BL A347 General Physiology Laboratory, Prof. Stark
Spring, 2015 Assessment Report

Form in regular font, Stusent replies, information and future plans in italics

My interpretation of the history of assessment
"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 April, 1998, SLU's Biology Department adopted a policy of having graduating majors take the Graduate Record Exam, interpreting "assessment" as "program assessment." On September 21, 2000, "each faculty member" was charged to "develop an outcome assessment tool." At this time, the interpretation was one of "student outcomes assessment." In December 2002, "course assessment" replaced "student outcomes assessment;" faculty were directed to collect information used to change or improve the course in keeping with SLU's policy ("Assessment results are utilized to improve courses and curriculum"). There is a link to the assessment reports I have prepared since assessment was mandated at SLU:

Here are the objectives of the course:

Students completing this laboratory will have their learning experience for Human Cellular Physiology, Human Physiology, or Exercise Physiology supplemented, reinforced and extended. Students will acquire and analyze data on neuromuscular, sensory, cardiac, endocrine, respiratory and excretory systems. Skills such as critical thinking, data analysis, library searches, and preparation of scientific reports will be emphasized. Specialized physiology hardware and software will stimulate students in their appreciation of changing technology. A substantial lecture component of this laboratory course will dovetail the interface between learning from lecture (and web resources) vs. hands-on components of learning.

"The course fulfilled these objectives and these objectives were resonable."

1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

Average = 1.27


Since this was a general physiology lab course, the objectives make sense and are completely reasonable in terms of expectations for material knowledge by the end of the semester.

This class was great, and emphasized what a physiology lab should.

I really liked the structure of the course. I thought that the expectations and objectives were very reasonable.

It was very helpful to have information I learned in Human Cellular Physiology last semester paired with experiments demonstrating the phenomenon I had studied.

We learned a lot of material during this class through the lecture portion. It was nice to apply some of what we learned in a practical manner.

I thought that the course was very good in fulfilling in addressing the topics needed.

I thought that the course did a great job of giving a fundamental overview of physiology while giving us invaluable hands on experience that many classes can't offer.

The course did a really great job of fulfilling the objectives and expanded upon them very well.

I was pleased to find that the objectives were feasible. I was rusty on my human cell physiology, but that didn't end up being problematic.

The lectures and the labs went very well together.

It was very helpful to have the knowledge from human cell physiology.

The only aspect which may not have been fulfilled is the library searches, just from a personal experience.

I feel as if the course covered a lot of material for a 2 credit hour course.

Yes, we learned a lot about different systems. And some techniques in physiology studying. However, the lecture part was not sufficient. It's too broad.

Course objectives were clear but not too specific to give students insight on what the class entails.

The topics listed were covered by different lectures and labs, and I feel like I have a handle on this information. The technology and lab equipment sometimes held us back in learning and data collection, which could be improved. Also, labs could be better prepared so that all those leading the lecture/experiment/class know the plan for the class session.

"The lab "notebook," with step by step instructions and clearly spelled out exercises and data collection, allowed students to work well, independently and in their lab groups."

1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

Average = 1.78


procedures were very detailed and clear. Easy to follow.

It's nice that I'll have this notebook to look back to, since it had to be somewhat organized.

I thought the handouts where clear and helpful to explain what to do for each lab and also the TAs and professor helped if there was any confusion.

I liked being about to work with my lab group. It was a good experience.

Though the lab notebooks were dense at times, they were rather informative and provided all the information we needed to complete the labs.

Yes, the lab notebook did help with the lab exercises, but it could be a little bit more clear in terms of which parts to do.

Exercises were generally well-spelled out, but there were changes to the procedure in almost every lab.

I agree with this statement, but there were certain parts of labs that were not clearly explained in the notebook that needed to be clarified by TAs.

Some labs had lots of tables and procedures we skipped/ ignored. Could cut out some of the unnecessary things to streamline the handouts.

Sometimes the notebook had information that was confusing, the with the help of the TAs and professor the experiments were very manageable.

For some experiments, it's better to remove the tables or exercises that we are not performing.

The labs were spelled out in great detail, but sometimes it was harder for me to follow along with just because of the numerous program-specific functions mentioned. When/If I wasn't working on the computer that day, it was harder for me to understand what was meant by the instructions or what the different functions performed were doing.

The lab provided good information for learning the topic, but we often did not follow the procedure exactly as it was laid out, which made experiments more confusing. We couldn't work independently without asking the instructors many questions.

The lab notebook was slightly convoluted and wordy.

Lab notebook was disorganized. Directions are clear, but it is confusing when TAs are telling us what to skip/do in lab and contradicting each other.

The lab notebook was a bit overwhelming at times and the procedures can be unclear. I think it would be more helpful to give clear step by step instruction in person instead of just letting the students read the for themselves since that can be time consuming.

Some of the lab report directions could be updated in terms of which files to use and what the protocol should be for adjusting the programs so that the devices can calibrate and measure the variables correctly.

Some of the calibrations and instructions with the machine were difficult to do by ourselves, but it's hard to make that stuff easy.

The lab notebook was written very technically and was difficult to follow at times, especially in relation to the iWorks program.

"A unified web site, with postings of exercises, outlines, exam questions from previous years, data, PowerPoints, and PodCasts helped to ensure that each laboratory and your learning experience went smoothly."

1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

Put your number here:


The website was very convenient, my only recommendation would be to somehow label or denote which links students should have printed out and ready for class.

It was great that all materials and previous materials for the entire semester were all present at the beginning of the semester. It was great to be able to plan ahead and keep up with the material.

I think that the website was a great idea and it definitely helped to keep everything organized and easy to access. I really appreciate all the time and effort you put into the site and wish more teachers would use something similar.

I'm a huge fan of Stark's websites. I like having everything I need in one site, instead of bunches of papers.

I really liked the website for the lab. It is much easier to use than conventional blackboard.

The website is really useful and organized.

The extensive materials made studying very easy.

The previous exams and exam questions are very helpful for studying for the midterm and final.

The syllabus is well laid out, especially because we are able to access previous year's syllabi for test review.

A lot of resources online, which were really helpful.

There was so many different resources of information to help one learn the material.

I agree that we had access to a variety of sources to help make sure we would understand the material and have enough questions to master the material.

Yes! I loved the website. Extremely helpful

The website was a great resource, but sometimes things were difficult to find.

The website was a bit confusing at first, but it was easy to adjust to.

Website is very helpful and resourceful. However, please make attachments instead of direct links to make navigation easier. Or compile all previous exam questions into one document for easy access.

When going over a Podcast and notes from a given week, sometimes it would be challenging to pause if you wanted to write down notes because the audio tab had to be separate from the visual tab. Maybe using Tegrity in order to put audio visual on a single screen might be a cohesive method for learning.

"This selection of labs provides a foundation relevant to systems physiology and to the objectives of this course."

1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree



The labs were really enjoyable, and we learned a lot about our human physiology

I agree that this course a majority of the topics in physiology and even covered some topics that were missing in the human cellular physiology clas.

I took advanced physiology with Warren and I felt like the lab complimented the important topics in the course very well.

Loved the lab.

Yes! I enjoyed all of them.

I enjoyed our labs! The hands-on approach allowed me to learn a lot!

Great choice in labs, lots of fun, just a little unfortunate that not all labs worked as planned all the time.

Yes I agree, we covered a diversity of topics!

The course went into depth on all the information covered in general physiology lab very well.

The labs were interesting in a way that we could see physiology in action to the best of our ability.

I've never taken a physiology course before and thus have nothing to compare what I learned in this class to, but I do feel that we covered a broad breadth of subjects and that I now have a solid foundation of physiology.

Yes, we did talk about different systems, however, we just briefly touched each system without going into the details.

"Topical mini-lectures delivered by your professor were helpful in keeping students with diverse backgrounds on 'the same page' and in orienting to each day's lab."

1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree



These were useful in understanding the key points of lab

The lectures were humorous and had just the right amount of information, and enough detail suitable for a college physiology class. I really enjoyed them.

It was nice to have small lectures in lab to refresh physiological concepts and to put the lab procedure in perspective

These helped put the labs in more perspective

These helped narrow down topics.

The mini lectures were useful in setting a background on what the lab was on each day and helped to set a good foundation for the material. Overall, one of the most fun classes I have taken at SLU and definitely the most fun biology class I have taken as we were able apply the science we learned as it related to the body systems.

This was nice because I had not studied certain physiology topics in over a year, back when I took Human Cell Physiology.

Very helpful

I greatly enjoyed the mini lectures and the different speakers that came in.

The lab lectures were necessary and helpful.

I loved the guest speakers.

There is enough information on the slides, but it's hard for us to consume all the concepts in the lab. So I was a little bit of confused during the lab. (Maybe because I was unprepared.) However, the outline for each lecture is helpful.

To some extent the lectures weren't always organized well as far as skipping through unnecessary slides, and they didn't always line up completely with the lab we were focusing on.

Though the lectures were very informative, I thought that they were often very information dense and kind of boring. Maybe if we broke up the lecture between lab procedures rather than doing the full hour at the start, it would have been more engaging. I realize that they are a necessary evil but I felt that they were the more boring part of the class.

Some topics and diagrams introduced were too complex for such a brief overview. However, perhaps a student who had already taken Physiology class would not notice. It would help if some topics could be simplified. If not, perhaps suggest other resources online in case the student does not have a relevant text book. For example, for the blood flow steps, a YouTube video helped me visualize the sequence. On the other hand, sometimes sources like YouTube can be inaccurate.

Very disorganized. Photoshop lecture was not needed. Digestion lecture was not related to final lab, why was it presented? Otherwise it did a good job of supplementing the day's activities.

Please provide feedback for your TAs:

Your undergraduate TA (Dushyant Patel [am]

Dushyant did a good job of answering questions and giving us advice on what to expect for the class.

Dushyant was very helpful and answered our questions thoroughly.

Dushyant did a great job simplifying the lab so it was more understandable and was very engaged.

Very (Patel) and was always willing to help guide the students.

Dushyant was very helpful during labs and explained procedure very well.

Dushyant was a very helpful TA.

Dushyant's a good friend of mine, and he was a good TA. He got better & better as the semester continued.

I appreciate that Dushyant always knows what theoretical results we should be getting and that he remembers much about how he did these labs a year ago, giving us a reference.

Dushyant. Not always prepared to answer questions. Obviously knows his physiology well, but doesn't always seem prepared.

"1" (highest rating)

or Saketh Tummala [pm])

Saketh was very helpful and knowledgable about the subject material and the lab protocol. He was also helpful in his suggestions on how to study for the midterm and final. He gave suggestions on how long to study in advance and what to focus on and where to find everything on the lab syllabus website. He was a great T.A.

Saketh was always very helpful, ensuring that we knew how to do each experiment and helping to troubleshoot any issues we ran into along the way.

Saketh was very helpful whenever we had any questions in lab. He was super friendly and easy to approach. He reflected what it meant to be a good TA.

Saketh was very good. He seemed to know what was going on for the most part, and he did his best to answer any questions knowledgeably.

he was very helpful. He answered questions quickly and found the answers for us if he didn't know.

Saketh did a great job of helping us walk through the labs. He knew what he was doing and was adept at answering our questions.

Saketh was very knowledgeable and helpful.

He was helpful during class. Knew what he was doing.

Saketh Tummala did a good job explaining to us how to do the different parts of the lab and was helpful.

Saketh was very helpful.

Saketh was helpful and very knowledgeable about the topics.

He was a good TA! I think it would be nicer if sped things along.

He was overall good. However, it's better if he could be more prepared and know what to do in the lab so that we don't waste time. Sometimes he seems confused about how to perform the lab.

Saketh was available for help often but at the same time didn't really know how to answer many of our questions and at times also gave us the wrong answers. It would be good if TAs could prepare more beforehand. However, he was always willing to help and was enthusiastic about lab.

Great! Very helpful and patient with students when we were confused, could have known the details of each lab and been more prepared to lead experiments

Could be more involved in helping with the labs

Your graduate TA (Cory DeClue)

Cory was an amazing TA. He responded to emails efficiently, succinctly, and quickly. He was knowledgeable about the labs and always willing to help.

Cory was fantastic. Had a good understanding of all the topics on a deep level and was able to answer questions concisely and regardless of their pertinence to lab (some only were tangentially related).

He's the best at trouble-shooting, and I appreciate how he can figure out, on the spot, how to calculate things or better ways to carry out procedures.

He was really nice and knew a lot of the topics. I appreciated his work for making tables and graphs for us.

Cory is very knowledgeable about physiology and can teach topics very well. He understands the underlying principles of the labs well.

Cory was very helpful in and out of lab. He provided great support with our lab reports and was clear/concise during lab.

Does a great job, wish he gave a couple more lectures on his work since it was very fascinating.

I think Cory was extremely knowledgeable and helpful. He was very good in explaining instructions for the lab report and a fair grader.

Cory was very helpful. He understood the lab procedures and was able to answer our questions.

I thought Cory did a really good job helping us throughout the course and was very clear with his expectations for the lab reports and was knowledgable in what he explained to us.

Cory did a good job of giving very good feedback and help on how to improve. He answered questions well and put hard work for this class.

Cory was helpful and proved to be an excellent resource during lab reports.

Cory was also helpful and answered all questions when needed.

Very knowledgable about the topics. Easy to contact for lab reports.

Cory was very helpful, especially with lab reports

Cory was very knowledgeable in all of this mini lectures. He was also approachable if we had questions in lab. Cory was also very generous to meet outside the classroom in order to answer our questions regarding the lab reports.

Cory was very good at explaining when we were confused about something.

very helpful and was more than happy to help during office hours.


"1" (highest rating)

Cory definitely knew his stuff. He was helpful in keeping our group going throughout the experiments. I wish that we had notes or slides or something from his lectures, as I always felt underprepared for test questions relating to his lectures.

Great source of information for real life application of topics we were learning. Also could have been more informed about experiments and lab changes. The lab reports were great-Cory helped soo much in writing those and I learned a lot from writing them!!

Cory also gave us great insight on our lab reports and gave good lectures in lab but again, was not able to answer many of questions and even answered some of them wrong upon further investigation.

Cory was very knowledgable about the subject matter and I enjoyed the lecture materials he presented. However, the the obstacles I encountered with him were that I did not perceive him to be approachable. I felt as if his communication with us was somewhat demeaning and when the time for the lab reports came I felt that his expectations were not clearly outlined. Also, for the second lab report we were not able to work out a time to meet (with Easter break) to discuss my mistakes on the first lab report.

Cory's a good TA, and seems very knowledgeable on what he has to lecture. However, I felt his grading of the lab reports were unfair. He seemed to be grading for technical details like grammar, and even the shading of the graphs; he took off points just because I didn't have my lab report in color, and the shadings looked similar (but they were still different shadings). Additionally, the way he graded the results section is unlike any college science class I have ever taken. What I have always been taught is to display results, the values, and what was obtained, and trends, but never to analyze data, as that was always intended for the discussion. He took too many points for technical details, when the actual content of the paper (i.e. sources cited right? graphs have asteriks? shadings correct? prose?) is what I think should really matter.

Please provide feedback for these contributors:

Dr. Beatty, Optometrist

This was my favorite speaker. I was really interested in the topic area and I hope to continue communication with him.

One of my favorite demonstrations! Dr. Beatty was interesting and the demonstrations informative and fun.

One of my favorite lecturers. His interactive activities gave us a better understanding of the tests used by optometrists and ophthalmologists.

Dr. Beatty was awesome and gave an engaging lecture and it was great that he allowed us to look into his eyes. His clinical stories were very interesting.

He was great and I really enjoyed his help and lecture.

I greatly enjoyed all the procedures and demonstrations Dr. Beatty showed. His lecture on the eye is one of the most memorable and interesting lectures we had in this lab so please continue to bring him back for future students.

I thought Dr. Beatty was very enthusiastic and helpful during the lab because he interacted with us and I learned a lot from him.

He got me very interested in this subject matter and was very fun with his demos.

Very helpful. Nice to see the eye from a professional point of view.

very interactive and spirited speaker,

It was so cool to finally understand everything that an optometrist checks on in patients. Seeing physiology applied like that was definitely a unique and helpful learning experience.

He had a nice and concise presentation. I liked all the demonstration we were able to do.

Extremely knowledgeable, I learned a lot from him

I really enjoyed the demos that he brought in.

Cool eye dilation.

Great! Very optimistic.

very interactive and fun to work with.

Dr. Beatty was a good lecturer and provided relevant information.

He seemed to be very enthusiastic about his profession.


"1" (highest rating)


ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them.

Prof. Shornick, Biology Professor

Dr. Shornick's lecture was another very fascinating subject. I really enjoyed hearing about the immune system and response and how her research is contributing to the understanding of that field. She was also great in helping with the lab.

Dr. Shornick did a great job lecturing and explaining what we were doing during the experiment and why we were doing it.

She was very helpful during the mice lab and taught us how to handle them.

Professor Shornick's lecture aided in my understanding of the subject material for that lab and found her lecture helpful when studying for the midterm.

I have Dr. Shornick for my immunology class and she is a top-notch professor.

Very good at explaining why we were doing what we doing.

The rat lab was great and she explained it well.

Dr. Shornick is a great lecturer and it was cool to hear about the research she does and work with the mice.

Very helpful lecture, especially because I am also taking her immunology class

She did a great job during lecture and had a very fun lab.

Very engaging in the insulin lab. Very interesting.

Dr. Shornick's lecture and lab were interesting.

knowledgeable and nice, want to take her class now

Dr. Shornick was a good lecturer and answered our questions.

Great presentation and good speaker.

Good information provided.


Although our mouse died, it was nice to learn about how to anesthetize a mouse and to allow those of us who were untrained to work with them still learn about hormones via these mice.

Great Professor

"1" (highest rating)

Good, but not very engaging lecture

Good lecturer; maybe it's the way she lectures, but she seemed to be rolling her eyes at us, or seemed impatient, which was a little bit uncomfortable.

ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them.

Prof. Buchanan, Psychology Professor

I absolutely loved Dr. Buchanan's lecture. It was informative but also interesting in the way he explained it.

Very interesting speaker. I really enjoyed the lab this week.

Dr. Buchanan was very engaging. I liked the interactive aspect of his lecture.

His lecture topic was very interesting, and I thought he delivered it in an easy-to-follow manner.

Professor Buchanan's lecture was helpful in interpreting the graphs of this lab and he had some interesting stories and facts in his lecture.

I really enjoyed Dr. Buchanan's lecture since it is something seldom talked about.

Prof. Buchanan was funny and gave us a great overview of a topic that I've never heard of before.

His information was very informative and interesting to listen to.

It is always nice to see a psychology professor who can lecture about the biological side of his topic.

Interesting and involved the audience

Good lecture on the GSR. Very fun and informative.

I have had Dr. Buchanan for a psychology class and found him to be extremely helpful.

Great presentation!

Passionate about Psychology

Interesting lecture. Very informative.


Very passionate about research work. Extremely interesting presentation.


Dr. Buchanan was interesting and provided cool facts about neuroscience. He was a good lecturer.


"1" (highest rating)

ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them.

Prof. Panneton, Pharmacology and Physiology Professor

Very informative. I really liked the topics discussed.

Great lecturer, engaging.

The mammalian diving reflex was something I had't learned much about until this lab and found it to be really interesting. I enjoyed Professor Penneton's lecture, however, it was a bit long.


He did not come to lab to lecture, but based upon on lecture recording, he seemed knowledgeable, but a little boring.

Interesting lecture. Very informative.

He seemed very knowledgeable.

Brought a different perspective to class


Prof. Panneton was extremely knowledgable.

Interesting presentation.

His presentation was informative but I think he simplified it a little too much for us.

"1" (highest rating)


This lecture was good.

Lecture made some interesting points but was a little dry

I thought that this was one of the more monotone and boring of lectures but informative nonetheless.

Did not show up, but his slides were interesting.

Just listened to lecture. Helpful and informative

Where was he? He was a very good lecturer and seemed really knowledgeable though, in his recording.

I don't think he came to class?

ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them. The recordings of lectures for those who didn't visit class were not as interesting because it is hard to stay focused when you are listening to a lecture-still provided good information.

Dr. Itoku, Urologist

Entertaining and very knowledgeable about renal health. My favorite guest lecturer.

Dr. Itoku was perhaps my favorite presenter just because of how enthusiastic and engaging he was. He gave us great insight into an oft forgotten field and showed us the importance of urine.

Urology is something I never hear much about, but Dr. Itoku's enthusiasm for the subject got me excited about the subject. I perhaps learned more from him than I did with any of the other guest lectures because he was so engaging and excited.

Dr. Itoku helped make Urology interesting. He offered some very insightful pieces of information and gave me a better understanding of the urinary system. I also enjoyed how he lectured with a combination of myths, factoids, and jokes. He was a very great guest.

Dr. Itoku's lecture was another one of my favorites. He had a great personality and presented the subject in an interesting, relevant, and easy to understand manner. I can't say that I have ever been particularly interested in Urology, but I thoroughly enjoyed his lecture.

This was a great lecture. Dr. Itoku was extremely engaging and willing to answer questions.

Super pleasant and very nice. good conversationalist.

Dr. Itoku was very knowledgeable and provided interesting facts about urology.

I really liked his lecture. It was very informative, but he was also funny and entertaining.

One of my favorite guest speakers, very interesting

I really enjoyed learning about what he discussed and about his perspective on medicine in relation to what he does.

Very interesting and funny lecture.

Had a lot of interesting things to say. Never knew how cool urology was.

Awesome lecturer and very engaging. Learning about urine was really interesting.

Great presentation and really fun to hear his personal stories as a physician.

Dr. Itoku was very well spoken and made urology very interesting.

This was my second favorite speaker. He was very informative about realistic medical concepts. He also gave good advice.

Really funny!

Excellent and very engaging

Dr. Itoku was a great presenter.

Very interactive and interesting.

"1" (highest rating)

ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them.

Amaeir Abu Irqeba, Biology Ph.D. student, Confocal demonstration

This person did an excellent job on explaining confocal microscopy. I was actually very impressed in his thorough explanation of the microscope and how it works. It was better than a textbook and my MCB professor's explanation. (although the microscope was not working at the time, so we didn't actually get to see a demonstration)

He did an excellent job familiarizing us with a machine most of us had no experience with, considering the time he had given to do so.

This was a really interesting lab. I enjoyed listening to the speaker.

did a good job even though the technical aspects slightly went over my head.

Amaeir was very knowledgeable about microscopes and answered all of our questions.

Very helpful in understanding the microscope

Made sure to tell us how it worked. Very informative.

Being able to see a confocal microscope and have it demonstrated was helpful to get an idea of how it works.

Very nice and explained things well.

I have used the confocal many times working in Dr. Spencer's Lab but the demonstration was very informative.

Excellent demonstration.

Helpful in learning about the confocal demonstration.

He was courteous during the demo.

"1" (highest rating)

He didn't seem that enthusiastic about presenting to us the microscope but it was a cool demo.

Mildly COnfusing


ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them.

Craig Hill, Biology Ph.D. student, Metabolism in the painted turtle

The lecture was quite informative and interesting

Very detailed and informative. Good presentation.

Very clear points and well organized slides

Good lecture and informative

Very interested in the future work of Dr. Warren

He seemed very knowledgeable.

Craig's lecture was also interesting and easy to understand. It also aided in my understanding of the subject matter.

I have heard Dr. Warren talk about the painted turtles before in Tribeta Club. I find the turtles extremely interesting and impressive.

Did not meet, but his talk was interesting

He didn't come to lab to lecture, but based upon his lecture recording, he was knowledgeable.

Very interesting presentation.

This one was not as helpful since it was just an audio recording of the individual speaking.

Unique, interesting presentation.

"1" (highest rating)

Was not present, but his podcast reflected that he had done a lot of research in this area.

I might be wrong but I think this might have been the recorded lecture. The material was interesting, but it was boring to follow if that makes sense.

It was hard to hear the podcast of his presentation.

I don't think he came?

Not present. OK lecturer.

ALL of the guest speakers were great! Very interesting, I learned a lot from them. The recordings of lectures for those who didn't visit class were not as interesting because it is hard to stay focused when you are listening to a lecture-still provided good information.

Make a statement about the relevance of SLU's 5 dimensions to this course and its assessment

As one comment

I think that this lab embodies all aspects of the SLU's 5 dimensions. The scholarship required to succeed in the course is apparent and the material is intellectually engaging. Working as a group in lab, community building and leadership is a must. Discussions about the ethics of working with animals is in concordance with the spirituality and values dimension.

This course definitely addressed all 5 dimensions and expanded my experience and skill in all of them. I really enjoyed the course and I will encourage others to do so as well.

The course definitely stressed the values of scholarhip, knowledge, intellectual inquiry, communication, and community building in ways that other courses do not. Group work helped build some of these dimensions.

This course effectively integrated knowledge of physiology, communication and community building with lab partners, leadership in the classroom, as well as discussing ethical values within scientific experimentation.

Has it all. Extremely awesome and fun lab, and some of the stories Dr. Stark gave were laugh-out-loud hilarious, and somehow still extremely relevant to what the topic was. Made a new friend, knew everyone else.

I definitely think this course exemplified the first two dimensions and possibly the leadership one as well. Dr. Stark himself was a good example of the other ones, tying the others ones into. In such a rigorous scientific course, it is hard to bring in community, service, or spirituality, so I was not disappointing at all.

I feel that this lab did a great job of fostering not only scholarship and intellectual inquiry but also in communication and community building. Lab, especially thanks to the groups and the open nature of the class, was very fun and engaging with group members and others in the class helped make it more interactive and easy going. Can't really say anything about leadership and service or spirituality and values but overall, I learned a lot from this class and will miss it very much.

BIOL 347 General Physiology Lab touches on all 5 of SLU's dimensions. It works to further scholarship through intellectual inquiry. This must be communicated in order to spread knowledge to the community and beyond. Working as a group has taught lab members to take initiative and leadership roles. It occurs in a zone where all types of spirituality and values are respected.

The course was a great overall reflection of SLU's 5 dimensions.

I feel that this course demonstrated all five values, but especially the second as communication and intellectual inquiry were required for successful learning.

In this course, we covered several of the 5 dimensions of SLU, including scholarship and knowledge as well as intellectual inquiry and communication. With science courses, it is harder to cover the other dimensions because of the structure of the science course.

Contributes to 1, 2, 3 very well but course does not hit 4 or 5 at all. Learned a lot of new physiology and enjoyed the lab experience.


1. Scholarship and Knowledge

Scholarship was definitely promoted, especially through the lab reports, which required extensive research on scientific literature. This, combined, with the hands-on learning experience contributed to our overall knowledge.

This course was very helpful in both. I gain more hands on knowledge that would have not been possible in a lecture course.

This course absolutely provided me with more knowledge than I had coming into the course.

This aspect of SLU's 5 dimensions was definitely fulfilled through the material we covered and what I've learned as a result.

Gained a wide scope of knowledge from this course

Yes! Definitely fulfilled by this class in discussing how the knowledge can be applied to the real world.

The class provided a wonderful base of knowledge for the class

Definitely learned a lot from this class.

very relevant

2. Intellectual Inquiry and Communication

Since there was a lot of information in the class, needed to look for help ourselves to make sure we understood the material._

This course pushed me to learn more than the minimum about all of the topics discussed, especially through the lab reports.

I always felt as if I could ask questions and further my understanding

the class allowed questions and interaction with the professor

Overall the communication in this course was good, if I had a question in lab I was able to ask one of the T.A's or yourself to clarify.

Working in a group naturally facilitates this dimension-this was done well in class._

Questions were always asked during lecture, and the experiments required communication between partners.

I think this course, with its hands on approach, has made me more inquisitive about what I'm learning and helped foster better methods of seeking answers.

very relevant_

3. Community Building

Working in a group aided in my community building and I realized the members of my group are in several of my other classes. We now talk about those classes and help each other with questions regarding those classes.

Working in a lab group and cooperating with the lab members, TAs and the professor has helped in building communication skills and creating a sense of belonging in the biology field.

I got to know my lab partners very well and learned to work well with them.

With the constant communication and collaboration, there was a sense of community building.

We worked together as a lab group and as a class, which makes it a bit like us being a community?

the class helped develop good group working skills

Working as teams will help with future community building situations

somewhat relevant_

Not present, but like Spirituality and Values-I'm not sure how this could be incorporated into a science lab where we focus on experimentation._

4. Leadership and Service

Each person in my group has different strengths and weaknesses so we all took turns leading different aspects of the experiment in order to complete everything in a timely manner.

Our lab group shared the leadership position throughout the semester

Completing experiments required students to step up and claim certain roles, in order to work towards a common goal.

Leadership qualities are certainly developed in this course-you have to take the initiative with your group to complete the lab and answer questions. Also necessary for the two lab reports._

the class tested ones ability to take charge in a group

Sometimes would have to take the lead for a certain experiment, but not much service being done.

not particularly relevant_

Leadership and service was only lightly touched upon through leading certain labs or helping other students who were confused.

5. Spirituality and Values

I think working together with my group and team building contributed to an overall sense of spirituality and values obtained form my four years at SLU.

Procedures, even ones involving animals, were 100% ethical, based on protocol guidelines. Interactions between students were good-willed and never malicious, making my overall experience a positive one.

This course actually brought up a lot of bioethical topics to which I had not been exposed.

We did speak of ethical points during the semester, especially with the mice lab

the class never pushed the student to do what they did not want to do

I think this is hard to incorporate into any science course, so I'm not sure how this could be emphasized more in Physiology Lab.

not particularly relevant_

This course did not exactly challenge me spiritually._

I didn't really see spirituality being relevant to this class.

What changes would you propose for next year?

I did not really see anything wrong with what the course entailed. We covered a majority of the different topics in physiology and the labs was very interesting.

Just keep doing what you're doing because it's working!

I really enjoyed this course! I enjoyed having guest speakers so maybe include more of those.

No changes!

Had fun in the course and learned a lot along the way!

I do not think the lab needs to be changed at all. Maybe all equipment should be checked to be functional more often but other than that I thought the course was great! Dr. Stark, Thank you for a great semester. I had a great time and learned a lot.

The only changes I would propose are perhaps to find a way to make the lectures at the start of class a bit more interesting. I'm not really sure how you could go about doing that but just something I noted. Also, using tegrity instead of podcast lectures would be very useful. Overall though, all the labs were very fun and the format of the class is great as well. Thank you again for the great semester,

Better working hardware and finalized lab procedures, if possible.

Exams that arent as hard!!

Perhaps shorten the pulmonary lab.

I wish the lab lectures were a little more engaging as well as the labs being better prepared.

Great course overall, I would recommend to other students. Overall, better organization would help facilitate learning and teamwork because sometimes it was frustrating to not really know what we were supposed to do or if we were following the lab procedure exactly as it was laid out in the lab notebook. This confusion could be prevented if the instructor and TAs were in better communication about what is going to happen each day in lab. The test material could be covered more in lecture-I felt that I was studying a lot of information that was never discussed in class and was only in random documents on the syllabus/archive.

More thorough explanation of lab procedure at the beginning of labs.

The only suggestion I have would be a clearer outline regarding the expectations of the lab reports. Other than that I really enjoyed this class, especially the guest speakers. Please keep bringing those back for the following years because they were extremely helpful and interesting.

I would suggest switching up the groups so that it allows for people to work with new people with different skills so that the jobs that people have in the group alter each time and they get to learn from new people.

The exams asked far to much of students for a 2 credit hour class, and the lab reports were not very informative prior to turning them in.

Change the grading system for the lab reports to be based on content rather than technical details.

I think the last lab can be combined with the basic cardiac function lab. Probably it's a good idea to replace some old equipments.

As mentioned above, there seemed to be a lot of extra words or sections in the labs which we did not actually do or were only slightly relevant to the lab. I would suggest trimming those out, partially to save paper, but to also present a more concise and readable lab. Perhaps emphasizing autonomy as well to allow people to work at their own pace, especially at the beginning. Overall, I found this a very enjoyable class, which is part of the reason I would like to work in it next year.

I would try to make some of the labs seem less chaotic by having people go to different stations, like we did in the sensory lab. Overall, I liked the labs, and they were fun. The lecturing was good, and the TAs were helpful.

I think a review/overview of what materials are expected to be on the test would be helpful. The syllabus site has numerous links and handouts that are sometimes irrelevant to the midterm or final, yet it is unclear whether students have to know it or not. Additionally, there is a lot of material in the lectures so a review would be helpful. I also think finding a better way to match up the outlines with the slides would be better because it is hard to follow which section of the outline notes correspond to which slide in a lecture.

I would choose a different lab to do that first lab report on. Also, my lab group and I had a lot of problems with the equipment not working, so something to fix that problem too.

Edit the lab notebook so it's one packet per week instead of 2 or 3 sometimes. Edit lab notebook such that parts to be skipped are taken out. Write clearer exams.

More organized outlines and notes would make the exams easier to study for.


There were 2 tests of 50 points each:
Midterm exam: Mean=38.04, High=45.5, Low=21
Final exam: Mean=48, High=60.5, Low=17.5
There were 2 lab reports of 50 points each:
First lab report: Mean=44.8, High=49.5, Low=28.5
Second lab report: Mean=44.9, High=50, Low=40.5
Credit was given for the lab notebook and all students earned 50 points

The grading curve was 3.73, more generous than in the past.


In one request, one reminder, and one final reminder, I obtained replies from 26 out of 47 students

Sometimes it seems to me (and to many students) that the dimensions were handed down by an anonymous administrator, fluent in drivel, who did not know that there were science courses in the college. However, there are some heartwarming comments based on all five dimensions. There was definitely a time when an assessment such as this needed to address how the course addressed the five dimensions. Is that still the case? I don't know, and nobody has told me.


(1) Clearly the lab notebook needs work

(2) Despite the high score, the lectures need some work

Minor considerations:

(1) I like the suggestion to label the links that need to be printed each week

(2) Possibly the Photoshop coverage should be eliminated

this page was last revised 6/3/ 2015

Return to Stark home page

Return to syllabus

Return to Stark Assessment page