BL A260 Human Physiology, Prof. Stark
Fall 2007 Assessment


Material from the assessment form that was administered is in plain text.
Student replies and material added during analysis is in italics. Eight students responded.

This is the course assessment, not the teacher evaluation - those are administered by the department, are on-line on banner, and are anonymous.

For your information
"Assessment" in Missouri spread after the mid 1980's "Value Added" program of Northeast Missouri State. It was originally intended "to reliably evaluate the quality of educational training." In the late 1990's the Biology Department at Saint Louis University first discussed assessment. On September 21, 2000, "each faculty member" was charged to "develop an outcome assessment tool." Even at this time, the interpretation was one of "student outcomes assessment." In December 2002, "course assessment" replaced "student outcomes assessment," and faculty were directed to collect information used to change or improve the course. There is a link to the assessment reports I have prepared since assessment was mandated at SLU:
http://starklab.slu.edu/CV/Assessment.htm
and the previous assessments for this course are also linked to the course information sheet:
http://starklab.slu.edu/Physio/Information.htm

In addition to being useful to me for teaching this course in the future, BME (the Department of Biomedical Engineering) makes use of this information for its accreditation.

Here are the stated objectives of the course:

BL A260 Human Physiology was created in 2004 by chairs of Biology and Biomedical Engineering (BME). It is the third and final biology requirement (after Principles of Biology I & II [BIOL 104 & 106]) for BME students. BME majors successfully completing Human Physiology will know systems physiology (homeostasis, circulation, respiration, digestion, nervous system, etc.) comprehensively at a level that does not have those prerequisites (biological chemistry and cell biology) needed for biology students.

"The course fulfilled these objectives."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.6
If not, why not?

"These objectives were reasonable."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.3
If not, why not?

"BIOL 104 & 106 provided adequate preparation for this course."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.6

"This Human Physiology course a good idea for your third semester requirement."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.3
If not, why not?

I am not a BME student, however physiology is a requirement because I am a pre-dental student.


"The selection of topics for emphasis was reasonable."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.4
If not, why not?

"The level of the textbook was appropriate."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.4
If not, why not?

i thought the book was very good.

"The level of the lecture coverage was appropriate."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.6
If not, why not?

"Having outlines on the web was useful."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.4
If not, why not?

"Having applicable test questions from the last three years on each outline helped for learning and for studying for tests."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1
If not, why not?

"Having several stories from recent literature, e.g. heart tissue engineering, women's health initiative study, etc.) was useful."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.3
Delete? Keep? Add more?

keep, it kept what we were learning related to life experiences

"Having figures and condensed portions of the outline on PowerPoint presentations was appreciated."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.1
If not, why not?

"Having lecture sound recordings on-line as PodCasts was appreciated."
1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree
Average=1.4
If not, why not?

VERY HELPFUL to go back and listen to lectures!


Are there any topics you would like to be added to the syllabus in future years?

No, I thought the topics covered were sufficient.

i think it's fine the way it is

I think the topics were well covered.

No.

No

connecting the big picture, a lot of what we learned was interrelated, it would have been helpful to see it all put together


Are there any topics you think should be reduced or eliminated?

No, all topics covered were main physiological subtopics so they were necessary.

NO

No.

No, all topics were essential

No

No

Plan for next year:

(1)
It is clear that only fine tuning will be necessary
(2) Students seemed to be fairly satisfied, but there were not many comments to work on.
(3) I will try, following comments from previous years and this comment from the teacher evaluation "Awesome course! The only complaint I've heard from past years is people wish some topics were dedicated more to biomedical engineering but I can see he made awesome efforts to fix this." to make the course more targeted to BME.

Return to WSStark assessment (main page)

or

Return to Human Physiology Syllabus (Information Page)

Return to Stark Home Page

this page was last revised 1/15/08