EVIDENCE OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
JULES O. YIMGA
Department of Economics, Kansas State University
Teaching Evaluations (TEVAL) – Kansas State University
Student ratings of instruction are out of 5 possible points with 5=Very High and 1=Very
Low. Some ratings are adjusted for individual and cohort attributes. The course numbers
are defined below.
Evaluated Courses:
• Econ 110: Principles of Macroeconomics
• Econ 120: Principles of Microeconomics
• Econ 520: Intermediate Microeconomics
• Econ 530: Money and Banking
Table 1. Teaching Evaluation Summary Statistics (Overall Mean)
Overall effectiveness
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Increased desire to learn about the subject
Amount learned in the course
Establishing a Learning Climate
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
Facilitating Student Learning
Explained the subject clearly
Stimulated thinking about the subject
Grading procedures fair and equitable
4.5
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.2
4.2
4.6
Table 2. Teaching Evaluation Summary
Econ 520
Econ 110
Econ 120
Summer 2015 Spring 2015 Spring 2015
Overall effectiveness
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Increased desire to learn about the subject
Amount learned in the course
Establishing a Learning Climate
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
Facilitating Student Learning
Explained the subject clearly
Stimulated thinking about the subject
Grading procedures fair and equitable
4.6
4.0
4.0
4.6
4.8
4.6
4.2
3.9
3.9
4.7
4.9
4.8
4.8
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.1
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.1
5.0
4.3
4.1
4.6
4.1
4.0
4.5
Table 3. Teaching Evaluation Summary (cont.)
Econ 110
Econ 110
Econ 530
Summer 2014 Spring 2013 Summer 2013
Overall effectiveness
Overall effectiveness as a teacher
Increased desire to learn about the subject
Amount learned in the course
Establishing a Learning Climate
Made the course goals and objectives clear
Well prepared for class
Interest in helping students learn
Willingness to help outside of class
Facilitating Student Learning
Explained the subject clearly
Stimulated thinking about the subject
Grading procedures fair and equitable
4.7
4.7
4.4
4.6
3.9
4.5
4.4
4.4
4.6
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.1
4.6
4.4
4.4
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.1
4.4
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.5
Teval Report: Student Ratings of Instruction
Teaching and Learning Center | Kansas State University
Faculty Member: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 910 MTWUF
Course #: ECON 520
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Summer 2015
Responses from 9 of the 10 enrolled (90%)
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
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
4
4
4
5
2
2
0
0
0
0.5
0.7
0.7
4.6
3.9
3.9
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.6
3.9
3.9
4.6
4.0
4.0
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
HM
M
M
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
1
0
1
0
2
3
4
6
1
0
0
0
1.2
0.5
3.3
3.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
2
6
8
7
7
0
0
0
0
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.4
4.7
4.9
4.8
4.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
2
3
3
4
0
4
4
4
4
9
3
0
0
0
0
0
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.0
0.7
4.2
4.1
4.3
5.0
4.1
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
None
No
Average
I was really enthusiastic
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: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 230 MWF
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2015
Responses from 68 of the 111 enrolled (61%)
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
0
1
1
9
19
18
33
19
30
26
28
18
0
0
0
0.7
0.9
0.8
4.3
4.1
3.9
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.3
4.1
3.9
4.6
4.8
4.6
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
HM
HM
M
HM
H
H
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
7
0
20
3
26
31
12
24
3
10
0
0
1.0
0.8
2.8
3.6
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
5
3
5
10
20
22
25
20
43
42
38
36
0
0
0
1
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.8
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
3
8
13
21
3
16
31
30
20
20
25
29
24
18
45
24
0
0
0
0
0
0.7
0.8
1.0
0.6
0.9
4.3
4.1
3.7
4.6
4.0
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
2-3
Yes
Average
I was really enthusiastic
Yes- I was responsible for all decisions
A minor 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: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 1230 MWF
Course #: ECON 120
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2015
Responses from 15 of the 17 enrolled (88%)
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
0
0
0
0
0
3
7
4
6
4
9
6
4
2
0
0
0
0.7
0.8
0.6
4.2
3.8
3.9
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.2
3.8
3.9
4.2
3.9
3.9
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
M
M
M
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
0
0
1
1
7
5
6
7
1
2
0
0
0.7
0.8
3.5
3.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
3
8
7
7
4
4
7
6
8
0
0
0
0
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.8
4.1
4.4
4.3
4.3
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
3
2
5
7
2
4
4
5
4
3
4
7
5
3
10
4
0
0
0
0
0
1.1
0.8
0.9
0.7
1.1
4.1
4.0
3.6
4.5
3.6
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
None
Average
I was really enthusiastic
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: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 950 MTWUF
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Summer 2014
Responses from 19 of the 21 enrolled (90%)
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
0
0
0
1
1
2
3
3
6
7
9
11
8
6
0
0
0
0.7
0.9
0.8
4.5
4.2
4.1
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.5
4.2
4.1
4.7
4.7
4.4
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
HM
M
H
H
HM
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
3
0
5
1
7
4
2
8
2
6
0
0
1.2
0.9
2.7
4.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
7
6
8
12
12
13
11
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.6
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
5
0
3
9
9
5
6
5
8
8
8
13
11
0
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.7
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
Too small
Unsuitable
2-3
No
Average
I was really enthusiastic
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: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 530 MW
Course #: ECON 110
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Spring 2013
Responses from 10 of the 12 enrolled (83%)
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
0
2
0
5
5
7
5
2
3
0
0
0
0.5
1.1
0.5
4.5
3.7
4.3
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.5
3.7
4.3
4.6
3.9
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
HM
HM
M
H
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
2
0
0
0
3
2
3
5
2
3
0
0
1.3
0.7
3.3
4.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
4
6
6
3
6
4
4
0
0
0
0
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.5
4.1
4.6
4.4
4.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
1
7
6
4
4
3
2
4
4
5
6
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.7
4.1
4.4
4.2
4.4
4.5
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 small
Satisfactory
1
Yes
On the light side
I was really enthusiastic
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: Yimga, Jules
Hr./Days: 950 MTWUF
Course #: ECON 530
College: Arts & Sciences
Term: Summer 2013
Responses from 6 of the 6 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
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
2
4
2
3
2
0
0
0
0.5
1.1
0.5
4.3
4.2
4.3
2
Statistics
Comparative Status
3
Raw
Adjusted
3
Raw
Adjusted
4.3
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.6
Averages and Comparative Status
1. Overall effectiveness as a teacher
11. Increased desire to learn about the subject
14. Amount learned in the course
HM
HM
HM
HM
HM
H
Ratings of Student Attributes and Instructional Styles
Number Responding [VL=1, VH=5]
VL
L
M
H
VH
OMIT
Statistics
AVG
1
SD
Relevant Student Attributes
12. Interest in the course before enrolling
13. Effort to learn in the course
1
1
0
0
2
0
2
3
1
2
0
0
1.2
1.3
3.3
3.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
3
1
3
2
3
4
3
3
0
0
0
0
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.7
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
3
4
2
1
3
2
2
3
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
0.7
0.9
0.5
0.7
4.3
4.3
3.8
4.5
3.7
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
Exceptionally good
None
Yes
On the light side
I was really enthusiastic
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