.87 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04- 4.05 3.9 4.6 0.64Amount learned

0 0

2 6

18 69%

0% 0%

23% 8%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.70 4.38 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82- 3.90 3.7 4.0 0.84Overall instructor comparison

1 0

5 11

8 32%

0% 4%

44% 20%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.74 4.49 4.0 3.87 - 3.68 3.96- 4.04 3.8 4.1 0.95Usefulness of the in-class activities

2 0

4 9

11 42%

0% 8%

35% 15%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.42 4.81 4.3 4.19 - 4.13 4.31- 4.32 4.2 4.6 0.50Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

0 10 16 62%

0% 0%

38% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.45 4.47 3.8 3.76 - 3.54 3.76- 3.91 3.7 4.0 1.22Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 2

5 6

10 38%

8% 0%

23% 19%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.65 4.97 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61- 4.70 4.6 4.8 0.40Students treated with respect

0 0

0 5

21 81%

0% 0%

19% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.40 3.98 3.9 3.80 - 3.75 3.98- 3.95 3.9 3.7 0.74Difficulty level of the course (new order)

1 0

9 13

3 12%

0% 4%

50% 35%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.95 4.53 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15- 4.20 4.0 4.2 0.72Value of time spent on course

0 0

4 11 10 40%

0% 0%

44% 16%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 6: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

15665-01

1/31/2012

COMPILERS+SYSTEMS SFTWRLEC001453C SCChristian S

Fall-09

-

5,550 16 471

C_SCALUM

Enrollment: Sections:

medium class, 20-39 enrolled

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(36%)Response: 13

Enrollment : 36

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 4.02 4.75 4.1 4.05 - 3.97 4.44- 4.22 4.2 4.4 0.65Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

1 6 6 46%

0% 0%

46% 8%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.35 4.65 3.8 3.76 - 3.79 4.23- 3.92 4.0 4.0 1.15Overall rating of the course

2 0

2 3 6 46%

0% 15%

23% 15%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.76 4.70 4.0 3.90 - 3.84 4.28- 4.05 4.1 4.2 0.83Amount learned

0 0

3 4 6 46%

0% 0%

31% 23%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.43 4.57 3.8 3.71 - 3.62 4.12- 3.90 3.9 4.0 1.00Overall instructor comparison

1 0

3 4 5 38%

0% 8%

31% 23%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.76 4.70 4.0 3.87 - 3.82 4.30- 4.04 4.1 4.2 0.83Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

3 4 6 46%

0% 0%

31% 23%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.95 4.82 4.3 4.19 - 4.07 4.53- 4.32 4.3 4.4 0.77Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

2 4 7 54%

0% 0%

31% 15%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.44 4.72 3.8 3.76 - 3.85 4.23- 3.91 4.0 4.1 1.08Usefulness of course materials (new question)

1 0

3 2 6 46%

0% 8%

15% 23%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.63 5.00 4.7 4.62 - 4.66 4.81- 4.70 4.7 4.8 0.38Students treated with respect

0 0

0 2

11 85%

0% 0%

15% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.54 4.62 3.9 3.80 - 3.51 4.06- 3.95 3.8 4.1 0.95Difficulty level of the course (new order)

1 0

2 5 5 38%

0% 8%

38% 15%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.66 4.80 4.1 4.06 - 3.81 4.31- 4.20 4.1 4.2 1.01Value of time spent on course

1 0

2 3 7 54%

0% 8%

23% 15%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 7: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

14641-01

1/31/2012

COMPAR PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001372C SCChristian S

Fall-08

-

5,550 45 3,261

C_SCALUH

Enrollment: Sections:

huge class, 60 or more enrolled

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(58%)Response: 40

Enrollment : 68

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 3.71 4.29 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13- 4.22 4.0 4.0 0.93Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

4 0

5 18 13 33%

0% 10%

45% 13%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.41 4.04 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84- 3.92 3.7 3.7 1.01Overall rating of the course

4 1

9 17

9 23%

3% 10%

43% 23%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.75 4.35 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04- 4.05 3.9 4.1 0.96Amount learned

3 0

8 13 16 40%

0% 8%

33% 20%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.43 4.07 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82- 3.90 3.7 3.8 1.03Overall instructor comparison

4 1

9 16 10 25%

3% 10%

40% 23%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.70 4.30 4.0 3.87 - 3.68 3.96- 4.04 3.8 4.0 0.96Usefulness of the in-class activities

2 0

12 10 16 40%

0% 5%

25% 30%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.02 4.63 4.3 4.19 - 4.13 4.31- 4.32 4.2 4.3 0.97Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 1

5 10 23 57%

3% 3%

25% 13%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.58 4.31 3.8 3.76 - 3.54 3.76- 3.91 3.7 3.9 1.14Usefulness of course materials (new question)

2 2

7 12 14 35%

5% 5%

30% 18%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.25 4.70 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61- 4.70 4.6 4.5 0.72Students treated with respect

1 0

2 14 23 57%

0% 3%

35% 5%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.42 3.88 3.9 3.80 - 3.75 3.98- 3.95 3.9 3.7 0.74Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 0

14 20

4 10%

0% 5%

50% 35%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.65 4.30 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15- 4.20 4.0 4.0 1.03Value of time spent on course

4 0

9 11 16 40%

0% 10%

28% 23%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 8: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

15111-01

1/31/2012

ADV TPC PROGRAMMING LANLEC001620C SCChristian S

Fall-08

-

1,307 Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Graduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 79

C_SCALG0

Enrollment:

(91%)Response: 11

Enrollment : 12

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 3.81 4.56 4.3 4.27 -- 4.43 4.2 0.60Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

1 7 3 27%

0% 0%

64% 9%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.47 4.34 4.1 4.00 -- 4.17 3.9 0.70Overall rating of the course

0 0

3 6 2 18%

0% 0%

55% 27%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.28 4.36 4.0 3.95 -- 4.12 3.8 0.87Amount learned

1 0

2 6 2 18%

0% 9%

55% 18%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.44 4.19 4.0 3.85 -- 4.09 3.8 0.60Overall instructor comparison

0 0

3 7 1 9%

0% 0%

64% 27%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.72 4.65 4.3 4.17 -- 4.34 4.2 0.75Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

2 5 4 36%

0% 0%

45% 18%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.57 4.79 4.3 4.27 -- 4.42 4.2 0.98Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

1 4 5 45%

0% 9%

36% 9%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.76 4.43 4.3 4.19 -- 4.34 4.1 0.54Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 0

1 8 2 18%

0% 0%

73% 9%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.44 5.00 4.7 4.65 -- 4.75 4.7 0.47Students treated with respect

0 0

0 3 8 73%

0% 0%

27% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.22 3.87 3.7 3.64 -- 3.82 3.5 0.52Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

5 6 0 0%

0% 0%

55% 45%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.66 4.53 4.3 4.26 -- 4.39 4.1 0.70Value of time spent on course

0 0

2 6 3 27%

0% 0%

55% 18%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 9: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

71799-01

1/31/2012

PRIN PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001520C SCChristian S

Spring-08

-

1,307 Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Graduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 79

C_SCALG0

Enrollment:

(89%)Response: 35

Enrollment : 39

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 3.82 4.47 4.3 4.27 -- 4.43 4.1 0.97Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

2 1

2 16 14 40%

3% 6%

46% 6%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.87 4.47 4.1 4.00 -- 4.17 4.2 0.89Overall rating of the course

0 1

5 15 14 40%

3% 0%

43% 14%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.77 4.41 4.0 3.95 -- 4.12 4.1 0.95Amount learned

2 1

2 18 12 34%

3% 6%

51% 6%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.56 4.27 4.0 3.85 -- 4.09 3.9 1.07Overall instructor comparison

1 2

6 15 11 31%

6% 3%

43% 17%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.93 4.59 4.3 4.17 -- 4.34 4.3 0.98Usefulness of the in-class activities

1 1

4 11 18 51%

3% 3%

31% 11%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.27 4.82 4.3 4.27 -- 4.42 4.5 0.82Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 1

1 10 23 66%

3% 0%

29% 3%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.90 4.50 4.3 4.19 -- 4.34 4.2 0.90Usefulness of course materials (new question)

2 0

5 12 16 46%

0% 6%

34% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.70 4.96 4.7 4.65 -- 4.75 4.8 0.38Students treated with respect

0 0

0 6

29 83%

0% 0%

17% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.29 3.79 3.7 3.64 -- 3.82 3.5 0.74Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 0

15 15

3 9%

0% 6%

43% 43%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 4.20 4.74 4.3 4.26 -- 4.39 4.5 0.79Value of time spent on course

1 0

3 9

21 62%

0% 3%

26% 9%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 10: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

12111-01

1/31/2012

COMPAR PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001372C SCChristian S

Fall-07

-

5,550 45 3,261

C_SCALUH

Enrollment: Sections:

huge class, 60 or more enrolled

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Upper Division Undergraduate

Comp Group 1:

5 or more enrolled

Sections: 127

C_SCALU0

Enrollment:

(67%)Response: 43

Enrollment : 64

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

Lecture, Seminars, Colloquia

Fall and Spring

1. - 3.68 4.18 4.1 4.05 - 3.86 4.13- 4.22 4.0 3.9 0.83Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 1

10 22 10 23%

2% 0%

51% 23%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.43 3.97 3.8 3.76 - 3.56 3.84- 3.92 3.7 3.7 0.89Overall rating of the course

3 0

16 15

9 21%

0% 7%

35% 37%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.51 4.02 4.0 3.90 - 3.78 4.04- 4.05 3.9 3.8 0.84Amount learned

1 0

18 14 10 23%

0% 2%

33% 42%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.14 3.69 3.8 3.71 - 3.49 3.82- 3.90 3.7 3.4 0.91Overall instructor comparison

5 1

16 17

4 9%

2% 12%

40% 37%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.59 4.18 4.0 3.87 - 3.68 3.96- 4.04 3.8 3.9 0.98Usefulness of the in-class activities

3 1

8 19 12 28%

2% 7%

44% 19%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.98 4.43 4.3 4.19 - 4.13 4.31- 4.32 4.2 4.2 0.74Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

5 21 16 37%

0% 2%

49% 12%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.28 3.81 3.8 3.76 - 3.54 3.76- 3.91 3.7 3.5 0.86Usefulness of course materials (new question)

5 0

14 18

5 12%

0% 12%

42% 33%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.26 4.67 4.7 4.62 - 4.50 4.61- 4.70 4.6 4.5 0.67Students treated with respect

1 0

1 18 23 53%

0% 2%

42% 2%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.22 3.62 3.9 3.80 - 3.75 3.98- 3.95 3.9 3.4 0.66Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 0

23 16

2 5%

0% 5%

37% 53%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.70 4.30 4.1 4.06 - 3.95 4.15- 4.20 4.0 4.0 0.98Value of time spent on course

2 1

8 17 15 35%

2% 5%

40% 19%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 11: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11503-01

1/31/2012

COMPAR PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001372C SCChristian S

Fall-05

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(70%)Response: 28

Enrollment : 40

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.74 4.41 -- 4.1 0.87Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

2 0

3 13

9 33%

0% 7%

48% 11%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.60 4.32 -- 4.0 0.94Overall rating of the course

2 0

6 10

9 33%

0% 7%

37% 22%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.53 4.25 -- 3.9 0.93Amount learned

1 0

10 7 9 33%

0% 4%

26% 37%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.35 4.21 -- 3.8 1.12Overall instructor comparison

2 1

8 7 9 33%

4% 7%

26% 30%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.66 4.34 -- 4.0 0.88Usefulness of the in-class activities

2 0

4 13

8 30%

0% 7%

48% 15%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.80 4.42 -- 4.1 0.80Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

4 13

9 33%

0% 4%

48% 15%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.47 4.13 -- 3.8 0.82Usefulness of course materials (new question)

1 0

8 11

5 19%

0% 4%

41% 30%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.05 4.62 -- 4.3 0.73Students treated with respect

0 0

4 10 13 48%

0% 0%

37% 15%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.11 3.63 -- 3.4 0.69Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 0

14 10

1 4%

0% 7%

37% 52%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.51 4.34 -- 3.9 1.07Value of time spent on course

1 1

7 8

10 37%

4% 4%

30% 26%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 12: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11907-01

1/31/2012

ADV TPC PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001620C SCChristian S

Fall-05

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(69%)Response: 9

Enrollment : 13

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.51 4.49 -- 4.0 0.71Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

2 5 2 22%

0% 0%

56% 22%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.01 4.77 -- 3.9 1.27Overall rating of the course

0 1

1 4 3 33%

11% 0%

44% 11%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.47 4.31 -- 3.9 0.60Amount learned

0 0

2 6 1 11%

0% 0%

67% 22%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.64 4.03 -- 3.3 1.00Overall instructor comparison

0 1

3 5 0 0%

11% 0%

56% 33%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.66 4.12 -- 3.9 0.33Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

1 8 0 0%

0% 0%

89% 11%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.35 4.43 -- 3.9 0.78Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

0 7 1 11%

0% 11%

78% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.69 4.53 -- 4.1 0.60Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 0

1 6 2 22%

0% 0%

67% 11%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.19 4.92 -- 4.6 0.53Students treated with respect

0 0

0 4 5 56%

0% 0%

44% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 2.84 3.82 -- 3.3 0.71Difficulty level of the course (new order)

1 0

4 4 0 0%

0% 11%

44% 44%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.20 4.36 -- 3.8 0.83Value of time spent on course

1 0

1 6 1 11%

0% 11%

67% 11%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 13: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11079-01

1/31/2012

PRIN PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001520C SCChristian S

Spring-05

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(73%)Response: 22

Enrollment : 30

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 2.94 3.88 -- 3.4 1.10Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

3 1

8 6 4 18%

5% 14%

27% 36%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 2.81 3.64 -- 3.2 0.97Overall rating of the course

1 2

10 8 1 5%

9% 5%

36% 45%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 2.47 3.35 -- 2.9 1.02Amount learned

8 1

6 6 1 5%

5% 36%

27% 27%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.51 3.40 -- 3.0 1.05Overall instructor comparison

2 3

11 5 1 5%

14% 9%

23% 50%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 2.77 3.68 -- 3.2 1.07Usefulness of the in-class activities

5 1

6 8 2 9%

5% 23%

36% 27%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.15 4.12 -- 3.6 1.14Usefulness of the outside assignments

3 1

4 9 5 23%

5% 14%

41% 18%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.04 3.87 -- 3.5 0.96Usefulness of course materials (new question)

4 0

7 8 3 14%

0% 18%

36% 32%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 3.85 4.69 -- 4.3 0.98Students treated with respect

0 1

2 8

11 50%

5% 0%

36% 9%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 2.80 3.29 -- 3.0 0.58Difficulty level of the course (new order)

3 0

15 4 0 0%

0% 14%

18% 68%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 2.73 3.63 -- 3.2 1.05Value of time spent on course

5 1

7 7 2 9%

5% 23%

32% 32%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 14: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11449-01

1/31/2012

COMPAR PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001372C SCChristian S

Fall-04

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(54%)Response: 35

Enrollment : 64

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.02 3.75 -- 3.4 1.07Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

5 2

9 14

4 12%

6% 15%

41% 26%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 2.79 3.57 -- 3.2 1.14Overall rating of the course

6 3

11 10

4 12%

9% 18%

29% 32%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.24 3.88 -- 3.6 0.93Amount learned

4 0

13 11

6 18%

0% 12%

32% 38%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.42 3.28 -- 2.9 1.26Overall instructor comparison

10 5

8 7 4 12%

15% 29%

21% 24%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.00 3.73 -- 3.4 1.06Usefulness of the in-class activities

9 0

8 11

5 15%

0% 27%

33% 24%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.80 4.26 -- 4.0 0.67Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

7 19

8 24%

0% 0%

56% 21%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 2.87 3.65 -- 3.3 1.09Usefulness of course materials (new question)

3 3

11 11

3 9%

9% 9%

33% 33%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 3.68 4.38 -- 4.0 1.04Students treated with respect

2 1

6 12 14 40%

3% 6%

34% 17%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.61 4.09 -- 3.9 0.70Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

11 17

6 18%

0% 0%

50% 32%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.36 4.01 -- 3.7 0.96Value of time spent on course

2 1

11 14

7 20%

3% 6%

40% 31%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 15: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11083-01

1/31/2012

PRIN PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001520C SCChristian S

Spring-04

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(81%)Response: 21

Enrollment : 26

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.24 4.09 -- 3.7 0.97Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

3 0

5 9 4 19%

0% 14%

43% 24%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 2.95 3.81 -- 3.4 0.97Overall rating of the course

2 1

8 8 2 10%

5% 10%

38% 38%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 2.91 3.85 -- 3.4 1.07Amount learned

4 1

4 10

2 10%

5% 19%

48% 19%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.58 3.42 -- 3.0 0.95Overall instructor comparison

5 1

9 5 1 5%

5% 24%

24% 43%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.19 4.24 -- 3.7 1.19Usefulness of the in-class activities

3 1

3 8 6 29%

5% 14%

38% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.14 4.29 -- 3.7 1.31Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 3

3 9 6 29%

14% 0%

43% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.16 4.17 -- 3.7 1.15Usefulness of course materials (new question)

3 1

3 9 5 24%

5% 14%

43% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.00 4.57 -- 4.3 0.64Students treated with respect

0 0

2 11

8 38%

0% 0%

52% 10%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 2.80 3.49 -- 3.1 0.79Difficulty level of the course (new order)

4 0

11 5 1 5%

0% 19%

24% 52%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.09 4.15 -- 3.6 1.20Value of time spent on course

3 1

5 6 6 29%

5% 14%

29% 24%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 16: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11897-01

1/31/2012

ADV TPC PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001620C SCChristian S

Fall-03

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(93%)Response: 14

Enrollment : 15

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 4.09 4.63 -- 4.4 0.50Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

0 9 5 36%

0% 0%

64% 0%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.32 4.11 -- 3.7 0.73Overall rating of the course

0 0

6 6 2 14%

0% 0%

43% 43%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.27 4.16 -- 3.7 0.83Amount learned

0 0

7 4 3 21%

0% 0%

29% 50%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.36 4.18 -- 3.8 0.73Overall instructor comparison

0 0

5 6 2 15%

0% 0%

46% 38%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 4.29 4.85 -- 4.6 0.51Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

0 6 8 57%

0% 0%

43% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.83 4.59 -- 4.2 0.70Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

2 7 5 36%

0% 0%

50% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.95 4.76 -- 4.4 0.74Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 0

2 5 7 50%

0% 0%

36% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.46 4.97 -- 4.7 0.47Students treated with respect

0 0

0 4

10 71%

0% 0%

29% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 2.41 3.17 -- 2.8 0.70Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 1

10 1 0 0%

7% 14%

7% 71%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.67 4.47 -- 4.1 0.73Value of time spent on course

0 0

3 7 4 29%

0% 0%

50% 21%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 17: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11321-01

1/31/2012

PRIN PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001520C SCChristian S

Spring-03

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(82%)Response: 23

Enrollment : 28

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.38 4.10 -- 3.7 0.86Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

2 0

6 11

4 17%

0% 9%

48% 26%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 2.96 3.74 -- 3.3 0.93Overall rating of the course

5 0

7 9 2 9%

0% 22%

39% 30%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 2.65 3.61 -- 3.1 1.14Amount learned

6 1

9 3 4 17%

4% 26%

13% 39%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.90 3.80 -- 3.3 1.07Overall instructor comparison

4 1

7 8 3 13%

4% 17%

35% 30%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.13 4.00 -- 3.6 1.04Usefulness of the in-class activities

2 1

7 9 4 17%

4% 9%

39% 30%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.30 4.00 -- 3.7 0.83Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

10 8 4 17%

0% 4%

35% 43%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.02 3.80 -- 3.4 0.91Usefulness of course materials (new question)

3 0

10 6 3 13%

0% 13%

26% 43%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.09 4.69 -- 4.4 0.72Students treated with respect

0 0

3 8

12 52%

0% 0%

35% 13%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.00 3.70 -- 3.3 0.83Difficulty level of the course (new order)

2 0

14 4 3 13%

0% 9%

17% 61%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 2.76 3.67 -- 3.2 1.09Value of time spent on course

5 1

8 6 3 13%

4% 22%

26% 35%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)232

Page 18: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11973-01

1/31/2012

COMPILERS SYSTEMS SFTWRLEC001453C SCChristian S

Fall-02

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(87%)Response: 47

Enrollment : 54

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 4.06 4.49 -- 4.3 0.74Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

1 0

5 21 20 43%

0% 2%

45% 11%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 4.00 4.42 -- 4.2 0.72Overall rating of the course

1 0

5 24 17 36%

0% 2%

51% 11%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 4.02 4.45 -- 4.2 0.73Amount learned

1 0

5 23 18 38%

0% 2%

49% 11%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.88 4.33 -- 4.1 0.76Overall instructor comparison

1 0

8 23 15 32%

0% 2%

49% 17%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.72 4.19 -- 4.0 0.79Usefulness of the in-class activities

2 0

9 24 11 24%

0% 4%

52% 20%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.37 4.72 -- 4.5 0.59Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

2 17 27 59%

0% 0%

37% 4%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.28 3.89 -- 3.6 1.02Usefulness of course materials (new question)

3 2

16 16

9 20%

4% 7%

35% 35%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.38 4.72 -- 4.6 0.58Students treated with respect

0 0

2 17 28 60%

0% 0%

36% 4%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 3.99 4.31 -- 4.1 0.55Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

4 32 11 23%

0% 0%

68% 9%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.94 4.40 -- 4.2 0.79Value of time spent on course

1 0

8 20 18 38%

0% 2%

43% 17%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)221

Page 19: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

10881-01

1/31/2012

ADV TPC PROGRAMMING LANGLEC001620C SCChristian S

Spring-02

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(100%)Response: 12

Enrollment : 12

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 4.19 4.90 -- 4.5 0.52Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

0 5 6 55%

0% 0%

45% 0%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 4.19 4.90 -- 4.5 0.52Overall rating of the course

0 0

0 5 6 55%

0% 0%

45% 0%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.99 4.92 -- 4.5 0.69Amount learned

0 0

1 4 6 55%

0% 0%

36% 9%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.99 4.92 -- 4.5 0.69Overall instructor comparison

0 0

1 4 6 55%

0% 0%

36% 9%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.96 4.59 -- 4.3 0.47Usefulness of the in-class activities

0 0

0 8 3 27%

0% 0%

73% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.30 4.98 -- 4.6 0.50Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

0 4 7 64%

0% 0%

36% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 4.10 4.81 -- 4.5 0.52Usefulness of course materials (new question)

0 0

0 6 5 45%

0% 0%

55% 0%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.08 5.00 -- 4.5 0.69Students treated with respect

0 0

1 3 7 64%

0% 0%

27% 9%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 2.99 4.10 -- 3.5 0.82Difficulty level of the course (new order)

1 0

4 5 1 9%

0% 9%

45% 36%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 3.90 5.00 -- 4.5 0.82Value of time spent on course

0 0

2 2 7 64%

0% 0%

18% 18%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)221

Page 20: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11579-01

1/31/2012

COMPILERS+SYSTEMS SFTWRLEC001453C SCChristian S

Fall-01

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(66%)Response: 33

Enrollment : 50

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 4.35 4.75 -- 4.5 0.56Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

0 0

1 13 19 58%

0% 0%

39% 3%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 4.04 4.56 -- 4.3 0.73Overall rating of the course

1 0

2 16 14 42%

0% 3%

48% 6%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 4.28 4.69 -- 4.5 0.57Amount learned

0 0

1 15 17 52%

0% 0%

45% 3%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 4.24 4.67 -- 4.5 0.62Overall instructor comparison

0 0

2 14 17 52%

0% 0%

42% 6%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 4.03 4.58 -- 4.3 0.77Usefulness of the in-class activities

1 0

3 14 15 45%

0% 3%

42% 9%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.41 4.80 -- 4.6 0.56Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

1 11 21 64%

0% 0%

33% 3%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 3.54 4.34 -- 3.9 1.11Usefulness of course materials (new question)

4 1

2 14 11 34%

3% 12%

44% 6%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.46 4.81 -- 4.6 0.49Students treated with respect

0 0

0 12 21 64%

0% 0%

36% 0%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

9. - 4.00 4.42 -- 4.2 0.60Difficulty level of the course (new order)

0 0

3 20 10 30%

0% 0%

61% 9%

extremely easyeasier than averageabout averagemore difficult than averageextremely difficult

10. - 4.44 4.83 -- 4.6 0.55Value of time spent on course

0 0

1 10 22 67%

0% 0%

30% 3%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)221

Page 21: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

09831-01

1/31/2012

FOUND COMPUTER SYSLEC001340C SCChristian S

Spring-01

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(61%)Response: 57

Enrollment : 94

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.87 4.31 -- 4.1 0.83Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

4 0

5 30 18 32%

0% 7%

53% 9%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.49 3.91 -- 3.7 0.80Overall rating of the course

4 0

17 28

8 14%

0% 7%

49% 30%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.78 4.22 -- 4.0 0.82Amount learned

4 0

7 31 15 26%

0% 7%

54% 12%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.44 3.93 -- 3.7 0.91Overall instructor comparison

3 2

14 30

8 14%

4% 5%

53% 25%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.73 4.23 -- 4.0 0.94Usefulness of the in-class activities

4 0

13 20 20 35%

0% 7%

35% 23%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.26 4.61 -- 4.4 0.66Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

5 22 30 53%

0% 0%

39% 9%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

7. - 2.51 3.24 -- 2.9 1.38Usefulness of course materials (new question)

9 13

14 12

8 14%

23% 16%

21% 25%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.20 4.54 -- 4.4 0.64Students treated with respect

0 0

5 26 26 46%

0% 0%

46% 9%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

10. - 4.20 4.60 -- 4.4 0.75Value of time spent on course

2 0

3 22 30 53%

0% 4%

39% 5%

almost none valuableless than half valuableabout half valuablemore than half valuablealmost all valuable

13. - 3.94 4.27 -- 4.1 0.62Difficulty level of the course

35 14

8 0 0 0%

25% 61%

0% 14%

extremely difficult (5)more difficult than average (4)about average (3)easier than average (2)extremely easy (1)

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

13

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)121

Page 22: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11451-01

1/31/2012

FOUND COMPUTER SYSLEC001340C SCChristian S

Fall-00

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(73%)Response: 58

Enrollment : 79

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.80 4.30 -- 4.1 0.93Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

3 1

8 25 20 35%

2% 5%

44% 14%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.37 3.96 -- 3.7 1.11Overall rating of the course

5 3

14 21 14 25%

5% 9%

37% 25%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.83 4.32 -- 4.1 0.92Amount learned

3 0

13 18 23 40%

0% 5%

32% 23%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 3.58 4.18 -- 3.9 1.13Overall instructor comparison

5 2

13 15 22 39%

4% 9%

26% 23%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.60 4.08 -- 3.8 0.90Usefulness of the in-class activities

4 1

10 30 12 21%

2% 7%

53% 18%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 4.17 4.60 -- 4.4 0.80Usefulness of the outside assignments

1 0

8 16 32 56%

0% 2%

28% 14%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 4.22 4.62 -- 4.4 0.75Students treated with respect

1 0

6 18 32 56%

0% 2%

32% 11%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

13. - 3.79 4.17 -- 4.0 0.72Difficulty level of the course

36 11

9 0 1 2%

19% 63%

0% 16%

extremely difficult (5)more difficult than average (4)about average (3)easier than average (2)extremely easy (1)

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

13

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)32

Page 23: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

11451-02

1/31/2012

FOUND COMPUTER SYSDIS001340C SCChristian S

Fall-00

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(56%)Response: 44

Enrollment : 79

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.32 4.07 -- 3.7 1.15Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

6 1

9 11 12 31%

3% 15%

28% 23%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 2.74 3.68 -- 3.2 1.42Overall rating of the course

4 7

10 8 9 24%

18% 11%

21% 26%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 3.09 3.86 -- 3.5 1.18Amount learned

6 2

11 10

9 24%

5% 16%

26% 29%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

8. - 3.85 4.62 -- 4.2 1.17Students treated with respect

0 3

4 9

22 58%

8% 0%

24% 11%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

8

1

2

3

8

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)36

Page 24: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective

Collberg TCE COMPARISON REPORT

08133-01

1/31/2012

PRINCIPLE OF COMPILATIONLEC001553C SCChristian S

Spring-00

-

Enrollment: Sections:

Comp Group 2:

C SC

Comp Group 1:

Sections: Enrollment:

(83%)Response: 10

Enrollment : 12

Instructor

Question / Instructor Frequency

Mean 95% CI 95% CIMean95% CIDev. St. Mean

Comparison Group Descriptions

1. - 3.47 4.73 -- 4.1 0.88Overall rating of teaching effectiveness

1 0

0 6 3 30%

0% 10%

60% 0%

almost never effectiverarely effectivesometimes effectiveusually effectivealmost always effective

2. - 3.00 4.20 -- 3.6 0.84Overall rating of the course

1 0

3 5 1 10%

0% 10%

50% 30%

one of the worstworse than averageabout averagebetter than averageone of the best

3. - 2.91 4.29 -- 3.6 0.97Amount learned

1 0

4 3 2 20%

0% 10%

30% 40%

almost nothingless than usualabout as much as usualmore than usualan exceptional amount

4. - 2.80 4.20 -- 3.5 0.97Overall instructor comparison

2 0

2 5 1 10%

0% 20%

50% 20%

one of the least effectiveless effective than mostabout as effective as mostmore effective than mostone of the most effective

5. - 3.06 4.54 -- 3.8 1.03Usefulness of the in-class activities

1 0

3 3 3 30%

0% 10%

30% 30%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

6. - 3.71 4.89 -- 4.3 0.82Usefulness of the outside assignments

0 0

2 3 5 50%

0% 0%

30% 20%

almost never usefulrarely usefulsometimes usefulusually usefulalmost always useful

8. - 3.90 4.90 -- 4.4 0.70Students treated with respect

0 0

1 4 5 50%

0% 0%

40% 10%

strongly disagreedisagreeuncertainagreestrongly agree

13. - 3.90 4.90 -- 4.4 0.70Difficulty level of the course

4 5

1 0 0 0%

50% 40%

0% 10%

extremely difficult (5)more difficult than average (4)about average (3)easier than average (2)extremely easy (1)

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

13

For each QUESTION: Instructor L, M, U; Group 1 L,M,U; Group 2 L,M,U

L -

Lo

w C

I, M

- M

EA

N,

U -

Up

per

CI

Graphic Comparison of the Means and Confidence Intervals

Questions

University of Arizona. OIRPS. (520) 621-9585. [email protected]. http://oirps.arizona.edu (Que Eva:120)32

Page 25: Fall-11 TCE COMPARISON REPORT Christian S ...collberg/content/teaching/tce.pdfalmost never effective rarely effective sometimes effective usually effective almost always effective