View Summary
The survey has 18 entries. Show details of
all entries
Advanced Research Methods
Course Evaluation
This survey is strictly confidential and the responses will only
be analyzed in an aggregate format. I greatly appreciate your time
to answer this questionnaire as your feedback is extremely valuable
for my evolution through academia. Any questions or comments, please
contact me through joao@vt.edu.
Thanks!!!
Administration of the class and
organization of materials:
excellent 6 (33%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 6 (33%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Content and clarity of the course
syllabus:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 7 (39%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 0 ( 0%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Clarity of student responsibilities and
requirements:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Organization of the course blackboard
website:
excellent 8 (44%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 0 ( 0%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Usefulness of the weekly emails with
overview of readings:
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 2 (11%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Logical sequence of the topics
discussed:
excellent 8 (44%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Please review the following list of
topics addressed in this course and check any topics that you found
particularly useful.
Course Overview and Participatory
Course Appraisal 7 (39%)
Introduction to Qualitative
Methods 12 (67%)
Finding Your Paradigm 8 (44%)
Linking Research Objectives and
Questions 10 (56%)
Choosing the Right Tradition & The
Research Proposal 12 (67%)
Overview of Methods and
Sampling 9 (50%)
Verbal Data: Interviewing and Focus
Groups 11 (61%)
Visual Data and Introduction to Data
Analysis 9 (50%)
Data Analysis: Managing, Coding, and
Theme Development 9 (50%)
Data Analysis: Making Meaning &
Questioning Results 11 (61%)
Reliability and
Validity 11 (61%)
Writing Qualitative Research/Reporting
Findings 7 (39%)
Ethics 9 (50%)
Applying Qualitative Research to
Planning and Policy 5 (28%)
Class Presentations 9 (50%)
Please review the following list of
topics addressed in this course and check any topics that you would
remove from the list.
Course Overview and Participatory
Course Appraisal 0 ( 0%)
Introduction to Qualitative
Methods 0 ( 0%)
Finding Your Paradigm 1 ( 6%)
Linking Research Objectives and
Questions 0 ( 0%)
Choosing the Right Tradition & The
Research Proposal 0 ( 0%)
Overview of Methods and
Sampling 0 ( 0%)
Verbal Data: Interviewing and Focus
Groups 0 ( 0%)
Visual Data and Introduction to Data
Analysis 1 ( 6%)
Data Analysis: Managing, Coding, and
Theme Development 1 ( 6%)
Data Analysis: Making Meaning &
Questioning Results 0 ( 0%)
Reliability and
Validity 1 ( 6%)
Writing Qualitative Research/Reporting
Findings 1 ( 6%)
Ethics 0 ( 0%)
Applying Qualitative Research to
Planning and Policy 2 (11%)
Class Presentations 2 (11%)
Readings
Please rank each of the required texts in terms of their
usefulness in understanding Qualitative
Methods:
Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative Research
Design: An Interactive Approach
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 1 ( 6%)
good 7 (39%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research
and Case Study Applications in Education
excellent 6 (33%)
very good 8 (44%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 0 ( 0%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Denzin N. and Lincoln, Y. (2003).
Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials
excellent 2 (11%)
very good 2 (11%)
good 8 (44%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 1 ( 6%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Overall, how many of the assigned
materials did you carefully read?
all of them 0 ( 0%)
almost all / skimmed a
few 6 (33%)
more than half 7 (39%)
about half 3 (17%)
only read a few 1 ( 6%)
none 0 ( 0%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
Assignments
Please rank each of the assignments in terms of their usefulness
in understanding Qualitative Methods:
Journal Article Analysis:
excellent 2 (11%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 7 (39%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Interview exercise:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 8 (44%)
good 2 (11%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Field observation exercise:
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Journal:
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 3 (17%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Research Proposal:
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 7 (39%)
good 1 ( 6%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Presentation:
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
To what degree were you able to relate
your research interests to the class assignments:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
Would you have preferred to take a final
exam covering the entire class materials, or to keep a journal
similar to what you did?
I would prefer to take a final
exam 2 (11%)
I would prefer to keep a
journal 14 (78%)
Other:
1 ( 6%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
Regarding the class facilitation, how
would you rate your collaboration with your partner and the
instructor brainstorming creative ways to introduce certain topics
to the class?
excellent 10 (56%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 0 ( 0%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
As the class facilitator, how would you
rate your experience for being responsible to introduce a certain
topic to the class?
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 7 (39%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
From a student perspective, how did you
feel about having other students being responsible for a portion of
the class?
excellent 4 (22%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 2 (11%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Overall how do you think the student
facilitation contributed to the success of the course?
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 1 ( 6%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Activities
Please rank each of the class activities in terms of their
usefulness in understanding Qualitative
Methods
Interviewing a partner (day 1)
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 6 (33%)
fair 5 (28%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Drawing a qualitative methods diagram
(day 2)
excellent 4 (22%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
'What is your paradigm' quiz (day
3)
excellent 4 (22%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 7 (39%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Development of a conceptual framework
(day 4)
excellent 4 (22%)
very good 7 (39%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Focus groups simulation (day 7)
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Coding puzzle pieces (day 10)
excellent 2 (11%)
very good 1 ( 6%)
good 8 (44%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
Using unconventional voices (day
13).
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 2 (11%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 5 (28%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 1 ( 6%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Group discussions on ethically sensitive
research (day 14).
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 6 (33%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Research proposal peer-review
process:
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 6 (33%)
fair 3 (17%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Guest Speakers
Please rank each of the guest speakers in terms of their
usefulness in understanding Qualitative
Methods
Earthea Bubanje-Nance - The materials of
qualitative Research
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Kyle Beidler - Phenomenology
excellent 4 (22%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 7 (39%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Ramya Ramanath - I though I
belonged
excellent 5 (28%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 8 (44%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Jon Bohland - Critical Theory and
Cultural Studies
excellent 10 (56%)
very good 2 (11%)
good 2 (11%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 2 (11%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
David Moore - training in human
subjects' research
excellent 3 (17%)
very good 1 ( 6%)
good 9 (50%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Degree to which subject matter was made
stimulating or relevant by instructor:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Instructor's enthusiasm:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 6 (33%)
good 2 (11%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Success in communicating or explaining
subject matter by instructor:
excellent 8 (44%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Did you find it a problem the fact that
the instructor's first language is not English?
not at all 17 (94%)
moderately 1 ( 6%)
substantially 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Instructor's contribution to
discussion:
excellent 10 (56%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 2 (11%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Instructor's preparation for
class:
excellent 8 (44%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Instructor's ability to deal with
student difficulties:
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Instructor's concern and respect for
students as individuals:
excellent 11 (61%)
very good 5 (28%)
good 0 ( 0%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The challenge
How would you rate the following when compared to the rest of
your graduate experience:
The number of required readings:
much higher 2 (11%)
higher 7 (39%)
average 9 (50%)
lower 0 ( 0%)
much lower 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The amount of work:
much higher 1 ( 6%)
higher 11 (61%)
average 6 (33%)
lower 0 ( 0%)
much lower 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The intellectual challenge
presented:
much higher 2 (11%)
higher 5 (28%)
average 10 (56%)
lower 1 ( 6%)
much lower 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The amount of effort you put into this
course:
much higher 4 (22%)
higher 9 (50%)
average 3 (17%)
lower 2 (11%)
much lower 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Your involvement in this course:
much higher 1 ( 6%)
higher 9 (50%)
average 7 (39%)
lower 1 ( 6%)
much lower 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
What grade do you expect in this
course?
A 7 (39%)
A- 5 (28%)
B+ 1 ( 6%)
B 4 (22%)
B- 1 ( 6%)
C+ 0 ( 0%)
C 0 ( 0%)
C- 0 ( 0%)
D+ 0 ( 0%)
D 0 ( 0%)
D- 0 ( 0%)
F 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Overall
How would you rate the following when compared to the rest of
your graduate experience:
The instructor's effectiveness in
teaching the subject matter:
excellent 8 (44%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 5 (28%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 1 ( 6%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The instructor's contribution to the
course:
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Overall rating of the
instructor:
excellent 9 (50%)
very good 3 (17%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The course content:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 6 (33%)
fair 1 ( 6%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Conduciveness of class atmosphere to
student learning:
excellent 7 (39%)
very good 4 (22%)
good 3 (17%)
fair 4 (22%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
The course overall was:
excellent 10 (56%)
very good 2 (11%)
good 4 (22%)
fair 2 (11%)
poor 0 ( 0%)
very poor 0 ( 0%)
no answer 0 ( 0%)
Was this class intellectually
stimulating? Did it stretch your thinking?
Yes 15 (83%)
No 2 (11%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
In which program are you currently
enrolled?
MURP 11 (61%)
MPIA 6 (33%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
What year?
1st 9 (50%)
2nd 8 (44%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
Was this a required course for
you?
Yes 13 (72%)
No 4 (22%)
no answer 1 ( 6%)
