|
IHUM In-house Evaluation Summary (Fall 97-98 to Spring 00-01)
Introduction and Background
IHUM conducted its own in-house student evaluations from Autumn 97-98 to Spring 00-01 in addition to the Registrar's Evaluations. The in-house surveys were administered in IHUM sections and were designed to measure the program’s success in imparting college-level skills in/through lecture and section. Although the forms evolved slightly through the years, the survey was consistently a two-sided form –one side of quantifiable “bubble” questions and the other of three to four narrative questions. The questions from 97-98 varied the most from the questions of the following years, focusing more attention on abstract issues like “what constitutes culture” and “human identity and existence,” probably in response to the role that CIV previously played. Despite this difference, the 97-98 survey did contain questions about IHUM’s effectiveness at imparting collegiate skills, and it is these questions that were used to compare responses across the years. The following set of questions is taken from the 00-01 survey, although there was little change in the survey questions from 98-99 to 00-01.
Quantifiable Questions
i. Percentage of lectures attended ii. Percentage of sections attended iii. Percentage of primary reading completed My Area One course (lecture and section) has… 1. enhanced my ability to comprehend texts through close reading. 2. improved my analytic and critical abilities. 3. improved my argumentative/persuasive abilities. 4. improved my written expression. 5. improved my oral expression. My Area One discussion sections have… 6. explored and expanded on material presented in lecture. 7. expanded my understanding of the course texts. 8. allowed me to articulate and express my ideas. 9. provided opportunities for me to consider diverse viewpoints. (Additional questions for Winter and Spring.) My fall IHUM course… 10. helped me develop methods and skills that I have used in this quarter’s course. 11. prepared me to explore themes and issues discussed in this quarter’s course.
Narrative Questions 12. Please list up to three things about your IHUM course that you have found effective. 13. In what ways could your IHUM course be improved? 14. How has your IHUM course been relevant to your other courses and/or your intellectual development? 15. Was any form of learning technology (email, forums, web pages, etc.) used in your course? If yes, please indicate what kind and comment on its effectiveness.
Methods
The following summary is based on both the results from the quantitative and the narrative portions of the surveys for Fall, Winter, and Spring. The quantitative questions were totaled and analyzed by the office program Remark before being manipulated into their current graphical form from whence this report draws its results. The narrative results consisted of over 1000 pages (excluding the 97-98 year) per quarter, which were organized by course and section. Because of the low number (under 500) of IHUM students in 1997-1998, all responses were read. In the subsequent years, one section’s responses per fellow were read.
Student comments have been reproduced as closely to the original as possible. Course and instructor names have been omitted, and minor grammatical corrections have been made, though syntax has been preserved.
The in-house surveys were discontinued as of 2001-2002 in favor of more qualitative measures. See the sitemap for specific numbers.
Participation Numbers
Respondents=resp Enrolled=enrlld Fall 97-98: 3 courses 469 resp/480 enrlld Winter 97-98: Spring 97-98: 3 courses 349 resp/enrollment unknown Fall 98-99: 6 courses 1071 resp/1169 enrlld Winter 98-99: 9 courses 1059 resp/1188 enrlld Spring 98-99: 9 courses 1173 resp/1175 enrlld Fall 99-00: 7 courses 1547 resp/1641 enrlld Winter 99-00: 10 courses 1516 resp/1640 enrlld Spring 99-00: 10 courses 1174 resp/1626 enrlld Fall 00-01: 8 courses 1415 resp/1506 enrlld Winter 00-01: 12 courses 1276 resp/1517 enrlld Spring 00-01: 12 courses 1245 resp/1497 enrlld
Results i. Percent of lectures attended:
“Very boring lectures…professors need to be more dynamic for such a diverse audience” (Spring 98-99).
“I often feel that the lectures aren’t helpful –lecturers go off on tangents or spend an inordinate amount of time harping on trivial examples, so lectures aren’t effective in giving the big picture and introducing the key ideas” (Winter 98-99).
“Lectures need drastic improvement. I find them dry and unengaging, which would account for the dramatic drop in attendance. Lectures were too biographical and historical and didn’t address literary issues as much as they should have. It isn’t fair to ask us to write analytical papers on texts when analysis of literature in lectures was avoided” (Spring 99-00).
However, students also expressed enjoyment of lecture and have been appreciative of certain unique aspects of the IHUM lecture, such as learning from multiple professors. Here are some sample quotes:
“More than one lecture professor gives students different intellectual viewpoints and areas of experience” (Fall 98-99).
“It [the IHUM lecture] has introduced me to two methods of looking at works of literature between the two lecturers who had very different styles” (Spring 98-99).
“I loved the lectures; discussion was useful” (Spring 99-00).
ii. Percent of sections attended:
Section attendance has remained consistently high, only once dropping below 90% of students attending 81-100% of sections. The narrative results underscore these statistics, as sections received the most positive feedback from students. When students critiqued section, they most often complained about length, suggesting three one hour sections per week instead of two ninety minute sections, like this student:
“Perhaps [institute] hour long section three times a week –section is too long, and [there is] still not enough time to cover materials”(Spring 00-01).
However, most comments about section agreed with this student who, when asked what was effective about IHUM, answered, “Sections in general. They are definitely the core of the class, and provide a great way to analyze texts in depth” (Fall 98-99).
iii. Percent primary reading completed:
Although numbers remained steady or rose in this category from 97-98 to 99-00, a dip occurred across all quarters in 00-01. This decline may be explained by the transition from CIV to IHUM, as IHUM sought to reduce the reading load of Fall quarter in order to concentrate on building a skill set. Students may well have interpreted this reduction as an improvement across quarters, as one student commented in Winter 97-98, “When I attend all lecture/sections and read all of the text on time, Area One is very intellectually stimulating. It is a great course in the humanities. The amount of reading is perfect.”
This sentiment may have faded as CIV faded from the academic landscape. However, student comments also suggest that dissatisfaction with reading loads may be more a matter of perceived inequality between courses, as this student indicates,
“STANDARDIZE READING EXPECTATIONS. As an alternative to CIV, IHUM was intended (I thought) to provide an option of reading fewer books more deeply. Some classes embraced this; some did not. We get angry at our four-book reading brethren when we take a class that requires nine be read!” (Winter 98-99)
In response to such feedback, the program has been concentrating on standardizing courses by conducting a paper-grading seminar for teaching fellows at orientation and this year developing a syllabus template for faculty to use in course design.
*In what follows the “strongly agree” and “agree” response options are grouped into one “agree” category and the “disagree” and “strongly disagree” options into one “disagree” category for ease of analysis and presentation.
1. My Area One course (lecture and section) has enhanced my ability to comprehend texts through close reading. (In 97-98 the parallel question read: “My Area One course has improved my ability to read in a focused way.”)
The number of students who felt their close reading skills improved in IHUM remained fairly constant through the years, although the numbers in Spring 97-98 are higher than the rest. This same peak appears frequently in the 97-98 year, which seems a likely result of the nature of IHUM and CIV in that year. IHUM was a new alternative to the CIV requirement, and only offered three courses in the 97-98 year. It is probable that IHUM students this year felt themselves part of a privileged few and therefore reacted more positively than students did when IHUM became the norm. Unfortunately, the survey form did not ask students to compare their impressions of the two programs, so there is little direct narrative evidence to support this hypothesis, although a couple of students did address the CIV-IHUM relationship:
“I really like the focus/unfocus of this class and the connection/disconnection of all the texts. I’m glad I got to be a pioneer” (Fall 97-98).
“So much better than [course track X] CIV!” (Spring 97-98)
Far more common among the narrative responses that can be interpreted as endorsing IHUM over CIV were those that referenced a reduced reading load in their IHUM course, like the following: “I liked that we had a small number of books because it allowed good concentration and deep critical reading of each book” (Fall 97-98).
“I like how [Course X] allows us to read only four novels but in depth” (Fall 97-98).
“Kudos to [Course X] for not having so many books that there is no discussion for many of them” (Spring 97-98).
However, even this data is complicated by the three-course factor. All of the positive reading load comments come from one course in the Fall and one in the Spring, making it difficult to know what weight to assign these comments. It is clear that this type of disparity is enough to inflate the quantitative numbers disproportionately, representing more the opinions of one course rather than the program as a whole. This suggests that comparisons between the 97-98 year and the years following may not be valid.
Relying on comments about CIV versus IHUM is also made difficult by the fact that some students confused the two programs. In the following examples, the students are enrolled in IHUM courses, though they refer to CIV:
“As CIV goes, it was all right, but I did not enjoy it very much. I think CIV unjust” (Spring 97-98).
“No more CIV!” (Spring 97-98)
The narrative data also yields ambiguous responses such as the following:
“No matter how good you make CIV, people’ll still be sick of it by May” (Spring 97-98).
“The worst thing about [Course X] is that it only lasts one quarter. Turn it into a three quarter sequence!” (Fall 97-98)
The first statement suggests that the student saw IHUM as an improvement over CIV, though the general negativity of the comment complicates the matter. The second comment may be read as comparative as CIV was made up of three-quarter tracks, but it probably reveals little about any sort of ranking between the two.
The CIV-IHUM phenomenon may also explain the spike in the “disagree” results in Fall 98-99, as this was the first quarter in which CIV was in the minority. The disagree responses in 99-00 and 00-01 may have also been padded by a change in the survey format. In 97-98 and 98-99, a “no opinion/unsure” option was the final response a student could choose; in 99-00 and 00-01, this option was replaced by “neither agree nor disagree,” which appeared between the agree and disagree options. The data suggests that students did not view these choices as equivalent, and so this change may also have impacted the apparent rise in student dissatisfaction.
2. My Area One course has improved my analytic and critical abilities.
The number of students who agreed with this statement has remained fairly steady through the years, though 97-98 records higher numbers, which may be due to the CIV phenomenon outlined above. This discrepancy may also be explained because the wording of the question in 97-98 read: “My Area One course has enhanced my skills in analysis, reasoning, and argumentation.” The number of students who didn’t feel that IHUM aided their analytic development decreased in later years. One student had this to say about IHUM’s analytic nature: “When I watched TV for the first time since coming to Stanford, about two weeks into the quarter, I found myself analyzing the commercials and unable to become convinced by any show I flipped to” (Fall, 97-98).
3. My Area One course improved my argumentative/persuasive abilities.
Positive feedback increased slightly through the years, although it is interesting to note that the overall numbers in this category are about ten to fifteen percentage points lower than in the analytic category. This difference may be due to a student perception that IHUM sections are geared more toward analysis and first year writing classes (WCT/PWR) more toward improving persuasive skills. The 97-98 year was not included in the analysis of this statement’s results as the data suggests that students did not equate the statement from 97-98 given above with this statement in later years.
4. My Area One course improved my written expression.
Student opinion in this category remained fairly constant, though there appears to be a slight downward trend in the Spring. This is perhaps due to the fact that all students have had a writing course (WCT/PWR) by the time they fill out Spring quarter evaluations and that students identify writing improvement more with WCT/PWR than with IHUM.
5. My Area One course improved my oral expression.
Even though oral expression has the lowest ratings of any of the questions asked in all quarters, the numbers have been on an upward trajectory since 98-99. A number of students have found IHUM helpful to their oral skill development from the beginning, as one student commented in Fall 97-98, “I enjoyed [Course X]. I feel that I was challenged in the four oral presentations to express my ideas in an effective, articulate way. This was a great benefit to me because I progressed from being nervous and unsure to becoming more expressive, articulate, and confident. This skill will be with me throughout life and it is something I’m sure I will use in the future.”
6. My Area One discussion sections have explored and expanded on material presented in lectures.
These numbers have remained steady since the question was introduced in the Fall 98-99 survey. This category also represents a notably high positive response, as the percentage of students who agree with the statement has never dropped below 80%.
7. My Area One discussion sections have expanded my understanding of course texts.
The data in this category is rather sparse, as the question has only been asked for two years, but the numbers so far display a definite upward trend (the numbers here are also quite high –between 80 and 90%). The question was an intelligent addition as appreciation of course texts is one of the most mentioned positive aspect of IHUM in the written feedback. One student commented, “The texts we read are so foundational. They touch upon almost every academic encounter I’ve had at Stanford, as well as personal” (Spring 00-01).
8. My Area One discussion section allowed me to articulate and express my ideas.
These numbers have remained steady, except for a slight dip in the Spring of 99-00, though this was recovered the next year. One student commented on the level of expression in section: “I think that this class made me a better reader, writer, and speaker. I have never had to read so attentively before. I have never had to create a strong thesis and support it so fully. I have never been in a discussion where ideas were so well thought out and expressed” (Fall 99-00).
9. My Area One discussion sections have provided opportunities for me to consider diverse viewpoints.
These numbers have also remained fairly constant, with Fall quarter showing the most marked increase. Many students also cited diversity as one of IHUM’s strengths. One student related, “The course had really made me question many of my beliefs and become aware of Eastern thought as compared to Christian and Western thought. The wide range of readings will be a great background for future classes and conversations” (Fall 99-00). Another student concurs, “This IHUM was most interesting because it was more than just the classics –represented all histories of all cultures as equally important to Western history. Good show!” (Spring 00-01)
*The next two questions were only asked on the Winter and Spring surveys.
10. My fall IHUM course helped me develop methods and skills that I have used in this quarter’s course.
The numbers here show the 98-99 and 00-01 years on equal footing, while there was a slight dip in 99-00.
11. My Fall IHUM course prepared me to explore themes and issues discussed in this quarter’s course.
The low numbers here reflect the fact that the question was ill-suited to explore the relationship between the fall quarter and the winter/spring sequence, since they are intended to serve two different purposes. According to the Area One Legislation, “Such first-quarter courses are conceived of primarily as an introduction to humanistic methodologies. Second- and third-quarter course sequences may build thematically on the first quarter courses or they may develop entirely new themes” (C2). Given the fall quarter’s emphasis on building the skills necessary for collegiate-level work in the humanities, and the fact that there is usually a disconnect between fall and winter/spring course topics, it is no surprise that student were confused by this question and thus rated it poorly. However, IHUM Central has taken feedback such as this into consideration and has taken steps to ensure that students have a better idea about the intended connection between the quarters. An additional section has been added to each quarter, which is devoted to discussing the structure of the program. IHUM faculty have also been provided with a syllabus template that describes what students should expect from each quarter of IHUM. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these measures have been well received by students.
12. Please list up to three things about your IHUM course that you have found effective. (Question first appeared in Fall 98-99.)
Here are a list of sample student responses, grouped by quarter and year:
Fall 98-99 “Presentation of varying viewpoints; exploration of differing methodologies.”
“Group of highly motivated, intelligent students from all different backgrounds and majors possibly that fuse to produce a very stimulating and even sometimes daunting work environment”
“The discussion format allowed me to learn a lot about different interpretations of texts from other people. I liked how supplementary material was presented but also how we had the opportunity to ask questions and bring up our own issues.”
Winter 98-99 “Subject matter was very interesting –exciting to explore new academic area. I would go back to the dorm after class and talk about it with other students –it made me think.”
“[Course X] forced me to read some texts I wouldn’t have read outside the class.”
“Studied the material from many points of view (very open) which allowed me to broaden my perspective on history.”
Spring 98-99 “Section presentations”
“Section was the most important part of my learning in IHUM. Papers were also a good learning experience.”
“Learned to analyze different mediums of expression: film, opera, text.”
Fall 99-00 “I felt me section leader was very helpful in answering my questions and giving me outside help when I needed it. As far as the lectures themselves, they greatly helped me in clarifying the concepts of the readings.”
“Guest lecturers were great (very interesting –excellent discussion topics)”
“The section; the round table discussion”
Winter 99-00 “Guest lecturers”
“Books assigned were worthy of reading”
“Section allowed me to understand material”
Spring 99-00 “Learning different viewpoints about a given idea. Broadened my mind philosophically.”
“Great texts”
“Sections with creative activities”
Fall 00-01 (These forms are have been misplaced.)
Winter 00-01 “[Prof. X]’s lectures are fantastic.”
“I really like the slides in lecture.”
“Incorporation of primary source reading with lectures and secondary source reading to give perspective on disciplines of history and archaeology.”
Spring 00-01 “I found the presentations to be quite effective. Often they let us grasp the concepts in an active way and they imparted a deeper understanding of the material.”
“I have found it interesting to discuss and read works of literature that I never would have approached on my own; it has helped me develop different perspectives.”
“Improved writing and discussion skills.”
13. In what ways could your IHUM course be improved?
Fall 98-99 “There could be a break of maybe ten minutes in the sections.”
“It seems that one could do well in the class without having attended the lectures. The lectures often had nothing to do with my performance in the class. The lectures were often incoherent and uncohesive.”
“Get rid of lectures altogether –they do not tie in to sections and add little to understanding of the books. Maybe incorporate short lectures into sections.”
Winter 98-99 “Less reading: a lot of the assigned material was really interesting and deep, but since we had so many other things to read, we couldn’t spend times trying to really understand what we were reading –it was more like ‘I have so much IHUM reading. I have to [read] really fast to get it done.’”
“The lectures are never about anything! This was also the case last quarter. I don’t understand why lectures choose to focus on the surface and irrelevant historical details rather than on the actual texts.”
“Honestly, I don’t know. I attended every lecture and section and found them all to be enjoyable and relevant to my education. The reading was tough, but I kept up, read it all, and really feel in love with some of the works.”
Spring 98-99 “Don’t have lecture at 9 am.”
“I am displeased with the way that minority authors are handled in Area One courses. In both my fall, winter, and spring courses minority authors are taught at the end of the course where there is little time.”
“In my winter and spring course a process of revisions was made available to us, and I believe that this process greatly enhanced the learning process. Fall quarter the experience of papers was quite demoralizing and although the work was about the same, I felt that I was unable to feel involved in the texts or inspired to write because I didn’t see any possibility of improvement. However, with the encouragement of my winter and spring quarter section leader, I once again began to enjoy the texts and [became] enthusiastic about papers.”
Fall 99-00 “The lectures could relate the texts more often to one another.”
“Sections are too long –it’s too difficult to focus on one topic for an hour and a half.”
“A stronger theme (not that it has to be present in every lecture and section, but at least indentified).”
Winter 99-00 “Less books (it gets overwhelming)”
“It would be nice if we didn’t have as much reading in such a short period of time –that way we could absorb the messages of the texts better and more fully understand them.”
“Focus on texts from places other than Western world”
Spring 99-00 “This class was awesome!”
“LESS READING –it is impossible for us to do all they ask which frustrates students and also does not allow us to discuss anything in depth. We, therefore, don’t learn much of anything at all.”
“No final, less reading/more selective so discussions can be more focused. I really enjoyed everything we discussed in IHUM. I think important issues were raised. But it REALLY bothered me that all the IHUM courses try to cover so much ground in so litte time. We’ll read an entire book and discuss it for 45 minutes. I do NOT think this is effective or necessary for providing a good intro to humanities and critical thinking.”
Fall 00-01 (These forms are have been misplaced.)
Winter 00-01 “Reduce the reading –a reduction of just 20 pages would be extremely helpful.”
“Less material to read each week, please! Will give us more time to deeply go into each book”
“The lectures could be more interesting. My sections were always much better.”
Spring 00-01 “More cohesion in general. Sometimes I don’t know whether it’s constructive to even take notes in lecture. I also get the impression that there are major differences between the sections/TFs.”
“If it was optional”
“Already great!”
14. How has your IHUM course been relevant to your other courses and/or your intellectual development? (This question did not appear on the survey until Fall 99-00.)
Fall 99-00 “I feel much more well-read and I feel as though my writing skills have improved. The course material includes works that I think are important works for anyone to explore in order to have a more complete picture of humanity.”
“Hasn’t really been relevant (I am taking math/science courses), but I was glad to have a class that let me think in a way my other classes don’t. I think that is important.”
“It hasn’t”
Winter 99-00 “My IHUM course, along with another course I took this quarter, has really interested me in anthropology. I am now thinking of doubling in CASA.”
“It’s challenged me to look at things in different ways and improved my argumentative writing skills.”
“Very much so. I am now looking at an International Relations major and a History minor, and this class helped decide that.”
Spring 99-00 “Much of the stuff we talked about in section had to do with psychology and so I could bring psych into the discussions in section that were very relevant. I learned a lot about subjectivism. This changed my viewpoint on the world drastically” (Spring 99-00).
“I feel like I’ve grown immensely on an intellectual level listening in lecture. I get so excited about the ideas Professor [X] bring up and further discussion in section helps, too. This was the best class I took this quarter” (Spring 99-00).
“I really don’t feel like I learned much in this course, which I feel is too bad because I spent a lot of time on it for nothing. Course quality needs to be improved –IHUM can be good –my first quarter class was.”
Fall 00-01 (Forms misplaced)
Winter 00-01 “Not really –I’ve done this stuff since sophomore year in high school.”
“Has improved my writing skills and has taught me to analyze literature better”
“I find the topic interesting and have enjoyed learning more about it. It doesn’t really relate to other courses because I hope to be an engineer.”
Spring 00-01 “Yes, I have really enjoyed this course. It has truly changed the goals of my education.”
“Not really to other courses –I am a premed, but it has helped me think differently/critically about what I read and engage in.”
“IHUM has taught me to think at a college level.”
15. Was any form of learning technology (email, forums, web pages, etc.) used in your course? If yes, please indicate what kind and comment on its effectiveness. (First appeared in Spring 98-99.)
Spring 98-99 “We had considerable email communication with our section leader. I found this very helpful for my papers and other course work relating to section.”
“The Forum was used in fall and winter quarters, and I found it to be one of the most counter-productive educational devices that I have ever come across. It was time consuming, and it forced students to say things to impress the TFs that would ordinarily never get said. It should be removed from all future IHUM programs.”
“The forum was interesting and more fun when it was a free area for discussion. When we were required to post within a strict format, it became tedious, boring and a pain.”
Fall 99-00 “Forum was very frustrating –once modified, the experience improved. Good idea in concept, but information from forum needs to be brought out and expanded in class.”
“Forums –our class found the forum effective, but it strongly relies on participation, which wasn’t as strong in many of the other sections, therefore I don’t know how useful it was overall.”
“It was very useful to be able to look up paper topics and guidelines on the website.”
Winter 99-00 “Yes, videos, PowerPoint, music, etc. Its effectiveness was poor. Instructors had trouble with them all the time. They also took a lot of time trying to make them work.”
“Email and webpages were used. It was very effective in facilitating communication with our TF and lecturers.”
“No.”
Spring 99-00 “Used webpage to get paper topics. This was good, easier to get than getting them in class.”
“Web –useful and interesting extra links!”
“We didn’t use forums this quarter, which is good because I found them unhelpful and annoying first quarter.”
Fall 00-01 (Forms unavailable.)
Winter 00-01 “The course website was very useful.”
“Web page was very effective for review, paper topics, etc.”
“Web page provided some god material; include links to other web resources, provide discussion themes, etc.”
Spring 00-01 “Web page=awesome!”
“Web pages –not that effective. I didn’t have time to look at them and they really weren’t that important to what we did.”
“There was a web page, and it had lots of media supplements that were nice.”
|
Stanford University, 2003
http://www.stanford.edu/group/vpue/ihumrev