A bit of background: 15-251 is Carnegie Mellon's ``Discrete math for computer science students'' course, taught by the computer science faculty for second-semester computer science students (who concurrently take 15-211, Carnegie Mellon's version of ``Data structures''). It has an established reputation for being much more challenging but much more professionally taught than the math department's equivalent. In Spring 1999, the course had roughly 105 students.
The course has one lecture section meeting twice a week, and each student enrolls in one of four recitation sections. A 15-251 TA leads one of these recitation sections, organizes assignments, grades assignments and tests, and has regular office hours to help students with their material. Recitation sections should concentrate on discussion, but beyond the TAs together deciding on a general plan they have little overall organization: TAs have a lot of discretion about what happens their recitations.
The TA evaluation is given to the TA's discussion section at the last discussion session (21 students attended mine; there were 24 enrolled). The form is written by the department and has two sections: In the first, students tell whether the ``Strongly disagree'', ``Disagree'', ``Agree'' or ``Strongly agree'' with each of several statements. The second section has two free-form questions.
| Question | SD | D | A | SA | Mean | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | The TA was consistently well-prepared and organized for class. | 0 | 0 | 8 | 13 | 3.62 |
| 2. | The TA made me feel free to ask questions. | 0 | 0 | 7 | 14 | 3.67 |
| 3. | The TA grasped and responded to students' questions and comments. | 0 | 0 | 8 | 13 | 3.62 |
| 4. | The TA tried to learn students' names. | 1 | 1 | 11 | 8 | 3.24 |
| 5. | The TA never intimidated or embarrassed students. | 0 | 0 | 9 | 12 | 3.57 |
| 6. | The TA's conduct was never inappropriately influenced by students' personal characteristics, such as gender, ethnicity, cultural background, or sexual orientation. | 0 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 3.76 |
| 7. | The TA's English was understandable (e.g., good pronunciation, speed, vocabulary). | 0 | 0 | 3 | 18 | 3.86 |
| 8. | The TA's examples and illustrations were clear and concise. | 0 | 2 | 9 | 10 | 3.38 |
| 9. | The TA was able to give alternative explanation when needed. | 0 | 2 | 12 | 7 | 3.24 |
| 10. | The TA linked abstract issues to concrete situations and vice versa. | 0 | 1 | 13 | 7 | 3.29 |
| 11. | The TA was familiar with what concepts had been covered in the lectures. | 0 | 0 | 6 | 15 | 3.71 |
| 12. | The TA encouraged students to participate actively in recitation. | 0 | 1 | 11 | 9 | 3.38 |
| 13. | The TA managed class time effectively. | 0 | 2 | 13 | 6 | 3.19 |
| 14. | The TA was readily available for consultation with students. | 0 | 0 | 9 | 10 | 3.53 |
| 15A. | The TA returned students' work in a reasonable time. | 0 | 0 | 3 | 11 | 3.79 |
| 15B. | The TA graded in a consistent and systematic way. | 0 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 3.25 |
| 15C. | The TA's answer keys and/or individual comments were sufficiently detailed to help me learn. | 0 | 0 | 6 | 7 | 3.54 |
| 16. | Overall, the TA was effective in his/her role. | 0 | 0 | 6 | 15 | 3.71 |
20. What are the strong points about your TA's teaching? In other words, what do you want him/her to continue to do in the future (e.g., in class or in office hours)?
Well-prepared and aware of material.
very strong grasp of material, encouraged students to make extra effort beyond what was required for the course
I feel Carl is easily approachable, so I find no reservations about asking him questions. I enjoy his consistent positive attitude.
I like your style. You got moxy.
He is generally a good TA. He had good planning, but could improvise and he seemed to understand and answer questions well.
Tried to come up with interesting examples and get students involved in solving the problems he presented.
Makes people think and analyze the problem.
I liked the style.
Pretty much everything is good.
I love you carl
Help explain things, especially the weird stuff that Rudich glosses over and then tests repeatedly.
Good teaching style. My TA is a better teacher than most of my professors.
Was willing to meet with students and was flexible. Made sure he was not telling me the answers, but helping me figure them out on my own.
Examples. Handouts which guided us towards correctly doing the homework.
Answers questions well. Patient when students have difficulty expressing question. Explains clearly and thoroughly for the most part, and exhibits relevance of material to lecture topics.
21. What specific suggestions do you have to help your TA improve his/her teaching?
Different grading scheme with less stress on showing details and more stress on right answers. Perhaps a tad overly rational. Also better homework comments would be nice.
When students are trying to work through problems with Carl, I think he could give more confirmation about whether the student's reasoning is correct and on the right track.
Sometimes you babble a little when you have a lot to say. I definitely didn't like some of the grading criteria - a correct answer could receive only partial credit for not answering it in the ``right'' way (where the right way is placed in a filing cabinet in someone's basement, or something).
I would have liked more examples relating to the homework. Also, it may have been interesting to work with other students on in-class problems. Discussion helps a lot, I think, and I rarely or never discussed the homeworks.
Have end-of-the-semester parties.
Stay a little more focused on what you are trying to present, sometimes a student comment sparks a tangent that can last quite a while.
More examples.
Talking a little louder might help, but it was not a very big problem.
Stop going ``umm...'' repeatedly, makes it sound like you are confused an don't know what you are doing. Get copies of quiz beforehand and go over those types of problems thoroughly.
He should go over past assignments more.
Sometimes difficult to understand as a result of broken sentences.
More a class issue than personal, but the 2nd half of the course was much more relevant and helpful. However, in-class test review/preview/overview the week before a quiz would have been extremely appreciated.
Allow more time when planning recitation to address topics students suggest/request, while still ensuring that planned material is available in case there aren't questions. Make sure at beginning of class to let students know they can ask whatever and it won't cut into planned material.