Faculty Development Instruments

Teacher/Faculty Workshop Evaluations

Instrument 5: Evaluation of Workshop by Participants

Project: Interfacing Workshops for IBM Compatible PCs in the College Physics Laboratory
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Funding Source: NSF: Undergraduate Faculty Enhancement (DUE)

Purpose: To follow up with each workshop participant and determine workshop impact

Administered To: Faculty members who teach computer-interfaced introductory physics experiments to undergraduates in physics laboratories

Topics Covered:

• Facilities: accommodations
• Impact on Outcomes: classroom activities, equipment use, instructional methods
• Implementation Activities: curriculum/materials use
• Workshop Evaluation: areas for program improvement, content, follow-up, materials, methods, satisfaction

Format/Length: 19 questions total, 15 closed- and 4 open-ended. Formats include checklist and Likert scales.

Interfacing Workshop for IBM-Compatible PCs in the College Physics Laboratory

EVALUATION OF WORKSHOP BY PARTICIPANTS

1. Please check the activities you have been able to accomplish since the workshop
   1. Verified that the Nat2c program correctly reads voltages from the printer port of your computer. (Easiest done via 'Prefs, Info, Hardware Check', then 'Check the Hardware' menu items).

   2. Taken data from clip leads and displayed a graph of data.

   3. Conducted a demonstration experiment using BIB voltage inputs for class or lab

   4. Used a shaft encoder, and verified that data comes in successfully

   5. Used a shaft encoder along with voltage input

   6. Used a sonic ranger with the BIB board

   7. Used a sonic ranger plus voltage input

2. If you have run any experiments in class or laboratory with the BIB board, please briefly describe them.

    

3. Based on your experience to this point, would you recommend a workshop like this one (which might run again the Summer of 1996) to a colleague?

   ______  no  ______  perhaps    yes  _______  would strongly recommend  _______

4. Please evaluate various areas of the workshop on a scale of 1-5:

   1:very poor  2:weak  3:ok  4:good  5:outstanding

   a) Presentation of material
   b) Quality of information provided
   c) Quality of hardware (BIB board)
   d) Quality of software provided
   e) Room and board
   f) Follow-up activities
   g) Other aspects (please explain)

   (additional space for explanation)

    

5. Please identify deficiencies in the workshop or its follow-up which should be remedied.

    

6. Please express your overall view of the workshop, its value, impact on your teaching, your laboratory, and any other items you think are important.