62
Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order)

Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith

(presented in reverse chronological order)

Page 2: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSISNo. of responses = 12

Enrollment = 24Response Rate = 50%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=12Freshman 5

Sophomore 3

Junior 3

Senior 1

Graduate 0

Other 0

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=11Below 2.0 0

2.0 - 2.49 0

2.5 - 2.99 4

3.0 - 3.49 2

3.5+ 5

Not Established 0

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=12A 5

B 4

C 0

D 0

F 0

P 1

NP 0

? 2

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=12Major 9

Related Field 0

G.E. 3

None 0

Page 3: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

12

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

12

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.67md=9dev.=0.89

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

1

6

0

7

1

8

10

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

12

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.75md=9dev.=0.62

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

1

8

10

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.83md=9dev.=0.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

0

8

11

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=11av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

11

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=12

av.=2.33md=2dev.=0.65

1

1

6

2

5

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=12

av.=2.75md=3dev.=0.45

0

1

3

2

9

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=12

av.=2.75md=3dev.=0.62

1

1

1

2

10

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=12

av.=2.08md=2dev.=0.67

2

1

7

2

3

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=12

av.=2md=2dev.=0

0

1

12

2

0

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.67md=3dev.=0.49

0

1

4

2

8

3

Page 4: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=11

av.=2.82md=3dev.=0.4

0

1

2

2

9

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.83md=3dev.=0.39

0

1

2

2

10

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.83md=3dev.=0.39

0

1

2

2

10

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.83md=3dev.=0.39

0

1

2

2

10

3

Page 5: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=9.00

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=9.00

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.67

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=9.00

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.75

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.83

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=11 av.=9.00

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=12 av.=2.33

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=12 av.=2.75

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=12 av.=2.75

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=12 av.=2.08

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=12 av.=2.00

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.67

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=11 av.=2.82

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.83

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.83

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.83

Page 6: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Brian Smith is incredibly engaging and cares about what he teaches. He made class interesting everyday and always relied on relevant and real-world examples to keep students focused. His wittyapproach really highlights how fascinating linguistics is as a field of study.

Brian is a fantastic professor; I felt like I really understood the concepts discussed in the class well andthis class really solidified my decision to major in linguistics.

Brian is a superb professor and I wish there were more others like him. Maybe it was the smallclassroom environment, but I really felt like I learned a lot this quarter. His teaching style is organized,relatable, and engaging. I was never bored in class, and he was always very clear and kind. By far, oneof the best professors at UCLA.

Brian's teaching style is clear, well-organized, and easy to follow. He is concerned not only about thestudents' learning but about student interaction and engagement in class. He provides relatableexamples, gives us breaks to help us freshen up, and offers resources and time if needed.

He was awesome. He was one of the greatest professors I have had here at UCLA.

I think this class was very fair. I think Brian is one of the best professors I ever had. He is a great oratorand does an amazing job peeking our interest in a subject and building on our knowledge to further aconcept or idea. I really, really am into syntax now. And because of this class, I see myself incorporatinga lot of the material I learned in class into other aspects of my life, such as my job as an English tutor. Ireally appreciate Brian's enthusiasm and his knowledge. I am happy that I was able to take his classbefore he moved schools. Good luck in Santa Cruz!

In terms of learning from lectures, this was the best class I ever attended, Brian. A small lecture in a bigresearch university is an experience I will always cherish.

The instructor is good at presenting new ideas in clear and concise ways and provides good examples.

The instructor was approachable and concerned about student learning. The organization and pacing ofthe lectures was excellent. The instructor also made sure the material was clear before moving on tonew concepts/information. Additionally, the material was presented in an engaging manner usingmemorable examples to explain/illustrate concepts.

The copious examples presented during lecture were also quite helpful. The assignment and quizworkload was fair and manageable. The instructor also did an excellent job in encouraging and creatingclass discussion.

Overall, the instructor did a great job structuring lecture and providing plenty of examples to ensurestudent comprehension of material.

Page 7: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II No. of responses = 10

Enrollment = 24Response Rate = 41.67%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=10Freshman 0

Sophomore 1

Junior 3

Senior 6

Graduate 0

Other 0

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=10Below 2.0 0

2.0 - 2.49 0

2.5 - 2.99 1

3.0 - 3.49 5

3.5+ 4

Not Established 0

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=10A 6

B 2

C 1

D 0

F 0

P 0

NP 0

? 1

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=9Major 9

Related Field 0

G.E. 0

None 0

Page 8: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.8md=9dev.=0.42

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

2

8

8

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.4md=9dev.=1.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

1

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

1

8

8

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.8md=9dev.=0.42

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

2

8

8

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.6md=9dev.=0.97

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

1

6

0

7

1

8

8

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.4md=9dev.=1.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

1

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

1

8

8

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.4md=9dev.=1.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

1

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

1

8

8

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=10av.=8.4md=9dev.=1.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

1

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

1

8

8

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=10

av.=2.5md=2.5dev.=0.53

0

1

5

2

5

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=10

av.=2.6md=3dev.=0.52

0

1

4

2

6

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=10

av.=2.1md=2dev.=0.74

2

1

5

2

3

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=10

av.=2.4md=2dev.=0.52

0

1

6

2

4

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=10

av.=2.2md=2dev.=0.42

0

1

8

2

2

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=10

av.=2.3md=2dev.=0.48

0

1

7

2

3

3

Page 9: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=10

av.=2.4md=2dev.=0.52

0

1

6

2

4

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=10

av.=2.6md=3dev.=0.52

0

1

4

2

6

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=10

av.=2.9md=3dev.=0.32

0

1

1

2

9

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor n=10

av.=2.8md=3dev.=0.42

0

1

2

2

8

3

Page 10: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.80

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.40

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.80

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.60

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.40

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.40

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=10 av.=8.40

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=10 av.=2.50

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=10 av.=2.60

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=10 av.=2.10

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=10 av.=2.40

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=10 av.=2.20

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=10 av.=2.30

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=10 av.=2.40

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=10 av.=2.60

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=10 av.=2.90

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=10 av.=2.80

Page 11: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 165A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY II

11/01/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Brian brings a concept as abstract as phonology and makes it easy to understand. He is fun, engaging,and truly cares about the student's grasp of the course material. I really enjoyed having him from LING120A and I confidently enrolled in this class LING 165 knowing that he would not disappoint. I wish Icould take more classes with him. And if I were ever teaching I would teach very similarly to him.He is intelligent, quirky and. I think he deserves a lot of credit and should be recognized as a modelprofessor. Thank you Brian.

Brian has been one of my favorite teachers at UCLA - very kind and funny and intelligent. Also, myselfand several other students thought he did an impeccable job handling the crisis situation onWednesday. He kept everyone calm and made sure we all felt safe. Thank you Brian!

Brian is a really great instructor. He is super knowledgable and makes lectures and learning anenjoyable experience. He is clear, quick but thorough, and has a great attitude. He makes studentsfeel comfortable enough to ask questions and seek extra help if necessary. He also makes materialeasy to understand, which I think is the most important thing in an instructor. He is also great inemergencies and cares about his students!

Brian is an incredibly able and effective instructor. I found grappling with the material of this courseextremely difficult, and in class lectures and in office hours he was more than helpful in expanding uponand clarifying difficult concepts in the course material. I commend him with the highest regards, andhave no negative criticism to offer.

Brian was awesome as an instructor. I genuinely looked forward to going to this class each day. Hepresents information in a way that is easy to follow and mixes practice activities in throughout lectures,which I thought was incredibly helpful in digesting the often-difficult material, because we were able totry out the things we were learning as we were learning them and go over any questions together as aclass. Brian was also very concerned with students' understanding of the material and encouragedquestions, and worked through each person's questions thoroughly. The way he lectured wasinteresting and also very effective, and Brian is clearly an expert and passionate about his field. I wouldalso like to add that at the end of the quarter, we were on lockdown in this class for 2.5 hours and Brianhandled the situation very well and remained calm throughout. All in all, I thought Brian was a greatinstructor and I hope to take a class with him again.

I love having Brian as a professor! He is kind, engaging, and simply the best at answering students'questions, even when that means straying a bit from the planned lecture. I truly enjoyed having him asmy phonology instructor and only wish we had a full semester to learn all he has to offer.

I loved the hw assignments. It was really good practice to have a mini OT analysis each week and theywere very fun. :)

This is the fourth class that I've taken at UCLA with Brian as my teacher and that's thanks to goodplanning on my part. Ever since Ling 20 I've been lucky enough to Brian teach phonetics andphonology, two topics in the field which he is clearly passionate about. It's clear that Brian is well-organized and takes care in planning the lecture discussions with the handouts he provides every class.He's even done a lot more to make the class interactive for us too, rather than just lecturing for 2 hours.He has questions and problems in the handouts that we work on and discuss among ourselves,furthering class engagement. He's also flexible with deadlines and class organization to better suit thestudents' needs. He's fine with changing quiz and homework content and even getting rid ofassignments entirely. Overall, Brian is an entertaining and engaging lecturer, and I think it's pretty validto say that Brian's enthusiasm and love for the subject were factors in my decision to switch majors.

Page 12: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSISNo. of responses = 12

Enrollment = 22Response Rate = 54.55%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=12Freshman 2

Sophomore 1

Junior 6

Senior 3

Graduate 0

Other 0

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=12Below 2.0 0

2.0 - 2.49 2

2.5 - 2.99 2

3.0 - 3.49 1

3.5+ 6

Not Established 1

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=12A 4

B 3

C 0

D 0

F 0

P 0

NP 0

? 5

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=11Major 6

Related Field 0

G.E. 5

None 0

Page 13: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.33md=9dev.=0.89

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

3

7

2

8

7

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.67md=9dev.=0.65

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

2

8

9

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.5md=9dev.=0.8

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

2

7

2

8

8

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=11av.=8.36md=9dev.=0.81

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

2

7

3

8

6

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=7.92md=8.5dev.=1.98

0

1

1

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

4

8

6

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.58md=9dev.=0.67

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

3

8

8

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8md=9dev.=2

0

1

1

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

3

8

7

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=12

av.=2.17md=2dev.=0.58

1

1

8

2

3

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=11

av.=2.55md=3dev.=0.69

1

1

3

2

7

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=12

av.=2.75md=3dev.=0.45

0

1

3

2

9

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=12

av.=2.25md=2dev.=0.75

2

1

5

2

5

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=12

av.=2.17md=2dev.=0.39

0

1

10

2

2

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.5md=2.5dev.=0.52

0

1

6

2

6

3

Page 14: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.67md=3dev.=0.49

0

1

4

2

8

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.75md=3dev.=0.45

0

1

3

2

9

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.92md=3dev.=0.29

0

1

1

2

11

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.83md=3dev.=0.39

0

1

2

2

10

3

Page 15: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.33

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.67

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.50

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=11 av.=8.36

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=7.92

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.58

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.00

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=12 av.=2.17

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=11 av.=2.55

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=12 av.=2.75

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=12 av.=2.25

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=12 av.=2.17

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.50

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.67

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.75

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.92

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.83

Page 16: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Brian is a solid instructor. I like how he gets enthusiastic about most parts of linguistics, and especiallyphonology. His office hours are fairly accessible. I appreciate how he encourages us to not be afraid ofbeing wrong. His class can go a little faster in terms of pace, but I understand it's at a slower pace forthe students who haven't been in school as long as I have. I wish homeworks were released a full weekbefore they are due, instead of 5 days or so. The textbook was a bit of a doorstop but I liked theexercises scattered within it. Overall, Brian made linguistics fun, even if it's not my main area of study.

Brian's a great professor. He knows his stuff and he makes it fun and enjoyable to learn something thatcould potentially be very dry and boring.

I believe Professor Smith was genuinely concerned about student learning of the material. I am verytimid, but I was not intimidated at all to seek help from him. He was always very punctual, organized,well prepared for the course and very helpful. Since I am a slow learner, sometimes the pace was a bitoverwhelming for me, but Professor Smith was always willing to help with any questions regarding thelecture or assignments. I feel like I am ready for upper division linguistics courses. Overall, he was avery professional and great lecturer. I expected this course to be very difficult, but I thought hisexplanations made the subject more interesting and easier to understand.

I took the class last quarter, but I still learn a lot more from this class.

Interesting and engaging presentation of material.

Professor Smith strength lies in using the book in conjunction with his lectures.This allowed for a moreeffective use for the book. It was very helpful to use before and after the lecture. Professor Smith'slecture schedule was never too slow or too fast; the lecture always covered and appropriate amount ofmaterial and with great depth. My only complaint is the lack of a consistent date for the homework to beposted. it was never always at the same time or date; however, this did not affect the amount of time forthe assignment to be completed nor the availability of the professor (to ask about the assignment).

The strengths of this course are that it is a highly applicable subject to everyday life, which Brian madeuse of in his examples and in teaching the course. It was also great how Brian was enthusiastic aboutthe subject and had very clear expectations as to what would be on graded assignments/exams. I alsoliked how we had a break in the middle of an otherwise very long lecture.The only real weakness to this course is the somewhat disorganized way in which assignments andquiz dates were given, but it was not unreasonably so.

This class was so interesting and he is so nice professor.

Very good professor! He explains the concepts well and is easy to follow.

Page 17: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSISNo. of responses = 78

Enrollment = 155Response Rate = 50.32%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=78Freshman 29

Sophomore 18

Junior 27

Senior 3

Graduate 0

Other 1

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=77Below 2.0 2

2.0 - 2.49 5

2.5 - 2.99 11

3.0 - 3.49 21

3.5+ 36

Not Established 2

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=78A 34

B 24

C 1

D 0

F 0

P 8

NP 0

? 11

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=78Major 32

Related Field 4

G.E. 40

None 2

Page 18: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=8.26md=9dev.=1.16

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

3

5

7

6

5

7

15

8

48

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=8.31md=9dev.=1.17

0

1

0

2

0

3

1

4

3

5

3

6

7

7

14

8

50

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=8.23md=9dev.=1.24

0

1

0

2

1

3

0

4

3

5

4

6

7

7

16

8

47

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=77av.=8.43md=9dev.=0.97

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

1

5

5

6

5

7

15

8

51

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=7.92md=9dev.=1.7

0

1

1

2

1

3

3

4

4

5

7

6

4

7

11

8

47

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=8.35md=9dev.=1.09

0

1

0

2

1

3

0

4

0

5

6

6

4

7

19

8

48

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=78av.=8.01md=9dev.=1.39

0

1

1

2

0

3

0

4

4

5

6

6

11

7

14

8

42

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=78

av.=2.05md=2dev.=0.72

18

1

38

2

22

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=78

av.=2.45md=3dev.=0.75

12

1

19

2

47

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=78

av.=2.49md=3dev.=0.6

4

1

32

2

42

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=77

av.=2.17md=2dev.=0.64

10

1

44

2

23

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=78

av.=2.14md=2dev.=0.35

0

1

67

2

11

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=78

av.=2.35md=2dev.=0.53

2

1

47

2

29

3

Page 19: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=78

av.=2.29md=2dev.=0.54

3

1

49

2

26

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=78

av.=2.29md=2dev.=0.54

3

1

49

2

26

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=78

av.=2.68md=3dev.=0.5

1

1

23

2

54

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor

n=76av.=2.36md=2dev.=0.58ab.=2

4

1

41

2

31

3

Page 20: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=8.26

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=8.31

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=8.23

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=77 av.=8.43

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=7.92

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=8.35

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=78 av.=8.01

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=78 av.=2.05

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=78 av.=2.45

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=78 av.=2.49

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=77 av.=2.17

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=78 av.=2.14

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=78 av.=2.35

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=78 av.=2.29

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=78 av.=2.29

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=78 av.=2.68

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=76 av.=2.36

Page 21: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Always answered questions in class and tried to get students to participateGave us a 10 minute break in lecture

Best professor!!

Brian Smith was a great professor. He made class fun because he was extremely enthusiastic aboutthe material and it rubbed off on me and other students. All of his lectures were well prepared andorganized and really honed in on what was important. I can genuinely say that lectures were more thanworth my time and I'd take another class instructed by Professor Smith in a heartbeat.

Brian is a very engaging and inclusive speaker who truly made a very technical course into asurprisingly exciting one. He made everyone who participated feel very welcome, which greatlyfacilitated discussion in even such an immense class, and had the natural charisma of a great speaker.His only fault would be not in his conduction of lecture, but in the discrepancy between what he said inclass, and what was tested in quizzes/homework. For instance, for the PS Rules quiz, it wasn't madeclear if you could leave an Adjective as an Adjective or if you had to make it an AP for the NP Rule. Andif you did make it an AP, would you then have to define an AP (despite the fact that you only had to writethree PS rules, one for S, one for NP, and one for VP). This led to much conflict in discussion as weargued over which strategy was better since Daniela insisted that you couldn't leave an Adjective as justan Adjective if it was dominated by an NP. Same thing with the neutralization/alternation quiz last week.I felt these topics could have been made clearer so that we didn't end up breaking some Linguistic Lawin our naivete and inexperience.

Brian was a very concerned instructor. He was clearly very knowledgeable and extremely fair.

Brian was by far the best professor I've had a UCLA so far. He lectures with enthusiasm, has a greatsense of humor, and is extremely fair when it comes to quizzes, exams, and grades. Even when thematerial gets challenging, Brian explains it in a clear way so its easier to understand. Although some ofthe homework assignments can be difficult or time consuming, there is no doubt that Brian or a TA willbe available to help you. Overall, this course was amazing -- interesting, challenging, and fun all at thesame time.

Course very reflective of textbook, which was ambiguous and often needed wasted time for clarificationto fully understand the subject

Course was rather difficult for how simple the material is. Homework assignments were reasonablehowever I felt the number of quizzes was unnecessary.

Cute!

Dr. Smith is very caring and helpful. I can master the materials in class without further review after

Great professor. If someone thinks he didn't do a great job then they've been spoiled with perfectprofessors. He was really clear on what he expected us to learn and gave us plenty of resources to use.

Honestly didn't expect to like Professor Smith as much as I did—initially, he makes it seem like the classwill be extremely difficult and that he'll be a stickler about everything, but that isn't the case. He's reallyfriendly, has a great sense of humor and sarcasm (not everyone gets it, but he's a funny guy), and reallyseems to care that we learn the material.A lot of the teaching can seem hand-wavy in the first half the class because this is just an intro class,

Page 22: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 6

but he does his best to explain things without getting overly complicated.The class does cover a *lot* of material, but Professor Smith did a good job of connecting back to oldmaterial when relevant.Really enjoyed the class and I hope to take another linguistics class with the professor.

I am sure that the professor is a very knowledgable person about linguistics, but I did not appreciatehaving a draft textbook for the course, especially this course being the gateway to other linguisticcourses. That is all.

I appreciate the structure Brian brings in his lectures, for example, no cell phone usage, no in and out ofthe class, etc. It creates a productive and distraction-free learning environment for all students.Sometimes he tries a little to hard to be funny, but its all in good fun. He's definitely an asset to the Lingdepartment and I would definitely recommend him!

I greatly enjoyed having a professor so enthusiastic about teaching his students. Prof. Smith did a verygood job explaining the material clearly (or clarifying when something was confusing).The grading, however, could be frustrating. The course is a stickler for being notationally exact, but wewould sometimes obtain problems (usually the quizzes) where unknown symbols are present or specificnotation is suddenly more lax. This fluctuation was annoying to try and follow.All in all though, I'm glad I had an enthusiastic professor who really cares about his students (theirwellbeing as well as their understanding of the material).

I thoroughly enjoyed this course, both in subject matter and in subject delivery. Although I have longbeen fascinated by linguistics, I have emerged from this course with the understanding that linguistics,though steadfastly rule-governed, is far more complex than I originally conceived. We covered, at anintroductory level, a broad swath of linguistic subfields within these ten weeks, from inflectionalmorphology to language acquisition. I feel that the pacing of lectures was reasonable in order to coverthese branches of linguistics in cursory detail.The instructor, Brian Smith, was very engaging in his lectures. His bright and beaming disposition wasinfectiously positive and brought a much-needed light-heartedness to the middle of my nine-hourMondays and Wednesdays. Brian sought to ensure that his students understood the course material,supplementing it with entertaining, informative, and highly thought-provoking linguistic examples. Hesought to demonstrate the scientific method more directly than all of my science classes by expoundingupon linguistic theories, refuting them, and updating them in the spirit of demonstrating how complexlanguage is. Overall, I found the materials discussed to be highly informative and intriguing, and I wouldrecommend this course and instructor to many of my fellow students (who are not already enrolled inthis course).

Linguistics 20 isn't the most exciting class, but Smith did well in engaging the class by creating in-classactivities and assignments to help students understand the material. He follows the textbook almostexactly, which is very helpful in terms of studying. The homework for this class is 45% of the grade andcan sometimes be quite challenging, but Smith and the TAs do well in answering your questions.

Not enough practice problems; The format of the exam took longer than necessary to get used to.

Please tell us more jokes. Sarcasm is great! And please, don't "destroy cities" again.

Professor Smith had an excellent pace to this class. He was very interactive with us in lecture and madesure we understood concepts before moving on to the next. I thought he had good communication skillsand gave really good examples in class to illustrate those complex concepts. I think it was verydisrespectful when some students started to talk when quizzes were still out. He was very patient andrespectful to all of us. I went to his office hours once and he was very welcoming in offering hisassistance on what I didn't understand. Linguistics is a very hard subject for me, but I can see myselfpassing this class because the notes from lecture are very helpful!

Professor Smith is a great linguistic professor. I didn't know anything about linguistics before and wasgoing to take it as a GE class. But his teaching really interests me in the class. His explanation inlecture was helpful that I barely need to read the book and his homework was constructed well that afterfinishing I gained better understanding of the materials

Page 23: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 7

Professor Smith is a very engaging lecturer. I enjoyed coming to lectures as he explained the materialwell and made it entertaining with relevant and amusing references.

Professor Smith is an excellent professor, however at times it felt like the class had too manyassignments and quizzes, and that assignments were at times overly complicated.

Professor Smith is really funny and patient. He explains topics in clear language that made learning thismaterial simple and enjoyable. I changed my major to Linguistics because of this course.

Professor Smith is really professional and helpful, especially during office hours. He is veryknowledgable and knows how to convey his information to students effectively.

Professor is performing the course materials well and is always willing to help.

Professor's lecture is very clear and helpful.

Smith was very funny and interesting and made me remember why I fell in love with linguistics in thefirst place. I especially had fun with his invented language on tests and homework, though sometimesthey were very French/Romance-like in their vocabulary (blut Martian and Plutonian were gold).I dowish we had more time to cover historical linguistics, but I think we didn't because of all our three dayweekends, rather than Smith's fault.

So cute the professor, well-demonstrate everything we need to know. The course provides me s newvision to treat logic and language, and also make some inspirations for programming, which is also alanguage

Sometimes the homework is weird in the way the professor made questions. But taking the class was alot fun because of professor's personal charm and his iconic sarcasm. VERY NICE PROFESSOR!LOVE HIM!

Sometimes, the hw is hard, but I think they are very useful for me to learn about the material covered. Iwould appreciate that if we could have more clear instruction for the hw so we will know the direction ofhow to do better. Great lecture and section overall.

Strengths- willing to help.Weakness- If the lectures were one hour long we would still learn the same amount as the two hourclass. The lectures were too slow.

The Professor was very entertaining when lecturing. He makes students laugh and he makes linguisticsfun to learn. He reviewed material sometimes, and I think it would be great if he did that more often.

The instructor went in depth explaining various concepts better than the textbook explained them. He isvery good at coming up with examples to help us understand the concepts. I wish he came up withexamples that were a little different from the ones already in the book.

The learning of about four, five linguistics branches were spread out more and divided better thisquarter than last quarter with Hayes. No semantics, but there is historical linguistics.

The professor's lectures were always very informational, and I felt that tests and assignments werealways completely fair. Never too easy, but never too hard. Nothing was ever a trick question. It wasactually making sure we knew how to apply the things we learned without causing unnecessary stress. Ifelt like I had earned my grades instead of having them handed to me.

The real strength were the lectures. He presented the material in a clear and enjoyable way. The oneweakness was that some of the homework was confusing and incorporated things that we had notdiscussed yet.

This class is hard. It should specify somewhere that this is the gateway class to the major and shouldnot be mistaken for ling 1 if you are just looking for a ge

Page 24: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 16W: LING 20 LEC 1: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

10/31/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 8

This professor is really nice and considerate! A lot of quizzes and homework but they all help to keepme on the right track and check my understanding of the material.

Too much work for a class I was taking as a GE

Very engaging. Professor Smith's great communication skills along with his sense of humor (e.g.,sarcasm) made it easier to stay awake and attentive during the two hour lecture.

Very good professor.

he was very thorough in his lectures, and provided necessary material, super helpful! weaknesses N/A

jokes are pretty weird but entertainingclass is interesting and everything is pretty straightforwardsometimes it gets confusing but the lectures are fun

Page 25: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUISTNo. of responses = 13

Enrollment = 24Response Rate = 54.17%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=13Freshman 0

Sophomore 0

Junior 0

Senior 13

Graduate 0

Other 0

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=12Below 2.0 0

2.0 - 2.49 0

2.5 - 2.99 3

3.0 - 3.49 5

3.5+ 4

Not Established 0

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=13A 7

B 5

C 0

D 0

F 0

P 0

NP 0

? 1

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=13Major 11

Related Field 2

G.E. 0

None 0

Page 26: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=12av.=8.83md=9dev.=0.58

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

0

8

11

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

13

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

13

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=8.77md=9dev.=0.6

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

1

8

11

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=8.77md=9dev.=0.44

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

3

8

10

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

13

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=13av.=9md=9dev.=0

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

0

7

0

8

13

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=13

av.=2.38md=2dev.=0.65

1

1

6

2

6

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=13

av.=2.85md=3dev.=0.38

0

1

2

2

11

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=13

av.=2.69md=3dev.=0.48

0

1

4

2

9

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=13

av.=2.08md=2dev.=0.28

0

1

12

2

1

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=13

av.=2.08md=2dev.=0.28

0

1

12

2

1

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=13

av.=2.62md=3dev.=0.51

0

1

5

2

8

3

Page 27: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=12

av.=2.67md=3dev.=0.49

0

1

4

2

8

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=13

av.=2.77md=3dev.=0.44

0

1

3

2

10

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=13

av.=3md=3dev.=0

0

1

0

2

13

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor

n=11av.=2.73md=3dev.=0.47ab.=2

0

1

3

2

8

3

Page 28: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=12 av.=8.83

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=9.00

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=9.00

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=8.77

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=8.77

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=9.00

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=13 av.=9.00

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=13 av.=2.38

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=13 av.=2.85

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=13 av.=2.69

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=13 av.=2.08

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=13 av.=2.08

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=13 av.=2.62

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=12 av.=2.67

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=13 av.=2.77

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=13 av.=3.00

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=11 av.=2.73

Page 29: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Amazing professor! It was clear that he knew the topics of the course. I learned things I didn't think Iwould have learned being here at UCLA and he opened my perspective on many things that occurredand are occurring in society. He made the course exciting so exciting that I did not feel forced to go toclass because I was that eager to learn. Overall, AMAZING.

I found it tedious to have to write summaries of the assigned homework reading, however, I understoodthat it was your way of keeping us accountable to our responsibilities. In light of this, I think it would bemore beneficial if you just included questions about the readings on the quizzes or even better hadseparate quizzes on the readings. This is because I found it arbitrary to assign a score to a summarywhen the objective was to do the reading so the summaries can actually hurt students grades morethan the quizzes.

I found the presentations that the instructor put together were very well made. The course wasunderstandable and interesting. The only thing I would say is that some of the articles were somewhatlong, other than that I think that the course was great.

I really enjoyed this class and the professor's teaching style. The material was very interesting and Ithink the professor chose topics that were relevant. I appreciate that at the beginning of many classesthere is a short review to ensure that we understand main points.

I really like this class. I learned what I expected to learn. Topics were very interesting. Brian is anamazing professor. He has great communication skill that you would never get bored in class.Sometimes he was being too sarcastic, but sometimes he was pretty funny. It would be better if heresponds to emails more frequently, and remember students' names better...as it was a small class....that would definitely make students happier and feel respected.

Interesting material, professor is passionate about subject which makes lecture more enjoyable.Presents in a way that makes sense to the students and ensures that we understand the coursematerial in lecture before moving on to another topic. Approachable and friendly, felt welcome to seekhelp outside of lecture

It was hard at first to study for the quiz and complete the reading assignments I the beginning of thequarter, especially when there were multi reading assignments due. Lectures were very well organizedand easy to follow.

Professor Smith always encourages the students to come to class by requiring to hand in homework inperson and with in-class quizzes. The class isn't boring at all and keeps me going into trying to keep upwith the class.

Really enjoyed the class! Great readings and class lectures

The professor seemed really picky and strict in the beginning, but he relaxed a little more after twoweeks of class or so. He is extremely organized. As much as I hate to say it, having to write summariesfor the required readings helped a LOT. It really added to what we he went through in the lectures.With that being said, he failed to tell us what he was looking for in the summaries, until after the first twoweeks when we got back our summaries and he realized we were missing some things he consideredcrucial. He took part of the class to outline the things we should include in our summaries.

This class was very demanding, but I really think it paid off. Without putting in as much work as I did, Idon't think I would have been able to master the material as much as I love. Prof. Smith really cares

Page 30: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 170 LEC 1: INTRO SOCIOLINGUIST

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 6

about his students learning and it shows.

Very organized professor, great lectures.

Page 31: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 1

B.W. SMITHEvaluation of Instruction Program Report

15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I No. of responses = 22

Enrollment = 37Response Rate = 59.46%

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

1. Background Information:1. Background Information:

Year in School:1.1)

n=21Freshman 0

Sophomore 0

Junior 3

Senior 18

Graduate 0

Other 0

UCLA GPA:1.2)

n=22Below 2.0 0

2.0 - 2.49 3

2.5 - 2.99 2

3.0 - 3.49 8

3.5+ 9

Not Established 0

Expected Grade:1.3)

n=22A 8

B 6

C 3

D 0

F 0

P 0

NP 0

? 5

What requirements does this course fulfill?1.4)

n=18Major 18

Related Field 0

G.E. 0

None 0

Page 32: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 2

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

Instructor Concern – The instructorwas concerned about studentlearning.

2.1)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.59md=9dev.=0.73

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

3

7

3

8

16

9

Organization – Class presentationswere well prepared and organized.

2.2)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.5md=9dev.=0.74

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

3

7

5

8

14

9

Interaction – Students felt welcome inseeking help in or outside of theclass.

2.3)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.41md=9dev.=1.33

0

1

0

2

1

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

1

7

5

8

15

9

Communication Skills – Theinstructor had good communicationskills.

2.4)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.5md=9dev.=0.74

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

3

7

5

8

14

9

Value – You have learned somethingyou consider valuable.

2.5)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.18md=8dev.=1.01

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

1

5

0

6

3

7

8

8

10

9

Overall – Your overall rating of theinstructor.

2.6)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.5md=9dev.=0.74

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

0

5

0

6

3

7

5

8

14

9

Overall – Your overall rating of thecourse.

2.7)Very High orAlways

Very Low orNever

n=22av.=8.05md=8.5dev.=1.21

0

1

0

2

0

3

0

4

1

5

2

6

3

7

5

8

11

9

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

Subject interest before course3.1)HighLow n=22

av.=1.82md=2dev.=0.8

9

1

8

2

5

3

Subject interest after course3.2)HighLow n=22

av.=2.55md=3dev.=0.6

1

1

8

2

13

3

Mastery of course material3.3)HighLow n=21

av.=2.43md=2dev.=0.6

1

1

10

2

10

3

Difficulty (relative to other courses)3.4)HighLow n=22

av.=2.64md=3dev.=0.49

0

1

8

2

14

3

Workload/pace was3.5)Too MuchToo Slow n=22

av.=2.45md=2dev.=0.51

0

1

12

2

10

3

Texts, required readings3.6)ExcellentPoor n=22

av.=2.41md=2dev.=0.5

0

1

13

2

9

3

Page 33: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 3

Homework assignments3.7)ExcellentPoor n=22

av.=2.41md=2dev.=0.59

1

1

11

2

10

3

Graded materials, examinations3.8)ExcellentPoor n=22

av.=2.5md=3dev.=0.67

2

1

7

2

13

3

Lecture presentations3.9)ExcellentPoor n=22

av.=2.68md=3dev.=0.48

0

1

7

2

15

3

Class discussions3.10)ExcellentPoor

n=20av.=2.55md=3dev.=0.51ab.=2

0

1

9

2

11

3

Page 34: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 4

ProfileSubunit: LINGName of the instructor: B.W. SMITHName of the course:(Name of the survey)

15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

Values used in the profile line: Mean

2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:2. To What Extent Do You Feel That:

2.1) Instructor Concern – The instructor was concernedabout student learning.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.59

2.2) Organization – Class presentations were wellprepared and organized.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.50

2.3) Interaction – Students felt welcome in seeking help inor outside of the class.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.41

2.4) Communication Skills – The instructor had goodcommunication skills.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.50

2.5) Value – You have learned something you considervaluable.

Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.18

2.6) Overall – Your overall rating of the instructor. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.50

2.7) Overall – Your overall rating of the course. Very Low orNever

Very High orAlways n=22 av.=8.05

3. Your View of Course Characteristics:3. Your View of Course Characteristics:

3.1) Subject interest before course Low Highn=22 av.=1.82

3.2) Subject interest after course Low Highn=22 av.=2.55

3.3) Mastery of course material Low Highn=21 av.=2.43

3.4) Difficulty (relative to other courses) Low Highn=22 av.=2.64

3.5) Workload/pace was Too Slow Too Muchn=22 av.=2.45

3.6) Texts, required readings Poor Excellentn=22 av.=2.41

3.7) Homework assignments Poor Excellentn=22 av.=2.41

3.8) Graded materials, examinations Poor Excellentn=22 av.=2.50

3.9) Lecture presentations Poor Excellentn=22 av.=2.68

3.10) Class discussions Poor Excellentn=20 av.=2.55

Page 35: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

4. Comments:4. Comments:

Please identify what you perceive to be the real strengths and weaknesses of this instructor andcourse.

4.1)

Amazing instructor! Made a difficult subject very interesting and much more comprehensible. Thepackets accompanying the lectures were very helpful and well-organized. Instructor was veryconcerned about students' learning and mastery of the material. Was always easy to reach outside ofclass and went out of his way to give students extra help when needed. Thank you so much!

Brian is a great lecturer. He explains things well and makes it very easy to understand. He takes a lot oftime making sure everyone understands and loves answering questions and will always ask the classquestions and makes sure everyone is involved.

Brian is a wonderful professor. My interest in phonology was relatively low before taking the class but hemade me really like it! 8am classes are always rough but for the first time I actually looked forward tothem. He was so entertaining and funny, it was a joy being his student. Not to mention, he is veryknowledgeable about the subject and clearly loves it. This was probably my hardest class but it wasalso my favorite. I don't have any complaints about the course and would highly recommend Brian toanyone,

Brian is an awesome instructor! I just struggle with phonology in general. He was so flexible withstudents and that to be deserves recognition, he is super friendly however although he provided a guidefor the homework it felt like too much and it was often very very confusing. There was like a week were Iwas so stressed and alot of assignments were due for his class and then a week where nothing wasdue because we were somehow ahead..i'm not sure if I'm grateful for that or i wish that weren't thecase. I do feel however that his quizzes had no real structure to them, like I never knew to really studybecause sometimes it would be phonological rules other times "writ this in prose" or "figure out thispattern" and for me that just was so hard because I never knew what to study. However him allowing aone page of notes often times helped me but I WISH he had given some sort of guidance like he did thehome works. But again he is a super sweet person and I can tell he wants his students to succeedhowever for some reason I felt intimidated to speak to him because I didnt want to use wrong linguisticterms or him think I don't know anything because I struggle with phonology so I'd go to Brice.

Brian is very knowledgeable and very helpful in and outside of class. Occasionally in lecture we wouldgo off topic and lose focus but most of the time it was relevant iinfo or interesting nonetheless.

Brian really wanted to teach and seemed to enjoy teaching. He was able to break down a complicatedsubject and make it understandable. He was patient and a good teacher.

Fantastic class with a really engaging instructor (which is no small feat for an 2hour 8am lecture inBroad). When we did phonology in Ling 20 I had a really hard time understanding and conceptualizingit, but I felt like this class was broken up really well and that I have a very good understanding of thematerial now. Brian is also clearly very concerned with his students not only doing well but having fullcommand over what we've been taught this quarter, which was very reassuring.

He is knowledgeable and helpful. He explains the course content clearly and helps the student reachthe required analysis. The only concern is that he only gives subtle hints on how to solve certainproblems, so the student could feel lost sometimes. It would be nice if he gave better directions oncertain quizzes, helped the student find the right answer for the project. Great professor overall.

Instructor was good but the course material was hard.

It is pretty rare for me to be able to sit through an 8AM, two-hour lecture, twice every week withoutdosing off. I have to admit that I did sometimes feel a little tired, but it was definitely not because of his

Page 36: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

B.W. SMITH, 15F: LING 120A LEC 1: PHONOLOGY I

02/29/2016 Class Climate evaluation Page 6

lectures, but because of the time. I think Professor Smith was very interactive and considerate about thestudents' learning, and always willing to listen to what we have to say.Some students asked questionsthat I feel like they could have asked during office hours instead (if the questions wouldn't benefit thewhole class), but Professor Smith was pretty nice about trying to answer the questions, and trying to cutthem off for later if the questions took too long to answer. Overall, I enjoyed being in his class, and thematerial was interesting.

Phonetics/Phonology has never been a topic I have had an easy time with. Fortunately, this is mysecond time having Brian Smith as a professor for such a topic. Brian really makes the class able to do.The only weakness I can point out in this class is the amount of work assigned. Some of the weeklyproblem sets require a lot of further critical thinking outside of what we learned in that week's lecture(s).Unfortunately, I still tend to struggle a lot with the types of questions on the homeworks that when I getmy homework results back, it goes to show how difficult but preparing the class tries to be for the final. Idid struggle with this class a whole lot. Brian made it easier for us with adding extensions and extraoffice hours to help students out with a lot of unanswered questions. I am thankful for that. I can't sayI'm coming out of the quarter still very interested in phonology, but I am glad to be done with it on ahopefully strong-to-decent note.

The instructor is great at presenting the material in an effective way. He makes sure the students areclear about detail before moving on, which is widely considerate. His way of lecturing is pretty engagingand encourages students to pay attention. The performance by students could potentially be better ifthe days for the homeworks and quizzes are switched, especially if the class is scheduled in the earlymorning.

The workload was intense, but the professor was interesting and made me interested in the topic. I hadan amazing time although the class was one of the most difficult I have ever taken.

This class was quite difficult but I really enjoyed it, some of the homework was very challenging but Ithink it really paid off. The class handouts were very helpful

This is my second time having Professor Smith, and hopefully it won't be my last. Starting off with hislectures, he is very well organized. The lectures have a very clear progression, and at no time wasanyone wondering "how is this related to anything?" The professor, unlike many I have had before, hadno problem answering any questions we had for him. He would always explain why the method ofsolving the question was wrong, then explain how to fix the problem. He is very helpful, willing to evenmeet on weekends outside of class in order to provide tips and guidance for homework and projects.Professor Smith is very approachable and understanding. He was able to make the material fun andinteresting, and this is definitely one of my favorite classes.

This is the third class that I've taken with Brian here at UCLA and it is not a coincidence. I've alwaysfound Brian to be an engaging and entertaining lecturer who can masterfully present the material in away that is clear and understandable. He is committed to ensuring that all students have access to theclass material in every lecture and he is flexible in scheduling class assignments and exams, takingstudent concerns and workload into consideration. I would recommend anyone to take a class by BrianSmith.

strengths-tough hw assignments made me better at phonologyweaknesses-lecture material did not match the difficulty of hw material. we should be practicing stuffthat's just as hard as the exams and hw in class. lecture often did not engage students. if we practicedphonology problems more interactively we would get it faster

Page 37: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

%�:��60,7+(YDOXDWLRQ�RI�,QVWUXFWLRQ�3URJUDP�5HSRUW

��6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������1R��RI�UHVSRQVHV� ���

(QUROOPHQW� ���5HVSRQVH�5DWH� �������

6XUYH\�5HVXOWV6XUYH\�5HVXOWV

���%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ����%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ�

<HDU�LQ�6FKRRO�����

Q ��)UHVKPDQ �

6RSKRPRUH �

-XQLRU ��

6HQLRU �

*UDGXDWH �

2WKHU �

8&/$�*3$�����

Q ��%HORZ���� �

���������� �

���������� �

���������� �

���� �

1RW�(VWDEOLVKHG �

([SHFWHG�*UDGH�����

Q ��$ �

% �

& �

' �

) �

3 �

13 �

" �

:KDW�UHTXLUHPHQWV�GRHV�WKLV�FRXUVH�IXOILOO"����

Q ��0DMRU ��

5HODWHG�)LHOG �

*�(� �

1RQH �

Page 38: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRUZDV�FRQFHUQHG�DERXW�VWXGHQWOHDUQLQJ�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ���PG �GHY� ����

��

2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQVZHUH�ZHOO�SUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ���PG �GHY� ����

��

,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQVHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQ�RU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKHFODVV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ���PG �GHY� ����

��

&RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KHLQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRG�FRPPXQLFDWLRQVNLOOV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ\RX�FRQVLGHU�YDOXDEOH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHLQVWUXFWRU�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHFRXUVH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV�����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ���PG ���GHY� ����

��

��

:RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV����7RR�0XFK7RR�6ORZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

Page 39: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

+RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ���PG �GHY� ���

��

*UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

/HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ���PG �GHY� ���

��

&ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV�����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ���PG �GHY� ����

��

Page 40: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

3URILOH6XEXQLW� /,1*1DPH�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� %�:��60,7+1DPH�RI�WKH�FRXUVH��1DPH�RI�WKH�VXUYH\�

��6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

9DOXHV�XVHG�LQ�WKH�SURILOH�OLQH��0HDQ

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

���� ,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�ZDV�FRQFHUQHGDERXW�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQV�ZHUH�ZHOOSUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� ,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQ�VHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQRU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKH�FODVV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� &RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRGFRPPXQLFDWLRQ�VNLOOV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ�\RX�FRQVLGHUYDOXDEOH�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�FRXUVH� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV� /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� :RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV 7RR�6ORZ 7RR�0XFKQ �� DY� ����

���� 7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� +RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� *UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� /HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

����� &ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

Page 41: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW

���&RPPHQWV����&RPPHQWV�

3OHDVH�LGHQWLI\�ZKDW�\RX�SHUFHLYH�WR�EH�WKH�UHDO�VWUHQJWKV�DQG�ZHDNQHVVHV�RI�WKLV�LQVWUXFWRU�DQGFRXUVH�

����

%ULDQ�KDV�EHHQ�DQ�DZHVRPH�SURIHVVRU��KH�LV�SDWLHQW�ZLWK�KLV�VWXGHQWV��YHU\�XQGHUVWDQGLQJ�RI�WKHLUVLWXDWLRQV��DQG�DOZD\V�ZLOOLQJ�WR�JR�DERYH�DQG�EH\RQG�WR�KHOS�XV�ZLWKLQ�WKH�FODVV�LQ�DQ\�ZD\�KH�FDQ�

%ULDQ�KDV�FOHDU�FRPPXQLFDWLRQ�VNLOOV�DQG�JLYHV�XV�KDQGRXWV�HYHU\�ZHHN�WKDW�KDYH�D�JRRG�EDODQFH�RIOHFWXUH�DQG�SUDFWLFH��,�DSSUHFLDWH�WKDW�KH�DOZD\V�LQFOXGHV�SUREOHPV�DQG�TXHVWLRQV�IRU�VWXGHQWV�WRJUDSSOH�ZLWK���WKLV�VWXGHQW�HQJDJHPHQW�LV�YHU\�KHOSIXO�DV�ZH�DSSO\�ZKDW�ZH�OHDUQ��,�DSSUHFLDWH�WKDW%ULDQ�PDNHV�KLPVHOI�UHDGLO\�DYDLODEOH�WR�VWXGHQWV�DQG�LV�DOZD\V�RSHQ�WR�TXHVWLRQV��+H�LV�SDUWLFXODUO\JLIWHG�LQ�ZD\�KH�LQWHUDFWV�ZLWK�VWXGHQWV�DV�KH�LV�SDWLHQW�ZLWK�TXHVWLRQV�DQG�TXLFN�WR�HQFRXUDJH��HYHQZKHQ�VWXGHQWV�GR�QRW�JLYH�WKH�FRUUHFW�DQVZHU��,�DOVR�DSSUHFLDWH�WKDW�KH�UHIUDLQV�IURP�FDOOLQJ�RQ�WKHVDPH�SHRSOH�FRQWLQXDOO\��EXW�VHHNV�WR�JLYH�HYHU\�RQH�D�FKDQFH��,W�ZRXOG�KDYH�KHOSHG�LI�KH�KDGUHPHPEHUHG�QDPHV�DQG�FDOOHG�RQ�SHRSOH�2QH�ZD\�%ULDQ�FRXOG�LPSURYH�ZRXOG�EH�WR�EH�PRUH�RUJDQL]HG��DQG�WR�LQFOXGH�PRUH�VWXGHQWHQJDJHPHQW��,W�ZRXOG�KDYH�KHOSHG�LI�KH�KDG�FDOOHG�VWXGHQWV�XS�WR�WKH�ERDUG�UDWKHU�WKDQ�DVNLQJ�VWXGHQWVWR�GLFWDWH�UXOHV�WR�KLP��WKLV�LV�PRUH�RI�D�QRWH�RQ�HIILFLHQF\���7KHUH�ZHUH�DOVR�VRPH�GD\V�WKDW�ZHUH�DOPRVWZKROO\�OHFWXULQJ��WKHVH�DUH�WKH�GD\V�WKDW�,�UHPHPEHU�WKH�OHDVW�DPRXQW�RI�PDWHULDO��$JDLQ��LW�ZRXOG�KHOS�WRLQFOXGH�PRUH�VWXGHQW�HQJDJHPHQW��5HJDUGLQJ�RUJDQL]DWLRQ��WKHUH�ZHUH�VHYHUDO�WLPHV�ZKHQ�WKHUH�ZRXOGEH�W\SRV�RU�XQFOHDU�LQVWUXFWLRQV�RQ�TXL]]HV��KRPHZRUN��DQG�WHVWV�WKDW�ZRXOG�FRQIXVH�VWXGHQWV�DQG�VHWWKHP�EDFN�VHYHUDO�PLQXWHV�KRXUV�GD\V��,W�ZRXOG�KHOS�LI�%ULDQ�ZRXOG�FDWFK�WKHVH�EHIRUHKDQG��WR�DOORZ�IRUVPRRWK��XQKDPSHUHG�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�

%ULDQ�LV�D�YHU\�HQJDJLQJ�SURIHVVRU��+H�DOZD\V�HQFRXUDJHV�XV�WR�DVN�TXHVWLRQV�DQG�DQVZHU�WKHP�E\PDNLQJ�MRNHV��ZKLFK�,�WKRXJKW�ZDV�KHOSIXO�WR�GHFUHDVH�DZNZDUGQHVV��+HV�DOVR�YHU\�SHUVRQDEOH�DQGPDNHV�KLPVHOI�DYDLODEOH�GXULQJ�KLV�PDQ\�RIILFH�KRXUV�IRU�TXHVWLRQV��,Q�DGGLWLRQ��,�IHHO�OLNH�P\�TXHVWLRQVDUH�DOZD\V�IXOO\�DQVZHUHG�DV�KH�VSHQGV�PRUH�WKDQ����PLQXWHV�SHU�VWXGHQW�DGGUHVVLQJ�WKHLU�FRQFHUQVDQG�FRPPHQWV��7KRXJK�KH�PD\�QRW�EH�WKH�IDVWHVW�SHUVRQ�WR�JHW�EDFN�WR�\RXU�H�PDLOV��KH�PDNHV�VXUH�WRFUHDWH�PDQ\�RSSRUWXQLWLHV�WR�PHHW�ZLWK�KLP��7KRXJK�KH�GRHV�WDNH�D�ZKLOH�ZKHQ�JUDGLQJ��+RZHYHU��KH�LVYHU\�QLFH�DERXW�H[WHQGLQJ�GHDGOLQHV�LI�LW�ZLOO�KHOS�XV�XQGHUVWDQG�WKH�KRPHZRUN�EHWWHU�RU�LI�KH�NQRZV�ZHZLOO�QHHG�PRUH�WLPH�IRU�DQ�DVVLJQPHQW��,�ZRXOG�UHFRPPHQG�WKLV�FRXUVH�WR�DQ\RQH�ZKR�LV�LQWHUHVWHG�LQ/LQJXLVWLFV�RU�MXVW�ZDQW�WR�KDYH�D�JRRG�SURIHVVRU�LQ�JHQHUDO��

%ULDQ�ZDV�H[WUHPHO\�OLNDEOH�DQG�KLV�LQWHUHVW�LQ�WKH�VXEMHFW�PDGH�OHFWXUH�H[FLWLQJ�DQG�IXQ�WR�DWWHQG��+HPDNHV�\RX�IHHO�FRPIRUWDEOH�VHHNLQJ�RXWVLGH�KHOS�IRU�FODVV�DV�ZHOO��DIWHU�FRQVLVWHQWO\�JHWWLQJ�SRRU�JUDGHVRQ�KRPHZRUNV�DQG�TXL]]HV�DQG�IHDULQJ�WKDW�,�ZRXOG�IDLO�WKH�FRXUVH��KH�KHOSHG�PH�EUDLQVWRUP�IRU�P\SDSHU�DQG�PDGH�PH�IHHO�FRQILGHQW�LQ�P\�DELOLWLHV�DJDLQ��,�ZDV�WHUULILHG�WKDW�,�ZRXOG�KDYH�WR�UHWDNH�WKHFRXUVH�DQG�SRVVLEO\�DQRWKHU�TXDUWHU�RI�FROOHJH�ZKHQ�,�FDQ�QRW�DIIRUG�LW��EXW�DIWHU�WDONLQJ�ZLWK�%ULDQ�KHKHOSHG�PDNH�PH�IHHO�KRSHIXO�DERXW�WKH�VXEMHFW�DJDLQ�

%U\DQ�ZDV�DQ�H[FHOOHQW�LQVWUXFWRU��1RW�RQO\�LV�KH�IXQQ\�EXW�KH�PDNHV�HYHU\WKLQJ�YHU\�HDV\�WRXQGHUVWDQG�DQG�LWV�D�SOHDVXUH�WR�EH�LQ�KLV�FODVV��

*UHDW�FRXUVH��UHDOO\�IHOW�,�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ�WKLV�TXDUWHU���0\�RQO\�VPDOO�FULWLTXH�ZRXOG�EH�WKDW�KHV�DOLWWOH�VORZ�RQ�WKH�HPDLOV��EXW�FHUWDLQO\�QRW�IURP�ODFN�RI�FDULQJ��3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�ZDV�YHU\�KHOSIXO�DQGJHQHURXV�ZLWK�KLV�WLPH��JRLQJ�RYHU�KLV�VFKHGXOHG�RIILFH�KRXUV�WR�RIIHU�JXLGDQFH�RQ�WKH�WHUP�SURMHFW�DQGWKRURXJK�H[SODQDWLRQV�RI�FRXUVH�FRQFHSWV��7KDQNV�3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�

+H�ZDV�LV�D�JUHDW�LQWURGXFWLRQ�WR�3KRQRORJ\��,P�DOZD\V�JRLQJ�WR�KHDU�KLV�FXWH�OLWWOH�YRLFH�LQ�P\�KHDGZKHQ�PDNLQJ�UXOHV�DQG�VFDQQLQJ�GDWD��+H�HQJDJHG�WKH�FODVV�YHU\�ZHOO�DQG�ZDV�SOHDVDQW��:HOO�GRQH6PLWK��

,�DEVROXWHO\�ORYHG�WKLV�FODVV��,�WKRXJKW�DOO�RI�WKH�WRSLFV�ZHUH�DGGUHVVHG�LQ�D�ZD\�WKDW�PDGH�WKHP�FOHDU

Page 42: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*����$�/(&����3+212/2*<�,��������

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

DQG�HDV\�HQRXJK�WR�XQGHUVWDQG��,�FDQQRW�DGGUHVV�DQ\�UHDO�ZHDNQHVVHV�EHFDXVH�,�GLG�QRW�UHDOO\�VHHDQ\��2YHUDOO��RQH�RI�WKH�EHVW�FODVVHV�,YH�WDNHQ�DW�8&/$�

,�MXVW�ZDQW�WR�EHJLQ�E\�VD\LQJ�WKDW�WKH�KRPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV�LQ�WKLV�FODVV�ZDV�YHU\��YHU\�GLIILFXOW�$OWKRXJK�,�DOZD\V�SHUIRUPHG�VR�SRRUO\�RQ�WKH�KRPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV��,�GR�VR�PXFK�EHWWHU�RQ�WKHTXL]]HV�DQG�WHVWV��,�WKLQN�WKDW�KRPHZRUN�VROXWLRQV�VKRXOG�EH�JLYHQ�RXW�VR�WKDW�VWXGHQWV�FDQ�UHDOO\DVVHVV�ZKDW�WKH\UH�GRLQJ�ZURQJ��)XUWKHUPRUH��,P�VR�ZDU\�RI�WKLV�ILQDO�SDSHU��VLQFH�,�KDYH�QR�SULRUH[SHULHQFH�LQ�ZULWLQJ�OLQJXLVWLFV�SDSHUV��7KDW�EHLQJ�VDLG��3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�ZDV�FHUWDLQO\�WKH�EHVWOLQJXLVWLFV�SURIHVVRU�,YH�KDG�WKXV�IDU��XQIRUWXQDWHO\��LW�KDG�WR�EH�SKRQRORJ\���$OWKRXJK�,�GRQW�SDUWLFXODUO\HQMR\�SKRQRORJ\��,�OLNH�ERULQJ�V\QWD[��VRUU\���3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�ZDV�FHUWDLQO\�DQ�HIIHFWLYH�HGXFDWRU��+HJLYHV�VXFK�TXDOLW\�OHFWXUHV�WKDW��KRQHVWO\��VKRXOG�EH�SRGFDVWHG��,�DOVR�UHDOO\��UHDOO\��5($//<��5($//<�DSSUHFLDWH�KLV�OHFWXUH�KDQGRXWV��7KH\�DUH�DOZD\V�VR�KHOSIXO�DQG�RUJDQL]HG��7KRXJK��,�GR�ZLVK�WKH\�ZHUHVOLJKWO\�PRUH�GHWDLOHG��$OWKRXJK�,�NQRZ�,�ZRQW�EH�WDNLQJ�DQRWKHU�FODVV�ZLWK�3URIHVVRU�6PLWK��VLQFH�KHIRFXVHV�RQ�SKRQRORJ\���,�DP�IXOO\�FRQILGHQW�LQ�P\�EHOLHI�WKDW�IXWXUH�VWXGHQWV�ZLOO�GHILQLWHO\�UHFHLYH�DTXDOLW\�HGXFDWLRQ�IURP�KLP��,WV�UDWKHU�LURQLF�WKDW�SKRQRORJ\�LV�P\�OHDVW�IDYRULWH�FODVV�WKLV�TXDUWHU��EXW3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�ZDV�GHILQLWHO\�P\�IDYRULWH�SURIHVVRU��7KDQN�3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�IRU�PDNLQJ�WKLV�FODVV�VRHQMR\DEOH��HYHQ�WKRXJK��,�GRQW�SDUWLFXODUO\�OLNH�SKRQRORJ\�

,�ZDV�DPD]HG�DW�KRZ�RUJDQL]HG�WKH�FODVVHV�ZHUH��%ULDQ�KDG�D�KDQGRXW�IRU�HDFK�FODVV��GHWDLOLQJ�QRW�RQO\DOO�WKH�PDWHULDO�LQ�WKH�OHFWXUH��EXW�WKH�LPSRUWDQW�WKLQJV�ZH�VKRXOG�EH�ZRUNLQJ�RQ�HDFK�ZHHN��7KHUH�ZHUHORWV�RI�H[DPSOHV�WR�ZRUN�WKURXJK�DV�ZHOO��ZKLFK�KHOSHG�D�ORW�LQ�OHDUQLQJ�WKH�PDWHULDO��1RW�RQO\�WKLV��EXWKH�ZDV�DOVR�IULHQGO\�DQG�DSSURDFKDEOH��DQG�YHU\�DWWHQWLYH�WR�KRZ�ZH�ZHUH�GRLQJ�LQ�WKH�FODVV��,�VWUXJJOHGVRPH�LQ�WKH�FODVV��EXW�LW�ZDV�QRW�EHFDXVH�RI�WKH�WHDFKLQJ�

3URIHVVRU�6PLWK�PDNHV�JUHDW�KDQGRXWV���WKH\�DUH�H[WUHPHO\�KHOSIXO�IRU�OHDUQLQJ�DV�ZHOO�DV�UHYLHZLQJ�7KH�TXL]]HV�KH�KROGV�ZHHNO\�DOVR�KHOS�LQ�WKDW�WKH\�NHHS�VWXGHQWV�RQ�WRS�RI�WKH�FRXUVHZRUN��+LV�H[DPVZHUH�YHU\�WUXH�WR�WKH�PDWHULDO�ZH�OHDUQHG�DQG�ZHUH�YHU\�FRPSUHKHQVLYH��VSDQQLQJ�DOO�RI�WKH�PDWHULDO�ZHQHHG�WR�NQRZ��+H�LV�DOZD\V�DYDLODEOH�LQ�RIILFH�KRXUV�DQG�RXW�RI�RIILFH�KRXUV�DV�ZHOO��+H�HYHQ�KDG�RIILFHKRXUV�RQ�D�KROLGD\�SULRU�WR�DQ�XSFRPLQJ�WHVW�WR�KHOS�XV�RXW�HYHQ�PRUH��*UHDW�SURIHVVRU�

7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�GRHV�JUHDW�ZLWK�FRYHULQJ�WKH�PDWHULDO��+H�LV�ZHOO�RUJDQL]HG�DQG�HQFRXUDJHV�VWXGHQWV�WRSDUWLFLSDWH��,�OLNH�WKH�IDFW�WKDW�KH�LV�DSSURDFKDEOH�FRQVLGHULQJ�WKH�PDWHULDO�LV�GLIILFXOW�WR�JUDVS�DW�WLPHV�2QH�WKLQJ�,�ZRXOG�KDYH�OLNHG�LV�WKDW�KH�ZRXOG�SRVW�WKH�DQVZHUV�WR�WKH�PDWHULDO�ZH�FRXOGQW�FRYHU�LQ�FODVVVR�WKDW�ZD\�ZKHQ�,G�JR�EDFN�WR�VWXG\�DQG�ZRUN�RQ�WKH�SUREOHPV�,�ZRXOG�NQRZ�LI�,�ZHUH�GRLQJ�LW�ULJKW�

7KH�SURIHVVRU�ZDV�YHU\�JRRG�DW�EHLQJ�RSHQ�IRU�XV�WR�FRPH�IRU�KHOS�ZKLFK�LV�VRPHWKLQJ�,�UHDOO\DSSUHFLDWH��,WV�DSSDUHQW�KRZ�PXFK�KH�FDUHV�DERXW�XV�OHDUQLQJ��+H�DOZD\V�FDPH�WR�FODVV�LQ�D�JRRGPRRG��HYHQ�DIWHU�OLWWOH�VOHHS�WKH�SUHYLRXV�GD\��7KHUH�ZDV�RQO\�RQH�JOLWFK�ZKHUH�KH�GLGQW�SULQW�RXWHQRXJK�RI�WKH�TXL]��EXW�DVLGH�IURP�WKDW�KH�ZDV�DOZD\V�SUHSDUHG�ZLWK�D�KDQGRXW�IRU�WKH�GD\�WKDW�ZHZRXOG�JR�RYHU��,�DSSUHFLDWH�KRZ�XQGHUVWDQGLQJ�KH�LV�DQG�KH�ZDV�UHDOO\�JRRG�DW�H[SODLQLQJ�VXEMHFWPDWHULDO��

Page 43: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

%�:��60,7+(YDOXDWLRQ�RI�,QVWUXFWLRQ�3URJUDP�5HSRUW

��6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&61R��RI�UHVSRQVHV� ���

(QUROOPHQW� ���5HVSRQVH�5DWH� �������

6XUYH\�5HVXOWV6XUYH\�5HVXOWV

���%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ����%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ�

<HDU�LQ�6FKRRO�����

Q ��)UHVKPDQ �

6RSKRPRUH �

-XQLRU �

6HQLRU �

*UDGXDWH �

2WKHU �

8&/$�*3$�����

Q ��%HORZ���� �

���������� �

���������� �

���������� �

���� �

1RW�(VWDEOLVKHG �

([SHFWHG�*UDGH�����

Q ��$ �

% �

& �

' �

) �

3 �

13 �

" �

:KDW�UHTXLUHPHQWV�GRHV�WKLV�FRXUVH�IXOILOO"����

Q ��0DMRU ��

5HODWHG�)LHOG �

*�(� �

1RQH �

Page 44: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRUZDV�FRQFHUQHG�DERXW�VWXGHQWOHDUQLQJ�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQVZHUH�ZHOO�SUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQVHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQ�RU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKHFODVV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

&RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KHLQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRG�FRPPXQLFDWLRQVNLOOV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ\RX�FRQVLGHU�YDOXDEOH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHLQVWUXFWRU�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHFRXUVH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV�����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

:RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV����7RR�0XFK7RR�6ORZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

Page 45: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

+RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

*UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

/HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

&ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV�����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

Page 46: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

3URILOH6XEXQLW� /,1*1DPH�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� %�:��60,7+1DPH�RI�WKH�FRXUVH��1DPH�RI�WKH�VXUYH\�

��6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

9DOXHV�XVHG�LQ�WKH�SURILOH�OLQH��0HDQ

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

���� ,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�ZDV�FRQFHUQHGDERXW�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQV�ZHUH�ZHOOSUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� ,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQ�VHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQRU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKH�FODVV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� &RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRGFRPPXQLFDWLRQ�VNLOOV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ�\RX�FRQVLGHUYDOXDEOH�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�FRXUVH� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV� /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� :RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV 7RR�6ORZ 7RR�0XFKQ �� DY� ����

���� 7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� +RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� *UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� /HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

����� &ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

Page 47: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����6��/,1*�����/(&����,1752�*(1�3+21(7,&6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW

���&RPPHQWV����&RPPHQWV�

3OHDVH�LGHQWLI\�ZKDW�\RX�SHUFHLYH�WR�EH�WKH�UHDO�VWUHQJWKV�DQG�ZHDNQHVVHV�RI�WKLV�LQVWUXFWRU�DQGFRXUVH�

����

%ULDQ�ZDV�D�YHU\�HQWKXVLDVWLF�DQG�FRQFHUQHG�SURIHVVRU��+H�ZRXOG�DOZD\V�PDNH�VXUH�WKH�FODVVXQGHUVWRRG�WKH�PDWHULDO�DQG�HQFRXUDJHG�TXHVWLRQV�WR�EH�DVNHG��+H�DOVR�KHOG�SOHQW\�RI�RIILFH�KRXUV�DQGH[WUD�KHOS�RQ�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO�WKURXJKRXW�WKH�TXDUWHU�

,�YHU\�PXFK�HQMR\HG�WKH�FODVV��,W�ZDV�DOZD\V�HQJDJLQJ�DQG�QHYHU�IHOW�OLNH�WKH�WZR�KRXUV�RI�OHFWXUH�WKDW�LWZDV��,�ZLVK�WKH�WHUP�SDSHU�ZDV�PRUH�IOHVKHG�RXW�DQG�H[SODLQHG�WKURXJKRXW�WKH�FRXUVH�RI�WKH�FODVV�KRZHYHU��DV�,�ZDV�DOZD\V�FRQIXVHG��,�DOVR�GLGQW�QRWLFH�FHUWDLQ�UHTXLUHPHQWV�ZHUH�QHFHVVDU\�IRU�WKHSDSHU�XQWLO�PXFK�ODWHU��ZKLFK�DGGHG�WR�VRPH�VWUHVV��2WKHU�WKDQ�WKDW��LW�ZDV�D�IDQWDVWLF�FODVV��

/RYHG�WKH�FODVV�

3UHWW\�JRRG�OHFWXUHV��GRQW�NQRZ�WKDW�,G�FKDQJH�DQ\WKLQJ

7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�LV�YHU\�NQRZOHGJHDEOH�DERXW�WKH�PDWHULDO��+H�LV�DSSURDFKDEOH��IULHQGO\�DQG�RXWJRLQJ��

7KHUH�ZDV�OLWWOH�FRUUHODWLRQ�EHWZHHQ�LQIRUPDWLRQ�SUHVHQWHG�WR�WKH�FODVV�LQ�OHFWXUH�DQG�LQIRUPDWLRQ�ZHZHUH�H[SHFWHG�WR�NQRZ�IRU�TXL]]HV�KRPHZRUNV�

7KH�3URIHVVRU�ZDV�YHU\�QLFH�

7KLV�OHFWXUHU�NQRZV�WKH�PDWHULDO�YHU\�ZHOO�DQG�LV�DEOH�WR�WHDFK�LW�SURILFLHQWO\��+H�LV�KLJKO\�LQWHUHVWHG�LQWKH�VXEMHFW�DQG�LW�PDGH�PH�YHU\�LQWHUHVWHG�LQ�LW�

WKHUH�ZHUH�WLPHV�ZKHUH�WKH�FRXUVH�PRYHG�WRR�TXLFNO\�DQG�LW�ZDV�GLIILFXOW�WR�NHHS�XS��WKDW�EHLQJ�VDLG��WKHSURIHVVRU�ZRXOG�RIWHQ�JR�RXW�RI�KLV�ZD\�WR�DGGUHVV�DQG�TXHVWLRQV�RU�FRPPHQWV�ZH�KDG��WKH�FODVV�ZDVIXQ�DQG�HQJDJLQJ��DQG�L�OHDUQHG�D�ORW�WKURXJKRXW�WKH�FRXUVH��LYH�DOUHDG\�UHFRPPHQGHG�WKLV�FODVV�ZLWKWKLV�SURIHVVRU�WR�RWKHU�IULHQGV�ZKR�DUH�LQ�OLQJXLVWLFV�

YHU\�OHQLHQW�DQG�FDULQJ�IRU�VWXGHQWV�WR�OHDUQ�DQG�JLYLQJ�H[WUD�TXL]]HV�RIILFH�KRXUV�IRU�VWXGHQWV�

Page 48: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

%�:��60,7+(YDOXDWLRQ�RI�,QVWUXFWLRQ�3URJUDP�5HSRUW

��:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,61R��RI�UHVSRQVHV� ��(QUROOPHQW� ���

5HVSRQVH�5DWH� �������

6XUYH\�5HVXOWV6XUYH\�5HVXOWV

���%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ����%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ�

<HDU�LQ�6FKRRO�����

Q �)UHVKPDQ �

6RSKRPRUH �

-XQLRU �

6HQLRU �

*UDGXDWH �

2WKHU �

8&/$�*3$�����

Q �%HORZ���� �

���������� �

���������� �

���������� �

���� �

1RW�(VWDEOLVKHG �

([SHFWHG�*UDGH�����

Q �$ �

% �

& �

' �

) �

3 �

13 �

" �

:KDW�UHTXLUHPHQWV�GRHV�WKLV�FRXUVH�IXOILOO"����

Q �0DMRU �

5HODWHG�)LHOG �

*�(� �

1RQH �

Page 49: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRUZDV�FRQFHUQHG�DERXW�VWXGHQWOHDUQLQJ�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQVZHUH�ZHOO�SUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQVHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQ�RU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKHFODVV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

&RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KHLQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRG�FRPPXQLFDWLRQVNLOOV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ\RX�FRQVLGHU�YDOXDEOH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHLQVWUXFWRU�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHFRXUVH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q �

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q �

DY� �PG �GHY� �

0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO����+LJK/RZ Q �

DY� �PG �GHY� �

'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV�����+LJK/RZ Q �

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

:RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV����7RR�0XFK7RR�6ORZ Q �

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q �

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

Page 50: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

+RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q �

DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

*UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����DE� �

/HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����DE� �

&ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV�����([FHOOHQW3RRU

Q �DY� ����PG �GHY� ����DE� �

Page 51: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

3URILOH6XEXQLW� /,1*1DPH�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� %�:��60,7+1DPH�RI�WKH�FRXUVH��1DPH�RI�WKH�VXUYH\�

��:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

9DOXHV�XVHG�LQ�WKH�SURILOH�OLQH��0HDQ

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

���� ,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�ZDV�FRQFHUQHGDERXW�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� 2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQV�ZHUH�ZHOOSUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� ,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQ�VHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQRU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKH�FODVV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� &RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRGFRPPXQLFDWLRQ�VNLOOV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� 9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ�\RX�FRQVLGHUYDOXDEOH�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�FRXUVH� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q � DY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ � DY� ����

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ � DY� ����

���� 0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO /RZ +LJKQ � DY� ����

���� 'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV� /RZ +LJKQ � DY� ����

���� :RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV 7RR�6ORZ 7RR�0XFKQ � DY� ����

���� 7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ � DY� ����

���� +RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ � DY� ����

���� *UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ � DY� ����

���� /HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ � DY� ����

����� &ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ � DY� ����

Page 52: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW

���&RPPHQWV����&RPPHQWV�

3OHDVH�LGHQWLI\�ZKDW�\RX�SHUFHLYH�WR�EH�WKH�UHDO�VWUHQJWKV�DQG�ZHDNQHVVHV�RI�WKLV�LQVWUXFWRU�DQGFRXUVH�

����

%UDLQ�PDNHV�KLV�VWXGHQWV�IHHO�YHU\�FRPIRUWDEOH��+H�LV�UHDOO\�TXLFN�WR�FRPPXQLFDWH�DQG�DFFRPPRGDWHVWXGHQWV�QHHGV��)RU�H[DPSOH��KH�PDGH�PRUH�RIILFH�KRXUV�DV�WKH�FRXUVH�JRW�KDUGHU��+H�DOVR�PDGH�VXUHWR�EH�YHU\�RSHQ�WR�TXHVWLRQV�DQG�QHYHU�PDGH�DQ\�RQH�IHHO�LQWLPLGDWHG��+H�GLG�ZHOO�WR�IRVWHU�JURXS�ZRUN�+H�ZDV�UHDOO\�TXLFN�WR�UHVSRQG�WR�HPDLOV�DQG�KH�PDGH�VXUH�WR�QRWLI\�WKH�FODVV�RI�DQ\�FRQFHUQV�YHU\SURPSWO\��

%ULDQ�H[SODLQHG�GLIILFXOW�FRQFHSWV�YHU\�ZHOO�DQG�ZLOOLQJO\�DQVZHUHG�TXHVWLRQV�GXULQJ�FODVV���,�GLG�QRWKDYH�YHU\�KLJK�H[SHFWDWLRQV�IRU�WKH�FRXUVH�EXW�,�FDQ�KRQHVWO\�VD\�WKDW�,�ZDV�ZURQJ���0\�LQWHUHVW�LQ/LQJXLVWLFV�KDV�JURZQ�DIWHU�WDNLQJ�WKH�FRXUVH�DQG�LWV�DOO�WKDQNV�WR�%ULDQ�

%ULDQ�LV�DQ�HQWKXVLDVWLF�DQG�DGHSW�WHDFKHU�DQG�OLQJXLVW���*RLQJ�LQWR�WKH�FODVV�,�KDG�QR�SULRU�H[SHULHQFHRU�H[SRVXUH�WR�OLQJXLVWLF�WKRXJK�,�ZDV�LQWHUHVWHG�LQ�WKH�VXEMHFW�VLQFH�P\�IDYRULWH�FODVVHV�LQ�P\�HGXFDWLRQFDUHHU�KDYH�EHHQ�IRUHLJQ�ODQJXDJH�FODVVHV���,W�ZRXOG�EH�IDLU�WR�VD\�WKDW�%ULDQ��WR�VRPH�H[WHQW�LQIOXHQFHG�P\�GHFLVLRQ�WR�FKDQJH�P\�PDMRU�WR�/LQJXLVWLFV�EHFDXVH�RI�WKH�DWWLWXGH�KH�EURXJKW�WR�FODVVDQG�WKH�UHYHUHQFH�KH�KHOG�IRU�WKH�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO���%ULDQ�ZDV�YHU\�KHOSIXO�LQ�H[SODLQLQJ�WKH�PDWHULDO�DQGFODULI\LQJ�DQ\�TXHVWLRQV�ZH�KDG�LQ�FODVV���,P�H[FLWHG�WKDW�,�JHW�WR�WDNH�DQRWKHU�RQH�RI�KLV�FODVVHV�QH[WTXDUWHU�

%ULDQ�LV�DQ�H[FHOOHQW�3URIHVVRU��+LV�OHFWXUHV�ZHUH�DOZD\V�ZHOO�SUHSDUHG�DQG�KH�SUHVHQWHG�WKH�FRQWHQW�RIWKH�FRXUVH�LQ�D�YHU\�HQWKXVLDVWLF�DQG�FRPSUHKHQVLEOH�PDQQHU��7KLV�JX\�NQRZV�KLV�OLQJXLVWLFV�/LQJXLVWLFV��KH�FDQ�WHDFK��7KLV�OLQJXLVWLFV�FODVV�WDXJKW�PH�WKH�VWUXFWXUH�EHKLQG�ZK\�WKDW�VHQWHQFH�LVJUDPPDWLFDO�DQG�WKDW�LV�SUHWW\�FRRO��%ULDQ�LV�DQ�H[WUHPHO\�NQRZOHGJHDEOH�JX\�ZKR�VHHPHG�KDSS\�WRVKDUH�KLV�NQRZOHGJH�ZLWK�KLV�VWXGHQWV�LQ�WKH�FODVVURRP�DQG�RXWVLGH�WKH�FODVVURRP��+LV�RIILFH�KRXUVZHUH�DOZD\V�YHU\�KHOSIXO�DG�KH�ZDV�YHU\�UHVSRQVLYH�WR�HPDLOV��+H�DOZD\V�PDGH�VXUH�WR�LQIRUP�WKH�FODVVDERXW��DQ\�FKDQJHV�RQ�WKH�KRPHZRUN�RU�UHDGLQJV�

3URIHVVRU�%ULDQ�6PLWK�KDV�EHHQ�RQH�RI�WKH�PRVW�LQIOXHQWLDO�IDFWRUV�IRU�P\�GHFLVLRQ�WR�SXUVXH�D�PDMRU�LQOLQJXLVWLFV��'HVSLWH�DOPRVW�WZR�KRXUV�LQ�FODVV�,�QHYHU�IHOW�WKH�XUJH�WR�IDOO�DVOHHS�EHFDXVH�KH�NHSW�WKHFODVV�HQJDJHG�DQG�LQWHUHVWLQJ��,�VWURQJO\�KRSH�WR�KDYH�WKH�FKDQFH�WR�HQUROO�LQ�DQRWKHU�FRXUVH�WDXJKW�E\WKLV�LQVWUXFWRU�LQ�WKH�UHPDLQGHU�RI�P\�XQGHUJUDG�FDUHHU�

7KH�LQVWUXFWRUV�JUDGH�EUHDNGRZQ�PDNHV�DWWHQGDQFH�PDQGDWRU\�IRU�D�JRRG�JUDGH��ZKLFK�LV�D�VKDPHEHFDXVH�,�IHHO�OLNH�,�PDVWHUHG�WKH�VXEMHFW��GHVSLWH�QRW�EHLQJ�DEOH�WR�DWWHQG�FRQVLVWHQWO\���%ULDQ�LVH[WUHPHO\�LQWHOOLJHQW��FDULQJ��FOHDU��DQG�HQWHUWDLQLQJ���+LV�RUJDQL]DWLRQ�DQG�FRQVLVWHQF\�PDGH�WKH�FRXUVHPDWHULDO�HDV\�WR�JUDVS���0\�RQO\�UHJUHW�LV�WKDW�,�FRXOGQW�HDUQ�WKH�$�,�IHOW�WKDW�,�GHVHUYHG�EHFDXVH�RIRXWVLGH�ZRUN�DQG�WUDYHO�GHPDQGV�WKDW�LQWHUIHUHG�ZLWK�P\�DWWHQGDQFH�

Page 53: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

%�:��60,7+(YDOXDWLRQ�RI�,QVWUXFWLRQ�3URJUDP�5HSRUW

��:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,61R��RI�UHVSRQVHV� ���

(QUROOPHQW� ���5HVSRQVH�5DWH� �������

6XUYH\�5HVXOWV6XUYH\�5HVXOWV

���%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ����%DFNJURXQG�,QIRUPDWLRQ�

<HDU�LQ�6FKRRO�����

Q ��)UHVKPDQ �

6RSKRPRUH �

-XQLRU �

6HQLRU �

*UDGXDWH �

2WKHU �

8&/$�*3$�����

Q ��%HORZ���� �

���������� �

���������� �

���������� �

���� �

1RW�(VWDEOLVKHG �

([SHFWHG�*UDGH�����

Q ��$ �

% �

& �

' �

) �

3 �

13 �

" �

:KDW�UHTXLUHPHQWV�GRHV�WKLV�FRXUVH�IXOILOO"����

Q ��0DMRU �

5HODWHG�)LHOG �

*�(� �

1RQH �

Page 54: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRUZDV�FRQFHUQHG�DERXW�VWXGHQWOHDUQLQJ�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� �PG �GHY� ����

��

2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQVZHUH�ZHOO�SUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQVHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQ�RU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKHFODVV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� �PG �GHY� ����

��

&RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KHLQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRG�FRPPXQLFDWLRQVNLOOV�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG ���GHY� ����

9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ\RX�FRQVLGHU�YDOXDEOH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHLQVWUXFWRU�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� �PG �GHY� ����

2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKHFRXUVH�

����9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV�����+LJK/RZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ���

��

:RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV����7RR�0XFK7RR�6ORZ Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

Page 55: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

+RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

��

*UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

/HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV����([FHOOHQW3RRU Q ��

DY� ����PG �GHY� ����

&ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV�����([FHOOHQW3RRU

Q ��DY� ����PG �GHY� ����DE� �

Page 56: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

3URILOH6XEXQLW� /,1*1DPH�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� %�:��60,7+1DPH�RI�WKH�FRXUVH��1DPH�RI�WKH�VXUYH\�

��:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

9DOXHV�XVHG�LQ�WKH�SURILOH�OLQH��0HDQ

���7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW����7R�:KDW�([WHQW�'R�<RX�)HHO�7KDW�

���� ,QVWUXFWRU�&RQFHUQ�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�ZDV�FRQFHUQHGDERXW�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2UJDQL]DWLRQ�±�&ODVV�SUHVHQWDWLRQV�ZHUH�ZHOOSUHSDUHG�DQG�RUJDQL]HG�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� ,QWHUDFWLRQ�±�6WXGHQWV�IHOW�ZHOFRPH�LQ�VHHNLQJ�KHOS�LQRU�RXWVLGH�RI�WKH�FODVV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� &RPPXQLFDWLRQ�6NLOOV�±�7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�KDG�JRRGFRPPXQLFDWLRQ�VNLOOV�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 9DOXH�±�<RX�KDYH�OHDUQHG�VRPHWKLQJ�\RX�FRQVLGHUYDOXDEOH�

9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�LQVWUXFWRU� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���� 2YHUDOO�±�<RXU�RYHUDOO�UDWLQJ�RI�WKH�FRXUVH� 9HU\�/RZ�RU1HYHU

9HU\�+LJK�RU$OZD\V Q �� DY� ����

���<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV����<RXU�9LHZ�RI�&RXUVH�&KDUDFWHULVWLFV�

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�EHIRUH�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 6XEMHFW�LQWHUHVW�DIWHU�FRXUVH /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 0DVWHU\�RI�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� 'LIILFXOW\��UHODWLYH�WR�RWKHU�FRXUVHV� /RZ +LJKQ �� DY� ����

���� :RUNORDG�SDFH�ZDV 7RR�6ORZ 7RR�0XFKQ �� DY� ����

���� 7H[WV��UHTXLUHG�UHDGLQJV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� +RPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� *UDGHG�PDWHULDOV��H[DPLQDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

���� /HFWXUH�SUHVHQWDWLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

����� &ODVV�GLVFXVVLRQV 3RRU ([FHOOHQWQ �� DY� ����

Page 57: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

%�:��60,7+����:��/,1*����/(&����,1752�/,1*�$1$/<6,6

���������� &ODVV�&OLPDWH�HYDOXDWLRQ 3DJH��

&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW&RPPHQWV�5HSRUW

���&RPPHQWV����&RPPHQWV�

3OHDVH�LGHQWLI\�ZKDW�\RX�SHUFHLYH�WR�EH�WKH�UHDO�VWUHQJWKV�DQG�ZHDNQHVVHV�RI�WKLV�LQVWUXFWRU�DQGFRXUVH�

����

%ULDQ�\RXUH�WKH�UHDO�KRPLH�WKDQNV�IRU�D�GRSH�FODVV�PDQ�

+H�LV�SUHWW\�IDLU�RQ�WKH�KRPHZRUN�DQG�H[DPV��+H�LV�DOVR�KHOSIXO�ZKHQ�,�DP�VWXFN�RQ�VROYLQJ�SUREOHPV��

,�IHHO�WKDW�WKLV�FODVV�FRYHUHG�D�ORW�RI�PDWHULDO�DQG�D�IDVW�EXW�UHDVRQDEOH�SDFH��,�GR�ZLVK�WKDW�ZH�FRXOGKDYH�JRQH�RYHU�PRUH�H[DPSOHV�WR�HQVXUH�PDVWHU\�RYHU�WKH�FRQFHSWV��,�OLNH�WKDW�WKH�SURIHVVRU�KDG�PDQ\RIILFH�KRXUV�DQG�ZDV�DSSURDFKDEOH�DQG�PRUH�WKDQ�KDSS\�WR�KHOS

/RYHG�WKLV�FRXUVH��+HOSHG�PH�XQGHUVWDQG�EHWWHU�ZD\V�WR�WHDFK�P\�(6/�VWXGHQWV��SOXV�3URIHVVRU�6PLWKLV�DQ�H[FHOOHQW�SURIHVVRU

3URIHVVRU�%ULDQ�LV�YHU\�NLQG�DQG�IDLU�WRZDUGV�KLV�VWXGHQWV��/LQJXLVWLFV�LV�QRW�DQ�HDV\�RU�IDPLOLDU�VXEMHFW�EXW�KH�KHOSV�VWXGHQWV�XQGHUVWDQG�WKH�PDWHULDO��0D\EH�QH[W�WLPH�KH�FDQ�LQFOXGH�PRUH�JURXS�DFWLYLW\ZLWKLQ�WKH�FRXUVH��EXW�RWKHU�WKDQ�WKDW�KLV�OHFWXUHV�ZHUH�WKRURXJK�DQG�FOHDU��,�KRSH�KH�FRQWLQXHV�WR�WHDFKPRUH�FRXUVHV��

7KH�LQVWUXFWRU�LV�RQH�RI�WKH�EHVW�,�KDYH�KDG�VR�IDU�DW�8&/$��+H�LV�YHU\�NQRZOHGJHDEOH�LQ�KLV�ILHOG�DQG�KHH[SODLQV�WKH�FRXUVH�PDWHULDO�VR�HDVLO\��+H�DOZD\V�KDG�WLPH�HYHQ�RXWVLGH�RI�FODVV�WR�KHOS�VWXGHQWV��,KRQHVWO\�FDQQRW�WKLQN�RI�DQ\�ZHDNQHVVHV��,Q�P\�RSLQLRQ�KLV�WHDFKLQJ�VNLOOV�DUH�DOUHDG\�LQFUHGLEO\HIIHFWLYH�

7KH�SURIHVVRU�LV�NQRZOHGJHDEOH��NLQG��DQG�HDJHU�WR�PDNH�VXUH�VWXGHQWV�OHDUQ�WKH�PDWHULDO�ZHOO�+RZHYHU��WKH�FRXUVH�PDWHULDOV��H�J��KRPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV�DQG�PLGWHUP��KDYH�D�ORW�RI�W\SRV�WKDWKLQGHU�VWXGHQW�OHDUQLQJ�EHFDXVH�PDQ\�VWXGHQWV�VSHQG�VR�PXFK�WLPH�WU\LQJ�WR�XQGHUVWDQG�ZKHUH�WKH\ZHQW�ZURQJ�EHIRUH�UHDOL]LQJ�WKDW�LWV�QRW�WKDW�WKH\�GRQW�XQGHUVWDQG�WKH�PDWHULDO��LWV�WKDW�WKH�W\SRVFRQIXVHG�WKHP��6RPHWLPHV�WKHVH�W\SRV�FDQ�UHDOO\�DIIHFW�WKH�RXWFRPH�RI�DQ�DQVZHU�RU�HYHQ�KLQGHU�DVWXGHQW�IURP�FRPSOHWLQJ�DQ�DVVLJQPHQW��7KLV�DOVR�KDV�WKH�SRWHQWLDO�WR�PDNH�JUDGLQJ�D�OLWWOH�XQIDLU��EXWWKH�SURIHVVRU�KDV�GRQH�D�JUHDW�MRE�RI�UHPHG\LQJ�WKRVH�LQVWDQFHV�IRU�WKH�FODVV�DV�D�ZKROH��2YHUDOO��WKHSURIHVVRU�LV�JUHDW�DQG�YDOXHV�VWXGHQW�LQSXW��EXW�,�WKLQN�KH�FRXOG�ZRUN�RQ�PDNLQJ�VXUH�KLV�DVVLJQPHQWV�HVSHFLDOO\�KRPHZRUN�DQG�H[DPV��GRQW�KDYH�PLVWDNHV�W\SRV�WKDW�ZD\�VWXGHQWV�KDYH�WKH�RSSRUWXQLW\�WRSHUIRUP�DW�WKHLU�EHVW��$OVR��,�ZRXOG�HQFRXUDJH�KLP�WR�DOZD\V�FRPSOHWHO\�WHDFK�FRQFHSWV�KLPVHOI�EHIRUHDVVLJQLQJ�KRPHZRUN�DQG�TXL]]HV�EDVHG�VWULFWO\�RQ�WKH�UHDGLQJ�EHFDXVH�WKDW�DOVR�FDQ�DIIHFW�KRZVWXGHQWV�SHUIRUP��+H�WHDFKHV�D�ORW�EHWWHU�WKDQ�WKH�WH[WERRN�H[SODLQV�WKLQJV�DW�WLPHV��VR�EHLQJ�TXL]]HGEDVHG�RII�D�PHUH�UHDGLQJ�RU�KDYLQJ�VWXGHQWV�WXUQ�LQ�KRPHZRUN�DVVLJQPHQWV�EHIRUH�FRPSOHWHO\�WHDFKLQJD�FRQFHSW�FDQ�UHDOO\�WKURZ�VWXGHQWV�RII��2YHUDOO��KH�LV�D�JRRG�SURIHVVRU��DQG�LW�LV�FOHDU�WKDW�KH�FDUHVDERXW�WKH�VWXGHQWV��

7KH�SURIHVVRU�LV�YHU\�SDVVLRQDWH�DQG�NQRZOHGJDEOH�DERXW�OLQJXLVWLFV��+H�FOHDUO\�LV�DQ�H[SHUW�LQ�KLV�ILHOG�2QH�RI�KLV�ZHDNQHVVHV�LV�WKH�ZD\�KH�DVVLJQV�KRPHZRUN��2Q�VHYHUDO�RFFDVLRQV�,�KDG�FRPSOHWHG�WKHKRPHZRUN��RQO\�WR�UHFHLYH�DQ�HPDLO�WKDW�WKH�KRPHZRUN�KDV�EHHQ�UHYLVHG��:KLFK�PHDQW�,�KDG�WRFRPSOHWHO\�UH�GR�WKH�DVVLJQPHQW��7KLV�KDV�KDSSHQHG�DW�OHDVW�����WLPHV�DQG�LW�LV�YHU\�IUXVWUDWLQJ�WR�WU\DQG�EH�SURDFWLYH�WR�JHW�WKH�ZRUN�GRQH�HDUO\�DQG�WKHQ�KDYH�WR�VSHQG�HTXDOO\�DV�PXFK�WLPH�UHGRLQJ�WKHZRUN��,�WKLQN�WKDW�IRU�D�*(�WKLV�FRXUVH�LV�WRR�PXFK�ZRUN��7KH�JUDGLQJ�VFKHPH�RI�WKH�GHSDUWPHQWGLVFULPLQDWHV�DJDLQVW�WKRVH�ZKR�KDYHQW�WDNHQ�D�OLQJXLVWLF�FRXUVH�\HW��

Page 58: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

OID/Evaluation of Instruction ProgramCLASS SUMMARY FOR:

2014 FALLForm

Processed: 17 forms... 50.0% response rate02-13-2015 06:03:15

1. Year in School# valid responses: 16

Freshman:Sophomore:Junior:Senior:Graduate:Other:

6.25 %56.25 %12.50 %25.00 %0.00 %0.00 %

2. UCLA GPA# valid responses: 17

Below 2.0:2.0 - 2.49:2.5 - 2.99:3.0 - 3.49:3.5 +:Not Established

0.00 %5.88 %

23.53 %29.41 %23.53 %17.65 %

A:B:C:D:F:P:NP:?:

47.06 %17.65 %11.76 %0.00 %0.00 %

11.76 %0.00 %

11.76 %

Major:Related Field:G.E.:None:

7.14 %0.00 %

92.86 %0.00 %

17 14# valid responses: # valid responses:3. Expected Grade 4. Requirement Fulfilled

5. The instructor was concerned about student learning. 6. Class presentations were well prepared and organized. 7. Students felt welcome in seeking help. 8. The instructor had good communication skills 9. You have learned something you consider valuable.10. Your overall rating of the instructor.11. Your overall rating of the course.12. Nonstandard Question.13. Nonstandard Question.14. Nonstandard Question.15. Nonstandard Question.

00000000000

00000000000

QuestionsNotAppl

Low1 2 3 4

Medium5 6 7

NoRsp Rsp

00000000000

00000000000

00001000000

00001000000

01010000000

42213130000

36367890101

1081295851010

8High

9

000000016161616

171717171717171111

Mean

8.358.248.598.357.718.418.129.008.009.008.00

9.008.009.009.008.008.008.009.008.009.008.00

0.90.90.70.91.40.60.70.00.00.00.0

MdnStdDev

NotApplCourse Characteristics

16. Subject Interest before Course17. Subject Interest after Course18. Mastery of Course Material19. Difficulty (Relative to Other Courses)20. Workload/Pace Was21. Texts, Required Readings22. Homework Assignments23. Graded Materials, Examinations24. Lecture Presentations25. Class Discussions

1000010000

Low Medium High #NoResp

#ValResp

12203011100

41013121711101067

054204661110

0000000000

17171717171717171717

AINTR-STUDY-LANGUAGE

Instructor:

Course:Type:Enrollment:

SMITH, B.W. LING INTR-STUDY-LANGUAGE 1 LEC 003 34

ID: 004550965

ID: 253002231Department:

Page 59: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS

OID/Evaluation of Instruction ProgramCLASS SUMMARY FOR:

2014 FALLForm

Processed: 16 forms... 47.1% response rate02-13-2015 06:03:09

1. Year in School# valid responses: 15

Freshman:Sophomore:Junior:Senior:Graduate:Other:

6.67 %33.33 %33.33 %20.00 %0.00 %6.67 %

2. UCLA GPA# valid responses: 15

Below 2.0:2.0 - 2.49:2.5 - 2.99:3.0 - 3.49:3.5 +:Not Established

0.00 %6.67 %

13.33 %40.00 %33.33 %6.67 %

A:B:C:D:F:P:NP:?:

80.00 %6.67 %0.00 %0.00 %0.00 %6.67 %0.00 %6.67 %

Major:Related Field:G.E.:None:

0.00 %0.00 %

100.00 %0.00 %

15 15# valid responses: # valid responses:3. Expected Grade 4. Requirement Fulfilled

5. The instructor was concerned about student learning. 6. Class presentations were well prepared and organized. 7. Students felt welcome in seeking help. 8. The instructor had good communication skills 9. You have learned something you consider valuable.10. Your overall rating of the instructor.11. Your overall rating of the course.12. Nonstandard Question.13. Nonstandard Question.14. Nonstandard Question.15. Nonstandard Question.

00000000000

00000000000

QuestionsNotAppl

Low1 2 3 4

Medium5 6 7

NoRsp Rsp

00000000000

00001000000

00000000000

10001010000

01125220000

11220110000

36445350000

1188841060000

8High

9

001000116161616

161615161616150000

Mean

8.448.318.278.137.138.317.870.000.000.000.00

9.008.509.008.508.009.008.000.000.000.000.00

1.10.91.01.11.71.11.30.00.00.00.0

MdnStdDev

NotApplCourse Characteristics

16. Subject Interest before Course17. Subject Interest after Course18. Mastery of Course Material19. Difficulty (Relative to Other Courses)20. Workload/Pace Was21. Texts, Required Readings22. Homework Assignments23. Graded Materials, Examinations24. Lecture Presentations25. Class Discussions

0000010003

Low Medium High #NoResp

#ValResp

9206020100

78910161310655

06700069108

0000000010

16161616161616161516

AINTR-STUDY-LANGUAGE

Instructor:

Course:Type:Enrollment:

SMITH, B.W. LING INTR-STUDY-LANGUAGE 1 LEC 002 34

ID: 004550965

ID: 253002230Department:

Page 60: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS
Page 61: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS
Page 62: Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith€¦ · Teaching evaluations for Brian W. Smith (presented in reverse chronological order) B.W. SMITH, 16S: LING 20 LEC 2: INTRO LING ANALYSIS