Teaching Evaluation (TEVAL) Statistics1
Hedieh Shadmani
Kansas State University
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Amount learned in the course
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Amount learned in the course
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
4.0
3.9
4.1
4.4
4.2
4.4
Econ 110
Spring 2014
Econ 110
Fall 2013
Econ 510
Summer 2013
Econ 110
Spring 2013
4.0
3.7
3.9
4.3
3.9
4.1
3.2
3.3
3.6
4.2
3.9
4.3
4.4
3.6
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.6
3.9
4.2
4.3
4.7
4.4
4.5
Econ 110
Fall 2012
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Amount learned in the course
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
TEVAL not recorded1
Econ 110
Spring 2012
Econ 110
Fall 2011
4.7
4.5
4.6
4.8
4.5
4.7
3.9
3.7
3.9
4.3
4.1
4.1
Econ 110: Principles of Macroeconomics
Econ 510: Intermediate Macroeconomics

All ratings are out of 5 possible points. Some ratings are adjusted for individual and cohort attributes.
This section was part of First Year Seminar and it was only evaluated by Individual Development and
Educational Assessment (IDEA) Center. The report will be available upon request..
1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 1730 MW
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Fall 2011
Responses from 34 of the 36 enrolled (94%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
0
4
0
4
2
6
7
14
9
18
11
14
5
3
5
0
0
0
0.9
1.1
0.9
3.7
3.2
3.5
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
3.7
3.2
3.5
3.9
3.6
3.7
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
LM
LM
LM
M
M
M
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
4
0
8
3
12
8
7
16
3
7
0
0
1.1
0.9
2.9
3.8
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
2
8
5
4
6
17
14
17
13
8
15
11
13
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.7
0.9
0.9
3.9
4.3
4.1
4.1
2
1
2
1
1
2
4
4
0
4
14
15
7
6
10
11
10
13
10
14
5
4
8
17
5
0
0
0
0
0
1.0
0.9
1.1
0.9
1.0
3.4
3.4
3.6
4.2
3.5
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
Too large
Exceptionally good
None
Average
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
A minor problem
High
Satisfactory
No additional comments
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 1730 MW
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2012
Responses from 27 of the 27 enrolled (100%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
11
4
12
6
17
14
9
6
0
0
0
0.6
1.0
0.6
4.5
3.8
4.1
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.5
3.8
4.1
4.7
4.4
4.5
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
HM
M
M
H
HM
H
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
5
0
9
0
7
8
5
11
1
8
0
0
1.1
0.8
2.6
4.0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
0
1
1
8
2
8
5
17
24
17
20
0
0
0
1
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
4.6
4.8
4.5
4.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
5
8
1
1
13
8
7
6
8
11
14
11
19
16
0
0
1
1
0
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.9
4.3
4.3
4.1
4.7
4.4
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
About right
Satisfactory
1
No
Average
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
Not a problem
Moderate; neither high nor low
Satisfactory
No additional comments
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 1130 TU
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2013
Responses from 15 of the 15 enrolled (100%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
0
3
0
0
0
0
6
9
5
5
1
8
4
2
2
0
0
0
0.8
1.2
0.7
3.9
2.9
3.8
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
3.9
2.9
3.8
3.9
3.2
4.2
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
M
L
M
M
LM
HM
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
5
0
1
1
7
6
2
4
0
4
0
0
1.1
0.9
2.4
3.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
8
5
7
3
6
10
7
10
0
0
0
0
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.9
4.3
4.7
4.4
4.5
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
6
3
3
1
7
5
6
4
5
2
3
5
7
9
3
0
0
0
0
1
0.9
1.1
1.0
0.6
1.0
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.5
3.4
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
Too small
Satisfactory
2-3
Yes
Average
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
Not a problem
High
Satisfactory
Comments written on the FIF
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 950 MTWUF
Course #: ECON 510
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Summer 2013
Responses from 18 of the 18 enrolled (100%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
0
1
1
1
3
1
2
3
5
8
5
5
7
6
5
0
0
1
0.8
1.2
1.1
4.2
3.7
3.7
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.2
3.7
3.7
4.4
3.9
3.6
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
M
M
M
HM
M
LM
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
1
0
1
0
9
3
2
8
4
6
1
1
1.1
0.7
3.4
4.2
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
1
3
3
1
4
6
3
6
11
9
11
11
0
0
0
0
1.0
0.7
0.9
0.6
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.6
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
5
2
2
1
8
5
8
8
5
3
6
6
7
12
6
0
0
0
0
0
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.6
1.0
3.8
3.9
4.2
4.6
3.8
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
About right
Exceptionally good
None
Yes
Heavy
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
A minor problem
Mixed; both high and low
Satisfactory
No additional comments
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 1130 TU
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Fall 2013
Responses from 22 of the 22 enrolled (100%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
5
5
4
1
5
3
6
2
1
7
8
11
3
2
3
0
0
0
1.3
1.4
1.4
3.1
2.9
3.3
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
3.1
2.9
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.3
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
L
L
LM
L
LM
LM
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
2
0
4
3
11
5
2
8
3
6
0
0
1.1
1.0
3.0
3.8
1
0
0
0
2
0
4
0
6
3
5
4
8
11
3
7
5
8
10
11
0
0
0
0
1.1
0.7
1.2
0.8
3.6
4.2
3.9
4.3
5
5
3
1
4
3
4
4
2
3
7
2
6
4
5
6
8
5
6
5
1
3
3
9
5
0
0
1
0
0
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.4
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.9
3.2
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
About right
Satisfactory
4 or more
No
Average
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
A minor problem
Mixed; both high and low
Variable; sometimes high, sometimes low
No additional comments
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Shadmani, Hedieh
Hr./Days: 1430 MWF
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2014
Responses from 80 of the 143 enrolled (56%)
Offered: In Class
Overall Effectiveness
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Obtained Responses
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
4
8
6
7
10
11
19
26
28
31
15
22
19
21
13
0
0
0
1.1
1.3
1.1
3.7
3.4
3.3
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
3.7
3.4
3.3
4.0
3.9
3.7
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
LM
LM
LM
M
M
M
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
SD
AVG
1
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
7
0
14
7
34
32
20
31
5
10
0
0
1.0
0.8
3.0
3.6
4
2
5
2
3
3
3
4
15
7
18
13
32
24
25
23
26
44
29
38
0
0
0
0
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.0
3.9
4.3
3.9
4.1
6
6
10
5
9
7
11
9
2
9
19
22
26
17
21
23
20
15
27
20
25
21
20
28
21
0
0
0
1
0
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.3
3.7
3.5
3.3
3.9
3.4
Instructional Styles
A. Establishing a Learning Climate
2. Made the course goals and objectives clear
3. Well prepared for class
5. Interest in helping students learn
10. Willingness to help outside of class
B. Facilitating Student Learning
4. Explained the subject clearly
6. Stimulated thinking about the subject
7. Made helpful comments on student work
8. Grading procedures fair and equitable
9. Realized when students did not understand
Instructor's Description of Class
A. Type of class
B. Class size
C. Physical facilities
D. Previously taught this course?
E. Approach significantly different this term?
F. Description of teaching load?
G. Attitude toward teaching this course
H. Control of course decisions
I. Differences in student preparation
J. Student enthusiasm
K. Student effort to learn
L. Additional comments?
1
2
3
Lecture
Much too large
Unsuitable
4 or more
Yes
Heavy
I wanted to
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
A minor problem
Moderate; neither high nor low
Variable; sometimes high, sometimes low
No additional comments
STANDARD DEVIATION
RELATIVE TO KSU CLASSES RATED BY 10 OR MORE STUDENTS: H=UPPER 10%; HM=NEXT 20%; M=MIDDLE 40%; LM=NEXT 20%; L=LOWEST 10%
ADJUSTED FOR STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS & CLASS SIZE: SEE TEVAL GUIDE
page 1 of 1
Sample Student Comments
Below are some sample student comments for four previous courses. I am happy to
provide raw data or copies of original student evaluations upon request.












Great teacher. Made me want to become an Econ major.
She made time outside of class to help me when I couldn’t go to her office hours and
calls on students during class to make sure we are paying attention.
I really had no interest in Economics, but Ms. Shadmani was an excellent instructor and I
feel better about the course.
Hedieh was a really great teacher! She explains the subject matter so I could understand.
She knew when we didn’t and slowed down.
Hedieh has done a great job. I’d definitely be interested in taking more classes from her.
I liked how she reviewed what we went over the class before to refresh our memory.
She is very kind, patient, and understanding. I have taken Micro at another school and I
didn’t learn as much as I did in Hedieh’s class.
She is always well-prepared and explains subjects very well!
She was very easy to follow.
She is very enthusiastic about teaching.
She is very friendly and approachable. I’d say she is one of the best instructors I’ve had at
K-State.
The instructor was very understanding and fair.