Class Evaluations
 
 



 

The following are summaries of official class evaluations for some of the classes Dr. Korcz has taught.
 

PHIL 101 What Is Philosophy?

PHIL 111 Contemporary Moral Dilemmas

PHIL 201 How to Think About Weird Things (formerly PHIL 210)

PHIL 314 Ethics

PHIL 316 Professional Ethics

PHIL 322 History of Modern Philosophy

PHIL 329 Skepticism

PHIL 331 Philosophy of Religion

PHIL 361 Introduction to Symbolic Logic

PHIL 371 Paradoxes & Skepticism

PHIL 402 Metaphysics

PHIL  441 Theory of Knowledge
 



PHIL 101 What Is Philosophy?

Evaluations are for Fall 2019, Fall 2020, and Fall 2022. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 Strongly
Agree
 Agree
Neutral Disagree Strongly
Disagree
The course learning outcomes and objectives were
made clear at the beginning of the course.		 28
 16
 6
 2
 2
Sufficient instructions on assignments, projects, and/or
exams were clearly communicated.		 28
 12
 8
 3
 3
This course was challenging.
 24
 21
 4
 3
 1
Explained subject matter in a way that I could
understand.
 21
 13
 7
 8
 4
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 27
 14
 9
 1
 2
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 23
 16
 7
 4
 4
Communicated clearly.
 26
 14
 8
 3
 3
Was available for scheduled appointments.
 22
 7
 2
 0
 1

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 19
 18
 10
 1
 5
Overall, I rate this instructor as:
 23
 14
 9
 1
 6


Evaluations are for Fall 2010, Spring 2010 and Fall 2009. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 28
 		31 4 4 1
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 38 22 2
 		2 0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 22 28
 		3 10 4
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 36 23 4 4 2
I learned a lot in this course. 26 22 9 6 4
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 47 16 2 3 0
This course challenged me to think. 40 21 4 2
 		0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 35 21 5 1 0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 39 22 2
 		1
 		2
The instructor was respectful to students. 41 19 3
 		4 0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 40 20 5 2 1
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 31 22 3 5 3

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 21 25 11
 		8 3
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 34 19
 		6 7 2


Evaluations are for Fall 2000, Fall 2001 and Spring 2002. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
33
19
0
1
1
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
35
17
2
0
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
39
11
4
1
0
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
33
13
5
1
0
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
38
14
3
0
0
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
34
15
5
0
0
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
37
16
1
0
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
24
21
5
3
0
This course was well organized.
32
20
0
0
0
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
36
13
1
1
2
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
44
10
0
0
0
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

27
Top 30%

18
Average

7
Lowest 30%

2
Lowest 10%

1
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

2
Lighter

4
Same

37
Heavier

9
Much Heavier

3

Top
 



PHIL 111 Contemporary Moral Dilemmas


Evaluations for Fall 2018, Spring 2018, and Fall 2016. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 33
 10
 4
 2
 0
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 25
 17
 6
 1
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 27
 17
 4
 1
 0
Was respectful to students.
 37
 9
 3
 0
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 23
 16
 6
 4
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 30
 14
 3
 2
 0


Evaluations are for Fall 2015, Fall 2014, Fall 2013, Fall 2012, Fall 2011 and Spring 2010. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 49 17 1 0 2
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 53 18 1 1 0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 48 19 1 3 1
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 56 11 2 3 0
I learned a lot in this course. 50 15 6 0 0
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 59 12 1 0 0
This course challenged me to think. 54 16 1 0 0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 52 13 3 0 0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 54 12 3 2
 		1
The instructor was respectful to students. 57 12 2 1 0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 51 20 1 0 0
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 56 12 2 0 0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 41 17 10 3 1
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 49 15 4 2 2
note: the following question was asked only starting in Fall 2013.
 		much lighter
 lighter
 about the same
 heavier
 much heavier
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
 		0
 6
 16
 6
 3

Evaluations are for Fall 2001 through Spring 2009. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.  

 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
79
58
3
6
1
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
90
54
2
0
1
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
91
43
6
4
4
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
75
43
20
2
1
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
78
43
12
2
2
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
78
51
15
0
3
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
94
48
3
0
2
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
69
50
12
14
4
This course was well organized.
93
49
1
3
2
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
86
51
3
4
4
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
89
41
4
3
1
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

52
Top 30%

61
Average

29
Lowest 30%

1
Lowest 10%

3
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

6
Lighter

17
Same

73
Heavier

24
Much Heavier

6

Top
 



PHIL 201 How to Think About Weird Things

Evaluations are for Spring 2023. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
 strongly disagree
Sufficient instructions on assignments, projects, and/or
exams were clearly communicated.
 9
 2
 0
 0
 2
This course was challenging.
 8
 4
 1
 0
 0
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests 9
 2
 1
 0
 1
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests
8
 1
 2
 1
 1
Communicated clearly 8
 3
 0
 0
 2

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
 poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 9
 0
 1
 2
 1
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 8
 2
 1
 1
 1


Evaluations for Spring 2019, Fall 2017 and Fall 2016. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 18
 6
 1
 4
 0
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 17
 7
 1
 3
 1
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 15
 11
 1
 2
 0
Was respectful to students.
 19
 9
 1
 0
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 16
 8
 3
 2
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 20
 4
 3
 0
 1

Evaluations are for Spring 2016, Fall 2014, Fall 2013, Fall 2012, Spring 2012, Fall 2010 and Fall 2009. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 50 19
 		8
 		1
 		0
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 57 12
 		4 1 1
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 46 21
 		7
 		1
 		2
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 49 14
 		10
 		3 1
I learned a lot in this course. 45 14
 		6
 		4
 		2
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 57 10
 		4
 		0
 		2
This course challenged me to think. 55 16
 		4
 		0
 		0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 49 12
 		2
 		1
 		1
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 50 16
 		7
 		3
 		1
The instructor was respectful to students. 54 16
 		4
 		1
 		1
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 48 20
 		2
 		4
 		1
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 47 19
 		6
 		1
 		1

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 39 23 8
 		2
 		2
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 46 19
 		8
 		1
 		1
note: the following question was asked only starting in Fall 2013. much lighter
 lighter
 about the same
 heavier
 much heavier
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was: 0
 0
 15
 2
 0

Evaluations are for Fall 2002, Spring 2003, Fall 2003, Fall 2004, Fall 2005, Fall 2006, Fall 2007 and Fall 2008. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
80
50
1
8
2
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
98
41
1
3
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
106
37
6
3
1
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
94
34
12
0
1
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
96
34
4
2
3
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
102
33
5
1
0
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
102
33
5
2
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
73
58
2
8
3
This course was well organized.
102
47
2
2
1
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
93
33
6
4
5
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
118
42
5
 2
1
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

60
Top 30%

43
Average

14
Lowest 30%

5
Lowest 10%

0
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

2
Lighter

10
Same

80
Heavier

38
Much Heavier

13

Top
 



PHIL 314 Ethics

Evaluations are for Fall 1998, Fall 2000, Fall 2002, Fall 2004 and Fall 2006. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
31
17
3
2
1
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
35
13
1
0
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
30
19
3
2
0
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
29
 16
9
0
0
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
32
16
4
2
0
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
32
18
2
1
1
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
36
17
0
1
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
16
27
4
6
1
This course was well organized.
32
19
2
1
0
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
30
18
2
2
2
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
39
13
2
0
0
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

21
Top 30%

20
Average
10
Lowest 30%

3
Lowest 10%

0
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

1
Lighter

6
Same

25
Heavier

17
Much Heavier

5

Top
 
 



PHIL 316 Professional Ethics


Evaluations are for Spring 2023. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 Strongly Agree
 Agree
 Neutral
 Disagree
 Strongly Disagree
Sufficient instructions on assignments, projects, and/or
exams were clearly communicated.
 7
 4
 2
 2
 0
This course was challenging.
 7
 7
 0
 1
 0
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests 8
 7
 0
 0
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests
 5
 5
 3
 1
 1
Communicated clearly
 9
 3
 2
 1
 0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 6
 5
 3
 0
 0
Overall, I would rate this instructor as
 8
 2
 2
 3
 0


Evaluations for Spring 2020 and Fall 2022. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
 strongly disagree
The course learning outcomes and objectives were
made clear at the beginning of the course.
 		33
 15
 3
 1
 0
This course enhanced my understanding of the
course subject.
 		27
 19
 3
 1
 1
This course was challenging.
 		20
 15
 15
 1
 1
Explained subject matter in a way that I could
understand.
 		26
 17
 6
 2
 1
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		29
 15
 6
 1
 1
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		29
 17
 5
 0
 1

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
 poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 		24
 17
 5
 6
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 		32
 13
 1
 5
 0


Evaluations for  Fall 2019, Spring 2018, Fall 2017, Spring 2017, and Fall 2016. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 90
 91
 10
 16
 3
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 99
 81
 11
 16
 3
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 87
 80
 19
 20
 4
Was respectful to students.
 123
 64
 13
 6
 3

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 72
 83
 38
 11
 5
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 95
 75
 19
 10
 6

Evaluations are for Spring 2016, Fall 2015, Spring 2015, Fall 2014, Spring 2014, Fall 2013, Spring 2013, Fall 2012, Spring 2012, and Fall 2011. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 246 125 30 10 9
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 279 95 22 6 5
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 219 100 38 25 11
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 275 86 34 15 12
I learned a lot in this course. 218 102 55 24 28
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 304 90 23 1 5
This course challenged me to think. 261 93 37 19 12
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 230 75 35 3 2
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 276 70 23 2
 		3
The instructor was respectful to students. 287 95 23 12 4
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 259 108 36 7 9
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 246 106 44 7 14

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 151 141 53 19 17
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 224 119 36 21 14
note: the following question was asked only starting in Fall 2013. much lighter
 lighter
 about the same
 heavier
 much heavier
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was: 18
 41
 109
 23
 5

Top
 
 

PHIL 322 History of Modern Philosophy


Evaluations are for Spring 2023. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
 strongly disagree
Sufficient instructions on assignments, projects, and/or
exams were clearly communicated.		 9
 1
 1
 0
 0
This course was challenging. 7
 3
 1
 0
 0
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests 6
 2
 3
 0
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests 6
 4
 0
 1
 0
Communicated clearly





excellent
 good
 average
 fair
 poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 6
 4
 0
 1
 0
Overall, I would rate this instructor as
 7
 3
 1
 0
 0


Evaluations for  Spring 2020, Spring 2021, and Spring 2022. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The course learning outcomes and objectives were
made clear at the beginning of the course.
 21
 2
 4
 1
 0
This course enhanced my understanding of the
course subject.
 18
 2
 5
 0
 2
This course was challenging.
 14
 7
 6
 0
 0
Explained subject matter in a way that I could
understand.
 19
 4
 3
 1
 1
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		18
 4
 6
 0
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		18
 3
 7
 0
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 16
 5
 5
 1
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 18
 4
 5
 1
 0

Top




PHIL 329 Skepticism (Topics in the History of Philosophy)

Evaluations are for Fall 2003, Fall 2005, and Fall 2008 . Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
19
7
0
0
0
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
20
6
0
0
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
21
2
1
0
0
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
18
7
1
0
0
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
17
6
3
0
0
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
18
7
0
1
0
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
22
3
1
0
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
13
11
1
1
0
This course was well organized.
21
5
0
0
0
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
23
2
1
0
0
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
22
4
0
0
0
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

19
Top 30%

7
Average

0
Lowest 30%

0
Lowest 10%

0
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

0
Lighter

0
Same

9
Heavier

11
Much Heavier

4





PHIL 331 Philosophy of Religion

Evaluations for Fall 2020, Fall 2021, and Fall 2022. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The course learning outcomes and objectives were
made clear at the beginning of the course.
 15
 1
 1
 1
 0
This course enhanced my understanding of the
course subject.
 15
 0
 3
 1
 0
This course was challenging.
 11
 7
 1
 0
 0
Explained subject matter in a way that I could
understand.
 12
 4
 2
 0
 1
Provided prompt feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		12
 3
 2
 1
 1
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects,
assignments, and tests.
 		12
 5
 0
 1
 1

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 11
 4
 2
 1
 1
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 14
 3
 1
 1
 0


Evaluations for Fall 2019, Fall 2018, Fall 2017, and Spring 2017. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 26
 7
 1
 1
 0
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 23
 7
 2
 3
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 30
 3
 1
 1
 0
Was respectful to students.
 27
 6
 2
 0
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 26
 6
 2
 0
 1
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 26
 7
 1
 0
 0

Evaluations are for PHIL 331/2 for Spring 2016, Spring 2015, Spring 2014, Spring 2013, Spring 2012 and Spring 2010. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 25 9 1 1 0
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 26 9 1
 		0 0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 19 13 3 2 0
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 25 10 0 1 0
I learned a lot in this course. 23 7 2 1 0
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 26 8 1 0 0
This course challenged me to think. 27 7 2 0 0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 27 8 0 0 0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 22 18 0 0
 		0
The instructor was respectful to students. 26 10 1 0 0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 22 12 2 0 0
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 23 7 1 0 0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 22 8 5 0 2
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 25 10 3 0 0

Evaluations are for Fall 1999, Fall 2001, Spring 2003, Spring 2004, Spring 2005, Spring 2006, Spring 2007, Spring 2008 and Spring 2009. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
95
47
4
1
0
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
103
43
0
0
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
105
40
2
1
0
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
103
40
8
2
0
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
95
39
11
1
0
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
93
44
8
1
0
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
106
38
2
1
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
78
59
5
6
1
This course was well organized.
113
42
3
0
0
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
110
53
0
6
1
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
106
42
1
0
0
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

65
Top 30%

59
Average

25
Lowest 30%

0
Lowest 10%

0
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

3
Lighter

3
Same

76
Heavier

59
Much Heavier

6

Top

 
PHIL 361 Introduction to Symbolic Logic

Evaluations are for PHIL 361 for Spring 2014. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 5 1 0 0 0
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 5 1 0
 		0 0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 5 1 0 0 0
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 5 1 0 0 0
I learned a lot in this course. 5 1 0 0 0
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 6 0 0 0 0
This course challenged me to think. 6 0 0 0 0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 5 1 0 0 0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 5 1 0 0
 		0
The instructor was respectful to students. 6 0 0 0 0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 5 0 1 0 0
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 6 0 0 0 0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 5 1 0 0 0
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 5 1 0 0 0




PHIL 371 Paradoxes & Skepticism

Evaluations for Spring 2018. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 7
 3
 1
 0
 0
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 5
 5
 0
 1
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 5
 3
 2
 1
 0
Was respectful to students.
 6
 5
 0
 0
 0
This course was challenging.
 		5
 5
 0
 1
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 4
 5
 1
 1
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 5
 5
 1
 0
 0





PHIL 402 Metaphysics

Evaluations for Spring 2017. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.


 strongly agree
 agree
 neutral
 disagree
strongly disagree
The format/design of this course was conducive to learning.
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0
Explained subject matter in a way I could understand.
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0
Provided helpful feedback on completed projects, assignments, and tests.
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0
Was respectful to students.
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0

excellent
 good
 average
 fair
poor
Overall, I would rate this course as
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0
Overall, I rate this instructor as
 3
 0
 0
 0
 0

Evaluations are for Spring 2013 and Fall 2009. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 8
 		1
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
I learned a lot in this course. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
This course challenged me to think. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The instructor was respectful to students. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 8
 		1
 		0
 		0
 		0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 9
 		0
 		0
 		0
 		0
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 9
 0
 		0
 		0
 		0


PHIL 441 Theory of Knowledge

Evaluations are for Fall 2010. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.



strongly agree agree
 		neutral
 		disagree
 		strongly disagree
The instructor made appropriate use of illustrations, demonstrations, examples and/or required materials. 8 2 0 0 0
The instructor provided feedback on my performance within a reasonable time. 8 2 0
 		0 0
The instructor explained subject matter in a way that I could understand. 6 3 0 0 0
The instructor created an atmosphere where ideas can be exchanged freely and easily. 9 1 0 0 0
I learned a lot in this course. 9 0 1 0 0
The instructor spoke audibly and clearly. 9 1 0 0 0
This course challenged me to think. 8 2 0 0 0
The instructor was available for scheduled appointments outside of class. 8 2 0 0 0
Expectations on assignments, projects and/or exams were clearly communicated. 8 2 0 0
 		0
The instructor was respectful to students. 9 1 0 0 0
The physical environment (facility) was conducive to learning. 6 3 1 0 0
The course resources were useful and appropriate for learning. 6 4 0 0 0

Excellent
 Good
 Average
 Fair
 Poor
Overall, I would rate this course as: 7 2 1 0 0
Overall, I would rate the effectiveness of this instructor as:
 10 0 0 0 0

Evaluations are for Spring 2002, Spring 2004, and Spring 2007. Numbers refer to number of students, not percentages.
 
 
 
strongly agree
agree
neutral
disagree
strongly disagree
The instructor presented material in an understandable manner.
 6
4
0
0
0
The instructor's exams reflected what was covered in the course.
8
1
1
0
0
With this instructor I felt free to ask questions and express opinions.
7
3
0
0
0
If I asked for help with the course, this instructor provided help.
7
1
1
0
0
This instructor used the same criteria to grade all students in the course.
6
4
0
0
0
The instructor provided timely feedback about my performance in the course.
8
1
1
0
0
The course requirements, including the grading criteria, were stated clearly in writing.
8
2
0
0
0
Materials used for this course (textbooks, readings, supplementary materials) were clear enough for me to understand.
5
3
0
2
0
This course was well organized.
8
2
0
0
0
This course contributed to my understanding of this subject.
7
2
0
1
0
This survey was administered in a manner that allowed me to answer anonymously.
8
1
1
0
0
Compared to other instructors I have had, I rate this instructor:
Top 10%

7
Top 30%

2
Average

1
Lowest 30%

0
Lowest 10%

0
The workload for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was:
Much Lighter

0
Lighter

1
Same

1
Heavier

7
Much Heavier

1

Top