I am always looking for ways to improve my teaching and so am attentive to the written comments and quantitative data provided by anonymous student evaluations. Below is a summary of how students have rated me at the end of the semester over a three-year period, 2009–2012. In that time I taught nine undergraduate courses and three graduate seminars. Eight-six of the evaluations are from an introductory course in American political development and seventy-seven from upper-level political theory courses, for 163 undergraduate evaluations in total. The table of undergraduate evaluations is followed by one listing the results of twenty-one graduate student evaluations.
Undergraduate Student Evaluations (2009–2012)
There is broad agreement among undergraduate students on several points, with three-quarters or more agreeing (or agreeing strongly) that they “really learned a lot” and that I am a fair grader, make students feel free to ask questions and express opinions, answer questions clearly and thoroughly, and welcome alternative viewpoints. There is also this same broad agreement with regard to basic technical competencies such as being well-prepared, enthusiasm, clear course requirements, etc. Three quarters of students said they found the courses I taught to be exceptionally worthwhile or worthwhile, and 70% rated me superior or above average compared to other professors they have had.
One student wrote, “He is a very enthusiastic, amenable, empathetic, and knowledgeable professor. He makes sure one does not feel stupid when he or she talks and accepts all opinions …. He makes sure everyone feels comfortable in class and he has high expectations, but they are not unrealistic.” An evaluation for the course on Nietzsche & postmodernism begins, “For such a difficult class and complicated material, Dr. Corbett did a great job explaining and teaching.” A student in the introductory course said, “As a POLS major I found Corbett’s class to be invaluable for my degree. It changed my whole perspective on law. Professor Corbett should be given tenure.” Another student writes, “I considered this to be my hardest class, yet looked forward to it the most.” “Mr. Corbett is by far the best professor I’ve taken over the past four semesters.” “I eagerly looked forward to his class every day—he came to class with a zeal for the material covered which I found infectious.” A evaluation for ancient & medieval political thought says, “I have taken a class taught by Prof. Corbett for two semesters and both semesters it was my favorite class. … Prof. Corbett teaches his courses how I would expect the courses to be taught at more prestigious universities. It’s like I get two and a half hours a week of Ivy League-quality education. If I wasn’t graduating, I would most definitely take another course with him.”
| Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Was well prepared for each class. | 135 | 83% | 24 | 15% | 4 | 2% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
| 2. Was enthusiastic when presenting course material. | 104 | 64% | 43 | 26% | 9 | 6% | 6 | 4% | 1 | 1% |
| 3. Was patient with questions during class. | 108 | 66% | 38 | 23% | 10 | 6% | 6 | 4% | 1 | 1% |
| 4. Graded exams and other assignments fairly. | 92 | 56% | 51 | 31% | 11 | 7% | 6 | 4% | 3 | 2% |
| 5. Assigned readings that were too advanced for me. | 24 | 15% | 33 | 20% | 40 | 25% | 45 | 28% | 21 | 13% |
| 6. Tried to cover too much material. | 24 | 15% | 36 | 22% | 34 | 21% | 50 | 31% | 19 | 12% |
| 7. Presented material in a logical and organized fashion. | 77 | 47% | 54 | 33% | 17 | 10% | 11 | 7% | 4 | 2% |
| 8. Seemed to be interested in teaching. | 114 | 70% | 38 | 23% | 3 | 2% | 6 | 4% | 2 | 1% |
| 9. Made students feel free to ask questions and express opinions. | 106 | 65% | 41 | 25% | 8 | 5% | 3 | 2% | 5 | 3% |
| 10. Clearly defined course requirements and the grading system used. | 89 | 56% | 46 | 29% | 13 | 8% | 7 | 4% | 3 | 2% |
| 11. Gave lectures that were too difficult for me. | 13 | 8% | 30 | 19% | 41 | 25% | 52 | 32% | 26 | 16% |
| 12. Stimulated my thinking about the course’s subject matter. | 73 | 45% | 44 | 27% | 25 | 15% | 16 | 10% | 4 | 2% |
| 13. Assigned too many readings. | 25 | 16% | 35 | 22% | 40 | 25% | 47 | 29% | 14 | 9% |
| 14. Used class time well. | 95 | 59% | 54 | 33% | 7 | 4% | 6 | 4% | 0 | 0% |
| 15. Seemed concerned with whether students learned from the material. | 58 | 36% | 66 | 41% | 18 | 11% | 15 | 9% | 5 | 3% |
| 16. Allowed alternative points of view to be expressed. | 84 | 52% | 45 | 28% | 14 | 9% | 17 | 10% | 2 | 1% |
| 17. Gave exams that were fair. | 50 | 32% | 36 | 23% | 62 | 40% | 6 | 4% | 2 | 1% |
| 18. Assigned papers that required unreasonable time and effort. | 19 | 12% | 25 | 15% | 25 | 15% | 60 | 37% | 33 | 20% |
| 19. Used good examples and illustrations to make points clear. | 57 | 35% | 55 | 34% | 27 | 17% | 18 | 11% | 4 | 2% |
| 20. Sometimes intimidated or embarrassed students. | 13 | 8% | 14 | 9% | 9 | 6% | 51 | 31% | 75 | 46% |
| 21. Answered questions clearly and thoroughly. | 77 | 48% | 50 | 31% | 23 | 14% | 11 | 7% | 1 | 1% |
| 22. Had a clear and understandable speaking voice. | 123 | 76% | 31 | 19% | 3 | 2% | 4 | 2% | 1 | 1% |
| 23. Had an interesting style of presentation. | 57 | 35% | 40 | 25% | 31 | 19% | 23 | 14% | 11 | 7% |
| 24. I attended almost all class sessions. | 100 | 63% | 42 | 26% | 11 | 7% | 6 | 4% | 1 | 1% |
| 25. I really learned a lot. | 60 | 37% | 61 | 38% | 20 | 12% | 18 | 11% | 3 | 2% |
| 26. I completed most of the reading assignments. | 44 | 27% | 56 | 35% | 23 | 14% | 31 | 19% | 8 | 5% |
| 27. My interest in the subject matter of the course has increased. | 60 | 37% | 36 | 22% | 33 | 20% | 21 | 13% | 12 | 7% |
| 28. I treated this as a blow-off course. | 3 | 2% | 4 | 2% | 17 | 10% | 57 | 35% | 81 | 50% |
| 29. My ability to think and to analyze problems has improved. | 46 | 29% | 56 | 35% | 36 | 22% | 14 | 9% | 9 | 6% |
| 30. I often asked questions or participated in class discussions. | 39 | 24% | 46 | 28% | 35 | 22% | 28 | 17% | 14 | 9% |
| 31. I became better prepared to read and talk about topics covered by this course. | 47 | 29% | 53 | 33% | 38 | 23% | 17 | 10% | 7 | 4% |
| 32. I found this course too easy. | 3 | 2% | 3 | 2% | 24 | 15% | 74 | 46% | 58 | 36% |
| 33. I developed useful skills and competencies. | 41 | 25% | 65 | 40% | 32 | 20% | 16 | 10% | 8 | 5% |
| Exceptionally worthwhile | Worthwhile | Not very worthwhile | Worthless | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 34. I found this course to be: | 50 | 30% | 79 | 48% | 25 | 15% | 8 | 5% |
| Superior | Above average | Average | Below average | Poor | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 35. Compared with other instructors I have had, I would give this instructor an overall rating of: | 64 | 40% | 49 | 30% | 35 | 22% | 10 | 6% | 3 | 2% |
Graduate Student Evaluations (2009–2012)
Quantitative evaluations are difficult to interpret regarding graduate students because of their small number and the students’ tendency to note that everything is wonderful. Still, the numbers are good and beat out the department averages on the three questions where the department releases the average scores. On question 3, asking whether the instructor stimulates the student’s thinking on the subject matter, the department average for the optimal response is 71.9%. All but three of my evaluations, 86%, give that response. Question 8 asks about the extent to which the course advances the student’s knowledge of the subject. Departmentally, 4.7% answer “minimally,” 21.1% answer “adequately,” and 74.2% answer “considerably.” My numbers on that question are slightly better, 0%, 14%, and 86%. The same goes for the student’s overall evaluation of the professor, question 11, where the department averages are 2.9% “poor,” 8.5% “adequate,” 30.6% “good,” and 58.0% “superior.” Sixty-seven percent rate my graduate instruction as “superior” and another 19% as “good;” the other 10% consider it “adequate” (one student neglected to answer the question—it is the only question on the back of the form).
Graduate student written evaluations are generally effusive, and mine are no different. “This was easily one of the finest seminars I have had as a graduate student. Prof. Corbett did a brilliant job of presenting a very difficult text in a manner that illuminated both political and philosophic issues of the highest order. I learned a great deal in each class. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Prof. Corbett for his superior and often inspiring work.” “This was a great course. I cannot say enough about the erudition of Dr. Corbett. He is a fine addition to the dept. and we are all looking forward to more classes in the future. NIU is lucky to have him.” “This was an excellent class. We are lucky to have RC, and I hope he stays for at least a few more years! Comments and analysis were both thorough and incisive.” “Prof. Corbett has been phenomenal this semester. He was instructive, well prepared, insightful, funny, and courteous of all questions.”
| 1. Did the syllabus adequately present an overview of the course? | 7. To what extent were the professor’s expectations and guidance regarding papers or other assignments reasonably consistent over time? | |||||
| yes | 21 | 100% | very consistent | 13 | 62% | |
| no | 0 | 0% | consistent | 7 | 35% | |
| no syllabus required | 0 | 0% | not very consistent | 0 | 0% | |
| very inconsistent | 0 | 0% | ||||
| 2. Did the professor take students’ comments and questions in an appropriate manner? | 8. To what extent did this course advance your knowledge of the subject? | |||||
| yes | 21 | 100% | minimally | 0 | 0% | |
| no | 0 | 0% | adequately | 3 | 14% | |
| considerably | 18 | 86% | ||||
| 3. In my opinion, the instructor simulates my thinking about the subject matter | 9. How would you rate the professors effectiveness in handling class discussion? | |||||
| not at all | 0 | 0% | poor | 0 | 0% | |
| to some extent | 3 | 14% | adequate | 1 | 5% | |
| greatly | 18 | 86% | good | 8 | 38% | |
| superior | 112 | 57% | ||||
| 4. To what extent does this course stimulate thoughtful discussion in and out of the classroom? | 10. Was the professor accessible for consultation? | |||||
| not at all | 0 | 0% | not accessible | 0 | 0% | |
| to some extent | 5 | 40% | sometimes accessible | 2 | 10% | |
| greatly | 16 | 76% | accessible | 19 | 90% | |
| 5. How would you rate the professor’s own preparation for the course? | 11. I would evaluate the professor’s overall teaching effectiveness in this course as being | |||||
| poor | 0 | 0% | poor | 0 | 0% | |
| adequate | 0 | 0% | adequate | 2 | 10% | |
| good | 1 | 5% | good | 4 | 19% | |
| superior | 20 | 95% | superior | 14 | 67% | |
| 6. To what extent were the professor’s expectations regarding papers or other assignments made clear? | ||||||
| very well | 15 | 71% | ||||
| well | 6 | 24% | ||||
| not well | 1 | 5% | ||||
