You are on page 1of 6

Florida State University

2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

1 - The course materials helped me understand the subject matter.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 15 75% 4.70 4.28 4.27
Agree (4) 4 20%
Neutral (3) 1 5%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.70 0.57 5.00 101,736 4.28 0.90 5.00 1,309 4.27 0.94 5.00

2 - The work required of me was appropriate based on course objectives.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 15 75% 4.70 4.35 4.33
Agree (4) 4 20%
Neutral (3) 1 5%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.70 0.57 5.00 101,404 4.35 0.86 5.00 1,305 4.33 0.89 5.00

3 - The tests, project, etc. accurately measured what I learned in this course.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 16 80% 4.70 4.21 4.26
Agree (4) 2 10%
Neutral (3) 2 10%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.70 0.66 5.00 101,300 4.21 0.98 4.00 1,309 4.26 0.94 5.00

4 - This course encouraged me to think critically.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 13 65% 4.45 4.30 4.26
Agree (4) 5 25%
Neutral (3) 0 0%
Disagree (2) 2 10%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.45 0.94 5.00 101,051 4.30 0.91 5.00 1,301 4.26 0.98 5.00

Page 1 of 6
Florida State University
2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

5 - I learned a great deal in this course.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 14 70% 4.45 4.25 4.19
Agree (4) 4 20%
Neutral (3) 0 0%
Disagree (2) 1 5%
Strongly Disagree (1) 1 5%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.45 1.10 5.00 101,002 4.25 0.97 5.00 1,296 4.19 1.04 5.00

6 - Laura Edythe Coleman provided clear expectations for the course.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 12 66.67% 4.61 4.41 4.37

Agree (4) 5 27.78%
Neutral (3) 1 5.56%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
18/32 (56.25%) 4.61 0.61 5.00 103,683 4.41 0.87 5.00 1,308 4.37 0.93 5.00

7 - Laura Edythe Coleman communicated effectively.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 12 60% 4.40 4.35 4.30
Agree (4) 4 20%
Neutral (3) 4 20%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.40 0.82 5.00 103,606 4.35 0.96 5.00 1,308 4.30 1.01 5.00

8 - Laura Edythe Coleman stimulated my interest in the subject matter.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 13 65% 4.35 4.18 4.16
Agree (4) 3 15%
Neutral (3) 3 15%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 1 5%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.35 1.09 5.00 103,398 4.18 1.06 5.00 1,303 4.16 1.09 5.00

Page 2 of 6
Florida State University
2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

9 - Laura Edythe Coleman provided helpful feedback on my work.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 16 80% 4.55 4.17 4.25
Agree (4) 2 10%
Neutral (3) 0 0%
Disagree (2) 1 5%
Strongly Disagree (1) 1 5%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.55 1.10 5.00 103,201 4.17 1.04 5.00 1,306 4.25 1.01 5.00

10 - Laura Edythe Coleman demonstrated respect for students.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 17 85% 4.85 4.57 4.54

Agree (4) 3 15%
Neutral (3) 0 0%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.85 0.37 5.00 103,198 4.57 0.75 5.00 1,310 4.54 0.85 5.00

11 - Laura Edythe Coleman demonstrated mastery of the subject matter.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Strongly Agree (5) 16 80% 4.65 4.59 4.57

Agree (4) 3 15%
Neutral (3) 0 0%
Disagree (2) 0 0%
Strongly Disagree (1) 1 5%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.65 0.93 5.00 103,321 4.59 0.74 5.00 1,304 4.57 0.79 5.00

12 - Overall course content rating.

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Excellent (5) 13 65% 4.50 4.15 4.10
Above Satisfactory (4) 5 25%
Satisfactory (3) 1 5%
Below Satisfactory (2) 1 5%
Poor (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.50 0.83 5.00 100,699 4.15 1.00 4.00 1,298 4.10 1.06 4.00

Page 3 of 6
Florida State University
2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

13 - Overall rating for Laura Edythe Coleman

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Excellent (5) 13 65% 4.45 4.34 4.28
Above Satisfactory (4) 4 20%
Satisfactory (3) 2 10%
Below Satisfactory (2) 1 5%
Poor (1) 0 0%
0 25 50 75 100 Instructor University Department
Return Rate Mean STD Median University Mean STD Median Department Mean STD Median
20/32 (62.5%) 4.45 0.89 5.00 102,809 4.34 0.96 5.00 1,298 4.28 1.02 5.00

14 - What is your year in school?

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
1st year (1) 1 5%
Sophomore (2) 0 0%
Junior (3) 0 0%
Senior (4) 1 5%
Grad/Other (5) 18 90%
0 25 50 75 100
Return Rate
20/32 (62.5%)

15 - What is your cumulative GPA?

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
1.99 or less (1) 0 0%
2.0-2.49 (2) 0 0%
2.5-2.99 (3) 0 0%
3.0-3.49 (4) 2 10.53%
3.5-4.0 (5) 14 73.68%
Not Applicable (6) 3 15.79%
0 25 50 75 100
Return Rate
19/32 (59.38%)

16 - What grade do you expect to receive in this course?

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
A (1) 16 80%
B (2) 2 10%
C (3) 1 5%
D (4) 0 0%
F (5) 0 0%
Not Applicable (6) 1 5%
0 25 50 75 100
Return Rate
20/32 (62.5%)

Page 4 of 6
Florida State University
2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

17 - Is this a required course for you?

Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 14 70%
No (2) 6 30%

0 25 50 75 100
Return Rate
20/32 (62.5%)

18 - What did you like about the course and/or instructor, Laura Edythe Coleman? Please give examples.

• Certain assignments were very clear, great examples were given & ample time was allotted to complete.
• Laura is clearly an expert on the material
• Dr. Coleman was great! I appreciated her expertise, and her lectures were engaging. I learned a lot in this course.
• Dr. Coleman was easy to communicate with and had appropriate expectations for the class. Her presentation was very relaxed and she provided a classroom environment conducive to learning.
• I liked the fact that Dr. Coleman made the course personable to my peers and I. She was extremely engaging and knowledgeable in her field.
• Great job. You bring life to the material!
• Throughout the course, Dr. Coleman has always been supportive and available to provide feedback. Her input and availability was crucial in my success in this course. Many of my classmates have
been doing most of the assigned work for many years in their daily lives where as I do not. So her guidance in accomplishing personas and Sitemaps was quite crucial.
• Professor Coleman is able to express ideas effectively. The thing is, to be a professor, one must know how to teach others. Professor Coleman not only is an expert in the subject matter, but she was
able to tap into her pedagogical skills and explain the subject matter in a matter in which I was able to understand it as she explained it. This is her merit.
• 1. Working in teams 2. Examples for assignments 3. Clear expectations
• I learned a lot from this course. Dr. Coleman was an excellent instructor. She is very knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the material.
• Dr. Coleman was very knowledgeable of the subject matter. She demonstrated an enthusiasm for the course that kept students involved.
• Instructor was good at making use of the instructional tools provided (Canvas). She had a good grasp of and encouraged the use of more modern collaborative technologies for teams (Google Drive)
and was more accepting of submissions composed in the Google Drive format than most instructors that prefer the more common MS Word format. Instructor clearly outlined expectations for
assignments and provided examples in most cases. Course site was very clearly setup and easy to understand / use.
• Grade assignments promptly. Making us wait so long for grades is terrible.
• Good assignment structure leading to final project. Clear communication of expectations and teaching the subject

19 - What aspects of the course and/or Laura Edythe Coleman's instructional methods should be improved? Please give examples.

• Certain assignments were not clear, examples or clear expectations were not given.
• This was one of the best LIS classes I've taken. I learned so much!
• Some of the course assignments were a little vague and could have benefited from examples.
• There were some problems with the Canvas course site. Dates of assignments were frequently wrong, which was confusing.
• None
• None.
• Keep up the good work.
• None
• 1. All screencasts should be submitted on the same day, and students should be assigned who they will respond to. 2. Response to e-mails 3. Each team should have their own Blackboard
Collaborate session room.
• The only thing I can think of is to have the all of the online information about the course updated for the correct semester before the class begins.
• Dr. Coleman did a great job overall in instructing the course. The only suggestions I would have is to ensure that the dates for the assignments are updated to the current semester; many (if not all of
the students) work full-time and take more than one course. Having accurate due dates for assignments at the start of the semester does help with planning. The only other suggestion I have is to
randomly assign the groups for the project. I felt it took a lot of time and was a little inefficient the way that we had to group ourselves. As many instructors indicate, the group work is intended to
"mirror" real-life were we must all work together. In many cases, we don't get to choose at our real jobs who we work with on projects so I would recommend considering a random assignment. I have
been in three other groups in classes I have taken and the random assignment actually worked well in those instances.
• Instruction not interesting at all, usually instructor is just reading from PowerPoint which could put someone to sleep even after drinking a case of Red Bull. Also, instructor prescribes an excessive
amount of useless reading material...I literally cracked the book twice in the course and got an A.
• I think people with actual industry experience teaching technology courses might help.

Page 5 of 6
Florida State University
2017 Spring Course Evalua on
Course: LIS5786-0001: INTRO TO INFO ARCHIT
Instructor: Laura Edythe Coleman *

20 - Please list additional comments and/or suggestions.

• Instructor could be a little rude at times in response to my assignments, also asked a question a few time in collaborate chat and it was either missed or ignored.
• This was a great course! Thank you!
• None.
• What a great and pleasant experience that will serve me well in my future!
• As is the nature with online classes, online collaborate does not easily allow one to meet face to face in a classical sense. I would like to see more online classes allow for students to meet each other
face to face as well as the professor.
• Of all the courses I have taken in the graduate program, this was one of the more challenging courses, but one where I learned the most.

Page 6 of 6