Melissa Krull (as private and confidential)

Course Evaluation Report

Melissa Krull,
In the attachment you will find the evaluation results for your course evaluation, Introduction to School
Administration.
The legend indicator is followed by the individual average values of the scaled questions.
Student comments are included following the summary statistics.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact Logan Michels of the Office of Institutional
Research, Planning and Assessment at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
Warmest regards,
Logan Michels

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

Melissa Krull
Fall 2015 20163-006365
No. of responses = 9

Survey Results

Legend

Relative Frequencies of answers

Question text

Std. Dev.
25%

Mean
0%

50%

0%

25%

Left pole

n=No. of responses
av.=Mean
dev.=Std. Dev.
ab.=Abstention

Right pole

Scale

Histogram

1. SECTION 1: To provide a general evaluation please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)
1.1)

1.2)

1.3)

1.4)

1.5)

1.6)

1.7)

The course as a whole

The instructor's contribution to the course

Use of class time

Instructor's interest in whether the students

learned

Amount you learned in the course

Evaluative and grading techniques

Clarity of student responsibilities and

requirements

0%

0%

11.1%

44.4%

44.4%

0%

0%

0%

22.2%

77.8%

0%

0%

0%

66.7%

33.3%

0%

0%

0%

11.1%

88.9%

0%

11.1%

0%

33.3%

55.6%

0%

0%

11.1%

22.2%

66.7%

0%

0%

22.2%

44.4%

33.3%

n=9
av.=4.3
dev.=0.7

n=9
av.=4.8
dev.=0.4

n=9
av.=4.3
dev.=0.5

n=9
av.=4.9
dev.=0.3

n=9
av.=4.3
dev.=1

n=9
av.=4.6
dev.=0.7

n=9
av.=4.1
dev.=0.8

2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)
2.1)

Course organization

0%

11.1%

55.6%

33.3%
5

12/29/2015

0%

Class Climate evaluation

n=9
av.=4.2
dev.=0.7

Page 1

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

2.2)

2.3)

2.4)

2.5)

2.6)

2.7)

2.8)

0%

Instructor's contribution to discussions

Instructor's use of examples and illustrations

Quality of questions or problems raised by

instructor

Student confidence in instructor's knowledge

Instructor's enthusiasm

0%

22.2%

77.8%

0%

0%

0%

33.3%

66.7%

0%

0%

0%

44.4%

55.6%

0%

0%

0%

44.4%

55.6%

0%

0%

0%

0%

100%

Encouragement given to students to express

themselves

Answers to student questions

0%

0%

0%

0%

11.1%

88.9%

0%

0%

0%

66.7%

33.3%

n=9
av.=4.8
dev.=0.4

n=9
av.=4.7
dev.=0.5

n=9
av.=4.6
dev.=0.5

n=9
av.=4.6
dev.=0.5

n=9
av.=5
dev.=0

n=9
av.=4.9
dev.=0.3

n=9
av.=4.3
dev.=0.5

3. Background information
3.1)

3.2)

Would you recommend this course?

no

11.1%

majors only

55.6%

anyone interested

33.3%

in your major

77.8%

not in major but required for program

11.1%

n=9

Is this course

an elective
other

12/29/2015

Class Climate evaluation

n=9

0%
11.1%

Page 2

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

3.3)

3.4)

Class
Fr

0%

So

0%

Jr

0%

Sr

0%

Grad

77.8%

Other

22.2%

77.8%

22.2%

0%

0%

0%

F/NC

0%

n=9

What grade do you expect to receive?

12/29/2015

Class Climate evaluation

n=9

Page 3

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

Profile
Subunit:
Name of the instructor:
Name of the course:
(Name of the survey)

Department of Educational Leadership

Melissa Krull
Introduction to School Administration (20163-006365)

Values used in the profile line: Mean

1. SECTION 1: To provide a general evaluation please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)

1.1)

1.2)

1.3)

1.4)

1.5)

1.6)

1.7)

The course as a whole

The instructor's contribution to the course

Use of class time

Instructor's interest in whether the students

learned

Amount you learned in the course

Evaluative and grading techniques

Clarity of student responsibilities and

requirements

n=9

av.=4.3 md=4.0 dev.=0.7

n=9

av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.4

n=9

av.=4.3 md=4.0 dev.=0.5

n=9

av.=4.9 md=5.0 dev.=0.3

n=9

av.=4.3 md=5.0 dev.=1.0

n=9

av.=4.6 md=5.0 dev.=0.7

n=9

av.=4.1 md=4.0 dev.=0.8

2. Section 2: To provide feedback to the instructor please rate the following on a 5 to 1 scale (5 high...1 low)

2.1)

2.2)

2.3)

2.4)

2.5)

2.6)

2.7)

2.8)

Course organization

Instructor's contribution to discussions

Instructor's use of examples and illustrations

Quality of questions or problems raised by

instructor

Student confidence in instructor's knowledge

Instructor's enthusiasm

Encouragement given to students to express

themselves

Answers to student questions

12/29/2015

Class Climate evaluation

n=9

av.=4.2 md=4.0 dev.=0.7

n=9

av.=4.8 md=5.0 dev.=0.4

n=9

av.=4.7 md=5.0 dev.=0.5

n=9

av.=4.6 md=5.0 dev.=0.5

n=9

av.=4.6 md=5.0 dev.=0.5

n=9

av.=5.0 md=5.0 dev.=0.0

n=9

av.=4.9 md=5.0 dev.=0.3

n=9

av.=4.3 md=4.0 dev.=0.5

Page 4

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

Comments Report

4. Please comment on the following items...

4.1)

What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the instructor?

Both instructors had a lot of background knowledge in their respective areas. They both definitely were their for a particular class.
Both instructors were fair, had real life experience relevant to the course, and could offer different perspectives. They were knowledgeable
and could provide background for many issues in administration.
At times, I felt that the topics were only from a single perspective. I felt this way any time state assessment came up. There was such a
powerful perspective against them, I didn't feel comfortable sharing a different perspective, even though I knew a couple other students
shared my perspective. I also felt the article assignment about the Seattle teachers was from a single perspective, even though there
were two articles. It would be nice to have seen the other side. I feel the instructor is responsible for providing this space.
Instructors were very invested in the course and materials which was a positive
Some confusion on assignments
Real-world experience is definitely a strength. The instructor CLEARLY wants students to succeed.
Strengths - Both were friendly, welcoming, concerned about student learning. Both emphasized the need for us as students to be activists
in changing the current educational system.
Weakness - so much time spent on discussing equity for black students. I felt that majority of the class material revolved around this topic
and was frustrated that a wider variety of areas or student groups were not addressed. I think I am more empathetic and aware as a
school leader now but feel as if that is the only tool added to my personal kit for success as a school admin from these two courses and
that disappoints me. I am worried that future classes will be run in the same manner and I will finish the program feeling unprepared to be
a successful principal.
The instructors seemed knowledgeable about our topics.
The knowledge that these instructors have is outstanding. I think that each came with a wealth of information that was valuable and very
applicable. Each has their strengths and came ready to go with an approach to teaching that is much like teachers versus professors. I
liked the activeness and high level engagement. I really like how they blended the classes together and brought the topics together to be
more meaningful instead of keeping them separate. It felt like one class that was fluid was more powerful to learn in, instead of chopping
them in two. Seeking a degree in Educational Leadership is one job, not multiple subsections. Just a thought.
These two instructors worked amazingly well together - they both brought an exceptional amount of knowledge and resources to the
course. In addition, it was organized in a way that was interesting, well paced, and engaging. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

4.2)

What aspects of this course were most beneficial to you?

Courageous Conversations and ideas highlighted within.
I really enjoyed the small group learning and interacting with fewer people at at time. I liked how you paired us up with another group and
had us critique their paper/presentation. I also liked it when we broke into small groups and discussed a policy or issue vs having us sit in
the large group and discuss it.
Opened my eyes to an educational system that has some legitimate areas needing fixing.
Real life connections to what was in the lectures and texts
Reflection papers on actual work (practicums).
Article sharebacks.
Policy Articles.
The basic understanding on policy and cultural competency
The content is what I need to know. I like it when I learn things that I will need to know versus a bunch of information that is unrelated. I
really like the climate of the class. This not only applies to the instructors and their positive attitudes, but it carries to the class and then we
all have positive attitudes. We had fun, while learning very challenging concepts at the same time. Even though this class is large, we all
seem to have high motivation and it keeps the class moving very well. I hope the instructors find our group to be fun/ hard working as well.

4.3)

What would you suggest to improve this course?

I personally don't like listening to everyone in the class answer a question (only the times when everyone had to speak). It seems to take
up more time and I get less from it. When we share in smaller groups, the time spent is more valuable and I get more out of those

12/29/2015

Class Climate evaluation

Page 5

Melissa Krull, Introduction to School Administration

discussions. I also don't like the pressure of having to speak on every issue. I process and learn by listening and thinking about
information. I am not always able to explain my thoughts right away.
If the reading are required, make them more relevant to to the class and discussions.
Most introductory material about administration overall.
Perhaps inform students how the reading will be discussed -- there wasn't a focus when we were reading and that would have made it a
better read. I think that the amount of reading was very high (and yet, we didn't even hardly touch some of the required books) -- there
were also books that were suggested that sounded like they would be more appealing to work with and probably give insight to real
administration situations.
The only suggestion I would make is the grading. Tim was more detailed in the APA style and the comments made on assignments were
too broad to understand what changes could be made to improve paper writing. For example, if a paper had the comment that a topic was
not in depth enough in a certain aspect, the comment was not specific to the area that needed more development. This approach may
work well with students that engage more in the overarching view of the assignment, but for the person who wants to know exactly what
changes the paper needs, it was hard to detect what it was. Melissa's grading was more on ideas and content overall which I was able to
relate to better.
When assignments are given that require the use of technology, or new technology programs, it would be helpful to have more guidance.
We saw examples for our strengths video, but when it came to the policy presentation, I didn't even know where to start in terms of finding
a program to do what you requested.

Wider scope of topics. More concrete examples. I want to know how various situations should be handled by a principal/school leader. I
want to know what can get an admin in trouble/what should be avoided. How to do with staff that are negative, how to change the morale
of a building, etc. I want more day to day real-world application.
4.4)

Comment on the grading procedures and exams.

Fair, most assessments included good feedback that could be used to improve in areas of weakness. Both professors were encouraging
in their comments.
I appreciated the feedback and suggestions and the opportunity and encouragement to fix and resubmit - if needed.
I felt that the rubrics were unclear.
Melissa gave great feedback and allowed us the opportunity to make changes.
Having 2 teachers that graded differently and communicated differently can make it more difficult to understand expectations and
assignments.
Rubrics were very vaguely written.
Scoring on the rubrics allowed you to pass each individual assignment (scoring in the highest overall category), but not have 80% to pass
the class.
Having 2 instructors with two very different writing/grading expectations was difficult.
The assignments were fair and appropriate for the class. See comment 4.3 for more details.
The instructor wanted to make sure we had all opportunities to continue to improve in our knowledge and would give helpful pointers on
how to do so.
The rubrics made it easy to see what was expected.

12/29/2015

Class Climate evaluation

Page 6