WRTG500: Introduction to Graduate Studies in Written Communication
Fall 2015 | Section 000 (26710) | M 6:30-9:10 | Course Materials | Eastern Michigan University

Enrollment: 15
Forms Completed: 14 (93%)

Core Items (A: Much Above Average, B: Above Average, C: Average, D: Below Average, E: Much Below Average)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
Overall Rating of the Teaching Effectiveness of this Instructor 6/43 3/21 5/36 0/0 0/0 14
Overall Rating of this Course 5/36 4/29 5/36 0/0 0/0 14

Additional Items (SA: Strongly Agree, A: Agree, U: Undecided, D: Disagree, SD: Strongly Disagree)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
My instructor seems well-prepared for class 8/57 6/43 0/0 0/0 0/0 14
My instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations 6/43 5/36 2/14 0/0 0/0 14
The instructor is reasonably accessible outside the classroom 7/50 3/21 3/21 1/7 0/0 14
The instructor has stimulated my thinking 7/50 5/36 2/14 0/0 0/0 14
The goals of the course are clearly stated and consistently pursued 6/43 6/43 1/7 1/7 0/0 14
My instructor respects students regardless of sex, age or race 9/69 2/15 1/8 0/0 1/8 13


What did you like most about this instructor and course?

  1. I like Derek's enthusiasm and his knowledge of so many ideas in the field.
  2. ---
  3. Prompted productive conversations that helped us navigate the field we were entering. He was extremely accessible and challenged us productively.
  4. Supplemental readings/guest speakers/his experience in the field/profession
  5. Great readings that fostered great discussions.
  6. The exploratory nature; the class helped me explore potential topics of interest and future studies. I also appreciate having the various faculty as guests to explain their research and interests.
  7. It was very laid back and relaxed.
  8. Derek is super excited and loves what he does. That's an awesome quality to have.
  9. I liked how personable Derek was in his instruction, how me made everyone feel welcome and brought about an interesting construction.
  10. The instructor had plenty of anecdotes and examples to give to fill up the lengthy time block.
  11. Very likable personality for instructor. Enjoyed visiting professors.
  12. One of the things I liked most was the lack of "busy work" and noise, and that instead there was a centralized focus on particular assignments to build upon and research.
  13. Derek has a plethora of knowledge and experience to pull from in order to assist us in this course, and I also liked how the course allowed me to explore my interests as they relate to this discipline.
  14. Derek is friendly and personable. He clearly knows a lot about the content of the course. I liked the feedback on drafts before the final draft was due.

What did you dislike most about this instructor and course?

  1. Reading assignments not linked to my interests.
  2. Not enough group work.
  3. The course to, maybe, lose focus toward the end.
  4. Difficult to gauge various student interests. Hard to focus on just one.
  5. Very heavy on teaching of writing side.
  6. NA
  7. How often the class got sidetracked from the original class plan/outline.
  8. The course really lacked professional writing, it focused on the teaching of writing.
  9. I would have liked to begin my studies in Written Communication with this class. When I began last semester I would have like to have this class available.
  10. The matrix assignment seemed very scattered and ineffective. We were told to explore our interests and then forced to adhere to guides at the end.
  11. Trying to cover too much in too brief a time.
  12. I can't say that I truly disliked anything. My concept of methodologies is slightly hazy, but I figure that will be elaborated upon in 621.
  13. Though I enjoyed the structure of this course, I would have liked a more defined and specific approach as it relates to my project. However, I may just being selfish here.
  14. The overview aspect of the course was overwhelming. While articles were on a variety of relevant topics, each article was not necessarily an appropriate introductory article. For example, the archivist article was not an intro level text on archiving. I needed more background to understand most of the articles. A lot of time was invested in readings that was not recouped in class. Discussions seemed to be around readings, not about them.

    I felt some topics were glossed over because so many of the students had taken Derek's courses before and he didn't want to be repetetive instead of catering towards the new people in an intro course.

What constructive suggestions do you have for this instructor or course?

  1. In class work time for projects were helpful. Maybe more?
  2. ---
  3. TPC stuff seemed to be overlooked.
  4. More work time in class.
  5. Integrate more about tech comm. I love the matrix, but maybe a little more guidance would serve some best.
  6. NA
  7. Make clear project requirements from the start.
  8. I would recommend a medium between the two tracks. The project was too vague, needs more direction.
  9. ---
  10. No more matrix assignment, maybe the addition of a group project.
  11. More explanations on theories and theorists. Explain the theories - they're confusing for 1st year rhet students.
  12. ---
  13. I would have liked more chances for in-class activities that allowed us to work together in groups to approach the matrix project.
  14. Please reconsider the order of readings. We read a critique of keywords before reading about keywords. Include information on visual rhetoric if important to presentation.

Additional Comments

  1. ---
  2. ---
  3. ---
  4. ---
  5. ---
  6. ---
  7. ---
  8. ---
  9. ---
  10. ---
  11. ---
  12. ---
  13. Extended work time in class to gain a deeper insight into the projects would have been beneficial, too. However, I understand we only have so much time in a semester, and I especially enjoyed meeting the various faculty in our department.
  14. ---