67
Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI) Spring 2005 Prepared by: Office of Institutional Research August 9, 2005

Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Results of

Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)

Spring 2005

Prepared by: Office of Institutional Research August 9, 2005

Page 2: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Spring 2005

Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction

Table of Contents Executive Summary Overview Analysis of SEOI Questions Full-Time/Part-Time Academic Instructors ……………… Tab 1 Full-Time/Part-Time Workforce Instructors ……………... Tab 2 Learning Resources Results………………………………………... Tab 3 Means Reports Academic ………………………………………………………. Tab 4 Workforce ……………………………………………………… Tab 5 Appendices ……………………………………………………………. Tab 6 Instructor and Student Proctor Directions SEOI Survey How to Read the Individual Instructor Report Please assist us by sharing all or parts of this document with colleagues who might find it useful. You may contact Dr. Linda Gibbs, Director (713-718-8627),or Ray Golitko (713-718-8629) if you have any questions or comments on this material.

GB: ToC.doc Prepared 8/9/05

Page 3: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Executive Summary Spring 2005 Administration: The Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI) was administered to all full-time and part-time faculty. Approximately 96,055 surveys were sent out in 5,040 envelopes; 48,153 surveys were returned to the Office of Institutional Research. The return rate for the paper surveys was 50% including late submissions. Instructors’ reports were provided to academic and workforce deans on May 16, 2005. And the late SEOI surveys reports were provided to academic and workforce deans on August 11, 2005. Methods Used: The optical-scan survey instrument was created using ScanTools for Windows, by National Computer Systems. The scanned data were analyzed by OIR using SPSS 13.0, and individual instructor reports were prepared. Also provided to students with the questionnaires were student comment sheets, which were later returned in their original hand-written form to the instructors via their respective deans’ offices. Library data were analyzed by subject and location and provided to library chairs for their use.

Page 4: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005

In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated that they were ‘neutral’, ‘had no basis for judgment’ or simply did not respond to the question. In Part I, Evaluation of Instruction:

• The course requirements in the syllabus were clearly stated; 91.5% of students agreed and 1.5% disagreed.

• The textbook used for this course is suitable; 85.7% of respondents agreed while 3.1% disagreed.

• Other instructional materials (tapes, handouts, web sites, etc.) used in this course enhanced my learning of the subject matter; 79.1% of respondents agreed, and 4.6% disagreed.

In Part II, Evaluation of Instructor:

• The instructor asks test questions that deal with material that is covered in the course; 91.8% agreed or strongly agreed, and 2.4% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor communicates clearly; 88.3% agreed or strongly agreed, and 4.1% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The assignments were relevant to the course; 92.7% agreed or strongly agreed, and 1.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• My grades are an indication of learning; 84.3% agreed or strongly agreed, and 4.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor treats students with respect; 93.4% agreed or strongly agreed, and 1.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor is available for student consultation; 88.7% agreed or strongly agreed, and 2.3% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor grades impartially; 82.0% agreed or strongly agreed, and 6.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor gives me timely feedback on graded work; 87.0% agreed or strongly agreed, and 3.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

In Part III, Lab Evaluation: In the section below, students who indicated an opinion are calculated in the agreement/disagreement percentages; those who indicated ‘no basis for judgment’ or did not respond were assumed not to be enrolled in laboratory or clinical courses.

• The instructor explains appropriate safety procedures for this laboratory/clinical; 86.4% agreed or strongly agreed, and 2.4% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• The instructor links the laboratory exercises to lecture; 84.9% agreed or strongly agreed, and 2.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

In Part IV, Overall Evaluation:

• The instructor encourages me to become actively engaged in the learning process; 88.1% agreed or strongly agreed, and 3.1% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

• I would recommend this instructor to other students; 85.5% agreed or strongly agreed, and 5.4% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Page 5: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part I: Evaluation of Instruction

Question 1: The Course Requirements in the Syllabus Were Clearly Stated

1.6 1.7

91.2

7.2

91.5

6.80.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Yes (n=35028) Neutral (n=2703) No (n=625)Responses (Total=38,356)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 2: The Textbook Used For This Course is Suitable

11.93.0

85.1 86.2

10.8

3.00.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Yes (n=32018) Neutral (n=4262) No (n=1117)

Responses (Total=37,397)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q1&2.xls Prepared 8/18/2005

Page 6: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part I: Evaluation of Instruction

Question 3: Other Instructional Materials (Tapes, Handouts, Web Sites, etc.) Used in This Course Enhanced My Learning of the Subject Matter

78.8

16.64.6

17.45.1

77.6

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Yes (n=27610) Neutral (n=5979) No (n=1705)

Responses (Total=35,294)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q3.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 7: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 4: The Instructor Asks Test Questions That Deal With Material That is Covered in the Course

1.6

64.8

27.0

5.8 0.8

64.6

27.1

5.6 1.8 0.90.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=24860)

Agree(n=10391)

Neutral(n=2199)

Disagree(n=652)

StronglyDisagree(n=334)Responses (Total=38,436)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 5: The Instructor Communicates Clearly

2.67.5

25.0

63.9

1.1 1.73.28.1

25.3

61.6

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=24529)

Agree (n=9805) Neutral(n=3029)

Disagree(n=1114)

StronglyDisagree(n=540)Responses (Total=39,017)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q4&5.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 8: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 6: The Assignments Were Relevant to the Course

5.8

27.7

64.8

0.51.1 0.61.25.7

28.2

64.2

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=24972)

Agree(n=10816)

Neutral(n=2238)

Disagree(n=459)

StronglyDisagree(n=220)

Responses (Total=38,705)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 7: My Grades Are an Indication of My Learning

1.53.5

11.329.1

54.6

1.53.610.8

29.7

54.4

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=21071)

Agree(n=11369)

Neutral(n=4278)

Disagree(n=1354)

StronglyDisagree(n=580)Responses (Total=38,652)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q6&7.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 9: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 9: The Instructor is Available For Student Consultation

0.9

62.4

26.2

9.4 1.5 0.6

61.9

26.09.5

1.70.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=23344)

Agree (n=9792) Neutral(n=3535)

Disagree(n=591)

StronglyDisagree(n=291)Responses (Total=37,553)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 8: The Instructor Treats Students With Respect

0.80.71.15.0

22.1

71.1

1.14.6

21.8

71.7

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=27719)

Agree(n=8539)

Neutral(n=1875)

Disagree(n=425)

StronglyDisagree(n=288)Responses (Total=38,846)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q8&9.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 10: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 11: The Instructor Gives Me Timely Feedback on Graded Work

1.3

59.1

27.59.5

2.6

59.2

27.5

9.52.6 1.3

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=22577)

Agree(n=10510)

Neutral(n=3616)

Disagree(n=993)

StronglyDisagree(n=505)Responses (Total=38,201)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 10: The Instructor Grades Impartially

56.4

25.0 11.74.4 2.5 2.64.4

56.3

25.211.5

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=21029)

Agree(n=9359)

Neutral(n=4327)

Disagree(n=1655)

StronglyDisagree(n=934)Responses (Total=37,304)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q10&11.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 11: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 3: Lab Evaluation

Question 12: The Instructor Explains Appropriate Safety Procedures For This Laboratory/Clinical

0.9

58.1

26.8 12.5

1.7

57.6

27.4

12.2

1.9 0.90.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=9625)

Agree (n=4502) Neutral(n=2054)

Disagree(n=299)

StronglyDisagree(n=151)Responses (Total=16,631)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 13: The Instructor Links the Laboratory Exercises to Lecture

1.20.91.8

13.726.8

56.8

2.5

13.4

26.6

56.3

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=9337)

Agree (n=4402) Neutral(n=2244)

Disagree(n=349)

StronglyDisagree(n=178)

Responses (Total=16,510)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q12&13.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 12: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Academic - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 4: Overall Evaluation

Question 14: The Instructor Encourages Me to Become Actively Engaged in the Learning Process

1.12.09.3

26.2

61.4 60.4

1.22.39.2

26.9

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=23640)

Agree(n=10297)

Neutral(n=3588)

Disagree(n=823)

StronglyDisagree(n=439)Responses (Total=38,787)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 15: I Would Recommend This Instructor to Other Students

2.52.99.122.0

63.6

2.93.19.422.1

62.5

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=24316)

Agree(n=8474)

Neutral(n=3552)

Disagree(n=1145)

StronglyDisagree(n=1039)Responses (Total=38,526)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Acad, Acad_FTPT_Q14&15.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 13: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part I: Evaluation of Instruction

Question 1: The Course Requirements in the Syllabus Were Clearly Stated

1.1 1.3

92.7

6.2

91.7

7.00.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Yes (n=8027) Neutral (n=560) No (n=102)Responses (Total=8,689)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 2: The Textbook Used For This Course is Suitable

10.63.6

85.8 86.3

9.83.9

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Yes (n=7058) Neutral (n=847) No (n=304)

Responses (Total=8,209)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q1&2.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 14: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part I: Evaluation of Instruction

Question 3: Other Instructional Materials (Tapes, Handouts, Web Sites, etc.) Used in This Course Enhanced My Learning of the Subject Matter

83.4

13.2

3.4

14.8

3.6

81.6

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Yes (n=6654) Neutral (n=1102) No (n=280)

Responses (Total=8,036)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q3.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 15: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 4: The Instructor Asks Test Questions That Deal With Material That is Covered in the Course

1.4

63.3

28.8

5.9 0.7

63.8

28.6

6.11.2 0.4

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5475)

Agree (n=2477) Neutral (n=514) Disagree(n=113)

StronglyDisagree(n=52)Responses (Total=8,631)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 5: The Instructor Communicates Clearly

2.56.6

26.3

63.8

0.8 1.62.57.9

25.2

62.8

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5616)

Agree (n=2294) Neutral (n=618) Disagree(n=221)

StronglyDisagree (n=96)Responses (Total=8,845)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q4&5.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 16: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 6: The Assignments Were Relevant to the Course

5.0

28.0

65.5

0.41.1 0.40.64.6

26.7

67.7

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5803)

Agree (n=2418) Neutral (n=428) Disagree(n=82)

StronglyDisagree(n=32)

Responses (Total=8,763)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 7: My Grades Are an Indication of My Learning

1.43.3

9.8

29.6

55.9

0.62.39.4

29.1

58.6

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=4944)

Agree(n=2563)

Neutral(n=842)

Disagree(n=260)

StronglyDisagree(n=100)Responses (Total=8,709)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q6&7.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 17: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 9: The Instructor is Available For Student Consultation

0.6

65.3

26.0

7.0 1.2 0.5

65.2

24.68.1

1.50.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5622)

Agree (n=2203) Neutral (n=635) Disagree(n=110)

StronglyDisagree (n=47)Responses (Total=8,617)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 8: The Instructor Treats Students With Respect

0.80.71.04.7

23.7

69.9

1.14.6

21.6

72.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=6221)

Agree(n=2026)

Neutral(n=413)

Disagree(n=90)

StronglyDisagree(n=61)Responses (Total=8,811)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q8&9.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 18: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 2: Evaluation of Instructor

Question 11: The Instructor Gives Me Timely Feedback on Graded Work

1.0

61.1

27.48.3

2.3

61.6

27.6

8.5

1.7 0.60.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5270)

Agree (n=2363) Neutral (n=717) Disagree(n=182)

StronglyDisagree(n=72)Responses (Total=8,604)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 10: The Instructor Grades Impartially

2.73.4

9.425.2

59.4

9.825.2

59.3

3.6 2.20.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5032)

Agree (n=2134) Neutral (n=806) Disagree(n=292)

StronglyDisagree(n=214)Responses (Total=8,478)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q10&11.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 19: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 3: Lab Evaluation

Question 12: The Instructor Explains Appropriate Safety Procedures For This Laboratory/Clinical

0.4

63.3

28.9

6.60.8

61.3

25.8 10.8

1.6 0.40.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=3393)

Agree (n=1516) Neutral (n=422) Disagree(n=57)

StronglyDisagree(n=20)Responses (Total=5,408)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 13: The Instructor Links the Laboratory Exercises to Lecture

0.70.51.17.2

29.2

62.0

1.611.0

25.7

61.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=3342)

Agree (n=1525) Neutral (n=450) Disagree(n=69)

StronglyDisagree(n=28)

Responses (Total=5,414)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q12&13.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 20: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office of Institutional Research

Student Evaluation of Instruction, Spring 2005Workforce - Full-Time/Part-Time Analysis

Part 4: Overall Evaluation

Question 14: The Instructor Encourages Me to Become Actively Engaged in the Learning Process

0.61.77.2

26.6

64.0 63.6

0.91.87.0

26.8

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5621)

Agree (n=2350) Neutral (n=628) Disagree(n=149)

StronglyDisagree (n=59)Responses (Total=8,807)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Question 15: I Would Recommend This Instructor to Other Students

1.82.38.322.6

65.0

2.12.48.922.1

64.4

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Strongly Agree(n=5680)

Agree(n=1966)

Neutral(n=747)

Disagree(n=207)

StronglyDisagree(n=165)Responses (Total=8,765)

Perc

enta

ge

Full-Time Instructors Part-Time Instructors

Spring2005_SEOI_CumulRpt_Workforce, WF_FTPT_Q14&15.xls Prepared: 8/18/2005

Page 21: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

CE Hobby Ctr Count 1 1Row % 100.0 100.0

Willie Lee Gay Hall Count 210 138 93 17 8 466Row % 45.1 29.6 20.0 3.6 1.7 100.0

Central Count 2711 2070 1480 231 106 6598Row % 41.1 31.4 22.4 3.5 1.6 100.0

Main Center - CE Count 49 20 35 4 5 113Row % 43.4 17.7 31.0 3.5 4.4 100.0

Total Count 2970 2229 1608 252 119 7178Row % 41.4 31.1 22.4 3.5 1.7 100.0

NE Automotive Tech. Ctr Count 74 72 37 21 22 226Row % 32.7 31.9 16.4 9.3 9.7 100.0

Northline Ctr Count 1183 777 408 53 16 2437Row % 48.5 31.9 16.7 2.2 0.7 100.0

Northeast Campus Count 84 66 56 15 4 225Row % 37.3 29.3 24.9 6.7 1.8 100.0

Pinemont Ctr Count 161 99 71 13 4 348Row % 46.3 28.4 20.4 3.7 1.1 100.0

Total Count 1502 1014 572 102 46 3236Row % 46.4 31.3 17.7 3.2 1.4 100.0

NW NW Dual Credit Count 3 6 1 10Row % 30.0 60.0 10.0 100.0

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

Question LR1: "The library resources were adequate for the needs of this course."

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 1 08/09/2005

Page 22: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

Question LR1: "The library resources were adequate for the needs of this course."

Town&Country Ctr Count 2380 1713 1310 193 77 5673Row % 42.0 30.2 23.1 3.4 1.4 100.0

Cinco Ranch Count 5 1 1 7Row % 71.4 14.3 14.3 100.0

Westgate Ctr Count 1005 666 519 67 33 2290Row % 43.9 29.1 22.7 2.9 1.4 100.0

Total Count 3393 2386 1831 260 110 7980Row % 42.5 29.9 22.9 3.3 1.4 100.0

SE Health Sci Ctr Count 877 716 511 78 31 2213Row % 39.6 32.4 23.1 3.5 1.4 100.0

Eastside Ctr Count 1595 1176 618 73 31 3493Row % 45.7 33.7 17.7 2.1 0.9 100.0

SE Dual Credit Count 3 2 1 6Row % 50.0 33.3 16.7 100.0

Total Count 2475 1894 1130 151 62 5712Row % 43.3 33.2 19.8 2.6 1.1 100.0

SW Gulfton Ctr Count 292 381 255 63 26 1017Row % 28.7 37.5 25.1 6.2 2.6 100.0

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 2 08/09/2005

Page 23: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

Question LR1: "The library resources were adequate for the needs of this course."

Alief Center Count 775 540 414 91 46 1866Row % 41.5 28.9 22.2 4.9 2.5 100.0

Stafford Ctr Count 2738 1842 1206 186 120 6092Row % 44.9 30.2 19.8 3.1 2.0 100.0

Missouri City Ctr Count 30 18 9 57Row % 52.6 31.6 15.8 100.0

West Loop Ctr Count 1012 652 377 47 33 2121Row % 47.7 30.7 17.8 2.2 1.6 100.0

Total Count 4847 3433 2261 387 225 11153Row % 43.5 30.8 20.3 3.5 2.0 100.0

System All Locations Count 15187 10956 7402 1152 562 35259Row % 43.1 31.1 21.0 3.3 1.6 100.0

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 3 08/09/2005

Page 24: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

CE Hobby Ctr Count 1 1Row % 100.0 100.0

Willie Lee Gay Hall Count 197 142 95 9 7 450Row % 43.8 31.6 21.1 2.0 1.6 100.0

Central Count 2579 1892 1466 146 78 6161Row % 41.9 30.7 23.8 2.4 1.3 100.0

Main Center - CE Count 50 21 30 5 4 110Row % 45.5 19.1 27.3 4.5 3.6 100.0

Total Count 2826 2056 1591 160 89 6722Row % 42.0 19.9 15.4 1.5 0.9 65.1

NE Automotive Tech. Ctr Count 74 60 58 10 15 217Row % 34.1 27.6 26.7 4.6 6.9 100.0

Northline Ctr Count 1113 741 441 32 14 2341Row % 47.5 31.7 18.8 1.4 0.6 100.0

Northeast Campus Count 79 62 52 7 4 204Row % 38.7 30.4 25.5 3.4 2.0 100.0

Pinemont Ctr Count 153 92 73 10 3 331Row % 46.2 27.8 22.1 3.0 0.9 100.0

Total Count 1419 955 624 59 36 3093Row % 45.9 30.9 20.2 1.9 1.2 100.0

NW NW Dual Credit Count 2 7 1 10Row % 20.0 70.0 10.0 100.0

Town&Country Ctr Count 2227 1598 1288 94 59 5266Row % 42.3 30.3 24.5 1.8 1.1 100.0

Question LR2: "The library instruction received for this course was adequate."

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 1 08/09/2005

Page 25: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

Question LR2: "The library instruction received for this course was adequate."

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

Cinco Ranch Count 1 1 2Row % 50.0 50.0 100.0

Westgate Ctr Count 972 574 528 40 25 2139Row % 45.4 26.8 24.7 1.9 1.2 100.0

Health Sci Ctr Count 829 669 519 55 27 2099Row % 39.5 31.9 24.7 2.6 1.3 100.0

Total Count 4031 2848 2337 189 111 9516Row % 42.4 29.9 24.6 2.0 1.2 100.0

SE Eastside Ctr Count 1527 1082 644 56 25 3334Row % 45.8 32.5 19.3 1.7 0.7 100.0

SE Dual Credit Count 4 2 6Row % 66.7 33.3 100.0

Total Count 1531 1084 644 56 25 3340Row % 45.8 32.5 19.3 1.7 0.7 100.0

SW Gulfton Ctr Count 283 375 250 60 24 992Row % 28.5 37.8 25.2 6.0 2.4 100.0

Alief Center Count 725 516 439 55 37 1772Row % 40.9 29.1 24.8 3.1 2.1 100.0

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 2 08/09/2005

Page 26: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

College Campus Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree Total

Question LR2: "The library instruction received for this course was adequate."

Results for Library Resources Questions, Student Evaluation of Instruction Spring 2005 (Exclusive of Distance Education responses)

Stafford Ctr Count 2652 1664 1235 109 85 5745Row % 46.2 29.0 21.5 1.9 1.5 100.0

Missouri City Ctr Count 26 18 12 56Row % 46.4 32.1 21.4 100.0

West Loop Ctr Count 956 586 388 30 27 1987Row % 48.1 29.5 19.5 1.5 1.4 100.0

Total Count 4642 3159 2324 254 173 10552Row % 44.0 29.9 22.0 2.4 1.6 100.0

System All Locations Count 14449 10102 7520 718 434 33223Row % 43.5 30.4 22.6 2.2 1.3 100.0

rg: Spring2005_cume_library_rept.xls 3 08/09/2005

Page 27: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

ANTH Central

N 30 30 28 30 31 31 29 31 30 30 30 2 2 31 30 Mean 1.33 1.10 1.36 1.53 1.55 1.65 1.79 1.29 1.43 1.70 1.60 2.00 3.00 1.58 1.73

Northeast

N 14 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 13 13 14 7 6 13 13 Mean 1.14 1.15 1.15 1.29 1.50 1.50 1.21 1.36 1.54 1.46 1.57 1.14 1.33 1.54 1.62

Northwest

N 75 68 73 75 77 77 77 77 74 73 74 17 15 77 76 Mean 1.05 1.18 1.10 1.45 1.49 1.40 1.69 1.30 1.42 1.53 1.59 1.88 1.67 1.44 1.54

Southwest

N 76 73 70 70 78 76 72 78 73 68 71 24 25 77 76 Mean 1.04 1.21 1.23 1.49 1.53 1.51 1.71 1.33 1.44 1.53 1.66 1.67 1.88 1.77 1.75

N 195 184 184 189 200 198 192 200 190 184 189 50 48 198 195 Mean 1.10 1.17 1.19 1.47 1.52 1.49 1.68 1.32 1.44 1.55 1.62 1.68 1.79 1.60 1.66

ARTS Central

N 291 243 272 268 290 290 284 288 275 276 283 98 98 290 289 Mean 1.07 1.11 1.15 1.31 1.31 1.30 1.45 1.22 1.36 1.58 1.34 1.47 1.49 1.38 1.38

Northeast

N 67 63 66 59 67 67 67 67 62 59 66 11 10 66 66 Mean 1.03 1.10 1.08 1.37 1.36 1.33 1.43 1.16 1.42 1.54 1.42 1.18 1.30 1.55 1.53

Northwest

N 338 268 314 294 341 336 340 339 323 326 334 100 92 339 337 Mean 1.06 1.16 1.19 1.37 1.36 1.32 1.56 1.28 1.37 1.69 1.47 1.60 1.55 1.48 1.45

Southeast

N 88 79 81 87 90 89 90 90 88 85 89 36 35 90 88 Mean 1.11 1.09 1.14 1.25 1.43 1.28 1.46 1.22 1.41 1.38 1.35 1.47 1.43 1.49 1.47

Southwest

N 345 300 323 323 352 353 345 355 348 330 343 139 132 351 347 Mean 1.10 1.12 1.20 1.50 1.56 1.47 1.61 1.38 1.49 1.75 1.52 1.45 1.47 1.53 1.61

N 1129 953 1056 1031 1140 1135 1126 1139 1096 1076 1115 384 367 1136 1127 Mean 1.08 1.13 1.17 1.39 1.41 1.36 1.53 1.28 1.41 1.65 1.44 1.49 1.49 1.47 1.49

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 1 8/8/2005

Page 28: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

BIOL Central

N 666 650 614 680 682 656 677 678 640 655 667 612 609 681 676 Mean 1.07 1.20 1.24 1.51 1.68 1.48 1.86 1.36 1.56 1.76 1.57 1.40 1.48 1.64 1.69

Northeast

N 592 586 554 600 605 598 593 604 587 581 583 577 579 603 605 Mean 1.09 1.13 1.20 1.50 1.55 1.40 1.57 1.36 1.51 1.61 1.59 1.40 1.45 1.56 1.56

Northwest

N 948 935 899 969 970 960 960 963 930 915 952 939 947 962 964 Mean 1.10 1.16 1.20 1.41 1.57 1.40 1.68 1.37 1.51 1.61 1.56 1.37 1.42 1.55 1.59

Southeast

N 419 413 398 426 426 420 422 423 411 409 416 412 410 426 423 Mean 1.09 1.16 1.20 1.51 1.63 1.41 1.68 1.45 1.49 1.66 1.50 1.49 1.50 1.47 1.58

Southwest

N 878 865 818 892 887 868 883 886 852 857 872 837 838 887 882 Mean 1.13 1.16 1.32 1.71 1.96 1.61 1.89 1.50 1.68 1.87 1.68 1.56 1.61 1.77 1.94

N 3503 3449 3283 3567 3570 3502 3535 3554 3420 3417 3490 3377 3383 3559 3550 Mean 1.10 1.16 1.24 1.53 1.69 1.47 1.75 1.41 1.56 1.71 1.59 1.44 1.49 1.62 1.69

CHEM Central

N 279 275 252 284 285 282 284 284 268 273 280 266 264 284 278 Mean 1.11 1.31 1.27 1.41 1.66 1.47 1.69 1.39 1.53 1.65 1.54 1.38 1.63 1.59 1.59

Northeast

N 46 46 41 47 47 47 47 46 45 46 46 42 43 46 44 Mean 1.22 1.30 1.29 1.62 1.72 1.51 1.96 1.59 1.58 1.67 1.98 1.95 1.70 1.78 1.86

Northwest

N 394 388 365 400 402 399 401 399 388 387 396 399 398 402 401 Mean 1.08 1.18 1.24 1.42 1.66 1.39 1.78 1.32 1.53 1.60 1.51 1.30 1.45 1.52 1.57

Southeast

N 103 101 92 103 105 102 105 105 102 101 104 103 102 105 104 Mean 1.22 1.57 1.49 2.02 2.29 1.94 2.14 2.13 2.11 2.10 1.99 1.89 2.22 2.22 2.19

Southwest

N 300 291 277 304 303 299 299 301 291 292 293 303 300 303 300 Mean 1.11 1.48 1.30 1.44 1.58 1.51 1.72 1.45 1.57 1.73 1.67 1.30 1.47 1.71 1.71

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 2 8/8/2005

Page 29: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 1122 1101 1027 1138 1142 1129 1136 1135 1094 1099 1119 1113 1107 1140 1127 Mean 1.12 1.33 1.29 1.49 1.70 1.50 1.78 1.46 1.60 1.69 1.62 1.40 1.58 1.66 1.68

COMM Central

N 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 18 19 20 1 1 20 20 Mean 1.11 1.10 1.10 1.40 1.20 1.25 1.85 1.15 1.44 1.42 1.65 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.35

Northwest

N 24 24 21 24 24 24 24 24 20 22 24 1 2 24 24 Mean 1.08 1.00 1.24 1.04 1.29 1.25 1.63 1.21 1.45 1.59 1.63 1.00 1.50 1.29 1.46

Southwest

N 29 29 28 29 29 29 29 29 26 28 28 6 6 29 29 Mean 1.10 1.10 1.25 1.79 1.55 1.76 2.03 1.38 1.50 1.64 1.96 1.50 1.50 1.55 1.72

N 72 73 69 73 73 73 73 73 64 69 72 8 9 73 73 Mean 1.10 1.07 1.20 1.44 1.37 1.45 1.85 1.26 1.47 1.57 1.76 1.38 1.44 1.40 1.53

COSC Northwest

N 13 13 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 4 7 13 13 Mean 1.08 1.23 1.08 1.23 1.38 1.31 1.31 1.54 1.31 1.31 1.38 1.00 1.29 1.46 1.46

Southwest

N 25 24 23 24 25 25 25 25 23 24 25 15 19 24 24 Mean 1.12 1.63 1.22 1.42 1.48 1.40 1.52 1.24 1.26 1.33 1.48 1.40 1.26 1.58 1.42

N 38 37 35 37 38 38 38 38 36 37 38 19 26 37 37 Mean 1.11 1.49 1.17 1.35 1.45 1.37 1.45 1.34 1.28 1.32 1.45 1.32 1.27 1.54 1.43

CRIJ Central

N 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 4 4 19 19 Mean 1.00 1.42 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.16 1.11 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00

Northeast

N 4 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 5 5 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.00 1.60 1.20 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.20

Northwest

N 74 73 67 76 77 77 77 77 75 74 76 12 12 74 73 Mean 1.01 1.59 1.13 1.22 1.19 1.21 1.27 1.12 1.19 1.49 1.18 1.33 1.33 1.23 1.22

Southeast

N 32 31 32 32 31 32 32 30 32 31 32 10 10 32 32 Mean 1.06 1.29 1.00 1.13 1.19 1.16 1.31 1.13 1.25 1.81 1.53 2.10 2.30 1.34 1.19

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 3 8/8/2005

Page 30: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

CRIJ Southwest

N 69 68 66 71 71 71 71 70 71 67 70 15 13 71 68 Mean 1.01 1.06 1.11 1.13 1.08 1.13 1.20 1.17 1.13 1.70 1.19 1.80 1.92 1.27 1.13

N 198 196 187 203 203 204 204 201 202 196 202 43 41 201 197 Mean 1.02 1.33 1.10 1.15 1.14 1.16 1.23 1.12 1.17 1.57 1.23 1.67 1.76 1.24 1.16

DANC Central

N 108 68 104 101 111 106 99 110 108 92 95 33 27 110 109 Mean 1.09 1.25 1.12 1.27 1.23 1.20 1.33 1.35 1.33 1.59 1.58 1.27 1.26 1.28 1.32

N 108 68 104 101 111 106 99 110 108 92 95 33 27 110 109 Mean 1.09 1.25 1.12 1.27 1.23 1.20 1.33 1.35 1.33 1.59 1.58 1.27 1.26 1.28 1.32

DRAM Central

N 60 59 60 57 60 59 58 60 58 58 57 24 23 59 59 Mean 1.00 1.17 1.08 1.23 1.18 1.17 1.31 1.20 1.29 1.60 1.16 1.38 1.26 1.08 1.19

Northeast

N 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 0 4 4 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 . . 1.00 1.00

Northwest

N 24 24 22 19 24 23 22 24 23 21 23 5 5 24 23 Mean 1.17 1.08 1.14 1.47 1.13 1.13 1.36 1.33 1.61 1.38 1.70 1.40 1.40 1.17 1.09

Southwest

N 29 29 28 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 16 15 28 28 Mean 1.14 1.17 1.21 1.20 1.17 1.20 1.43 1.20 1.27 1.34 1.37 1.31 1.27 1.18 1.18

N 117 115 114 110 118 116 114 118 115 112 114 45 43 115 114 Mean 1.07 1.15 1.12 1.25 1.16 1.16 1.34 1.22 1.34 1.47 1.32 1.36 1.28 1.12 1.16

ECON Central

N 102 99 90 101 101 102 100 102 97 98 99 25 22 100 97 Mean 1.15 1.15 1.30 1.41 1.72 1.43 1.78 1.31 1.56 1.64 1.59 1.84 2.14 1.54 1.55

Northwest

N 256 251 218 257 257 254 257 257 247 253 255 41 38 257 253 Mean 1.13 1.16 1.38 1.63 1.75 1.59 1.88 1.48 1.58 1.71 1.84 1.68 1.76 1.68 1.90

Southeast

N 66 64 54 67 67 65 66 67 63 65 65 18 16 67 67

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 4 8/8/2005

Page 31: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.11 1.14 1.33 1.42 1.88 1.58 1.70 1.34 1.68 1.63 1.55 1.89 2.00 1.70 1.63

ECON Southwest

N 291 286 237 293 292 286 292 293 277 283 287 74 70 293 293 Mean 1.11 1.22 1.32 1.58 1.66 1.57 1.79 1.41 1.52 1.70 1.70 1.91 1.93 1.57 1.67

N 715 700 599 718 717 707 715 719 684 699 706 158 146 717 710 Mean 1.12 1.18 1.34 1.56 1.72 1.56 1.81 1.42 1.56 1.69 1.72 1.84 1.92 1.62 1.73

EDUC Northeast

N 15 15 12 15 15 15 15 15 13 15 15 3 3 14 14 Mean 1.07 1.07 1.17 1.33 1.40 1.27 1.27 1.47 1.62 1.60 1.67 1.33 1.33 1.36 1.50

Northwest

N 34 34 30 34 34 34 34 34 30 32 34 5 5 34 34 Mean 1.15 1.21 1.33 1.91 1.97 1.71 2.00 1.32 1.47 1.53 1.65 1.60 1.60 1.62 1.94

Southeast

N 15 15 14 13 15 15 14 15 13 13 15 2 2 15 15 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.69 1.33 1.33 1.79 1.13 1.38 2.23 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.27

Southwest

N 68 68 63 65 68 66 61 68 67 63 63 17 17 68 67 Mean 1.00 1.15 1.16 1.29 1.10 1.21 1.41 1.10 1.27 1.46 1.40 1.29 1.29 1.13 1.22

N 132 132 119 127 132 130 124 132 123 123 127 27 27 131 130 Mean 1.05 1.14 1.18 1.50 1.39 1.36 1.60 1.20 1.37 1.58 1.53 1.33 1.33 1.29 1.45

ENGD Central

N 206 197 186 203 206 208 203 205 206 193 203 102 102 206 201 Mean 1.08 1.21 1.34 1.57 1.49 1.45 1.55 1.44 1.56 1.86 1.66 1.68 1.66 1.52 1.54

Northeast

N 79 80 76 75 78 79 79 79 79 78 79 36 35 80 79 Mean 1.09 1.11 1.22 1.39 1.31 1.34 1.52 1.24 1.46 1.56 1.46 1.56 1.63 1.39 1.49

Northwest

N 188 182 180 193 194 194 194 191 191 188 190 78 82 193 187 Mean 1.16 1.23 1.29 1.59 1.55 1.58 1.68 1.40 1.57 1.92 1.64 1.87 1.88 1.55 1.56

Southeast

N 87 84 83 85 86 87 87 86 83 83 85 56 57 84 81 Mean 1.06 1.35 1.23 1.42 1.35 1.32 1.46 1.45 1.43 1.48 1.40 1.70 1.65 1.45 1.48

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 5 8/8/2005

Page 32: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

ENGD Southwest

N 256 251 240 259 259 257 258 257 252 251 256 139 139 258 257 Mean 1.06 1.14 1.34 1.42 1.42 1.45 1.59 1.34 1.44 1.75 1.51 1.61 1.58 1.47 1.45

N 816 794 765 815 823 825 821 818 811 793 813 411 415 821 805 Mean 1.09 1.20 1.30 1.49 1.45 1.46 1.58 1.38 1.50 1.77 1.56 1.68 1.67 1.49 1.51

ENGF Central

N 178 172 165 179 180 179 181 180 180 173 177 110 104 181 180 Mean 1.19 1.31 1.40 1.60 1.52 1.65 1.77 1.56 1.71 1.87 1.72 1.95 2.04 1.66 1.67

Northeast

N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3 3 6 6 Mean 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.33 1.17 1.33 1.67 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.40 1.33 1.67 1.33 1.17

Northwest

N 125 124 120 124 125 124 124 123 124 122 122 54 54 122 121 Mean 1.12 1.19 1.22 1.45 1.37 1.48 1.52 1.39 1.50 1.60 1.52 1.57 1.63 1.47 1.50

Southeast

N 29 29 28 28 29 29 29 29 28 29 29 13 13 29 29 Mean 1.14 1.14 1.25 1.25 1.21 1.31 1.38 1.34 1.14 1.48 1.55 1.62 1.62 1.31 1.41

Southwest

N 214 209 200 224 223 221 221 220 218 219 219 134 129 221 215 Mean 1.06 1.15 1.33 1.39 1.34 1.45 1.49 1.34 1.39 1.56 1.50 1.57 1.57 1.43 1.48

N 552 540 519 561 563 559 561 558 556 549 552 314 303 559 551 Mean 1.12 1.21 1.32 1.46 1.39 1.51 1.58 1.42 1.51 1.66 1.58 1.70 1.75 1.50 1.54

ENGL Central

N 729 720 678 683 740 738 724 738 718 705 727 189 189 734 730 Mean 1.09 1.15 1.20 1.40 1.42 1.38 1.59 1.31 1.42 1.79 1.58 1.58 1.55 1.46 1.50

Northeast

N 295 297 273 285 298 300 300 299 295 286 295 76 73 301 295 Mean 1.20 1.18 1.31 1.66 1.72 1.58 1.84 1.57 1.70 2.00 1.94 1.79 1.86 1.60 1.77

Northwest

N 1155 1127 1066 1076 1166 1156 1151 1160 1114 1122 1148 254 252 1155 1147 Mean 1.14 1.18 1.28 1.57 1.62 1.48 1.85 1.44 1.58 1.84 1.75 1.84 1.83 1.63 1.74

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 6 8/8/2005

Page 33: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

ENGL Southeast

N 360 358 338 350 362 360 353 360 358 341 357 112 109 357 353 Mean 1.05 1.14 1.21 1.55 1.52 1.43 1.68 1.35 1.49 1.79 1.54 1.65 1.81 1.52 1.62

Southwest

N 1403 1387 1288 1335 1425 1418 1410 1416 1374 1357 1405 427 403 1417 1404 Mean 1.10 1.12 1.22 1.48 1.49 1.40 1.65 1.33 1.46 1.74 1.59 1.62 1.64 1.50 1.59

N 3942 3889 3643 3729 3991 3972 3938 3973 3859 3811 3932 1058 1026 3964 3929 Mean 1.11 1.15 1.24 1.51 1.54 1.44 1.72 1.38 1.51 1.80 1.65 1.68 1.70 1.54 1.63

ENVR Central

N 32 31 27 32 32 31 32 32 26 29 32 11 12 32 32 Mean 1.03 1.03 1.11 1.34 1.28 1.29 1.88 1.16 1.12 1.52 1.56 1.36 1.33 1.44 1.47

Northwest

N 58 58 53 59 59 56 59 59 50 57 58 26 28 58 58 Mean 1.09 1.17 1.28 1.59 1.92 1.70 1.86 1.68 1.54 1.75 1.74 1.73 1.68 1.84 1.95

Southeast

N 50 50 45 50 49 49 49 49 49 46 49 17 15 48 49 Mean 1.10 1.06 1.13 1.46 1.71 1.43 1.61 1.33 1.43 1.91 1.57 1.94 2.07 1.65 1.65

Southwest

N 38 36 35 38 38 38 38 38 37 37 38 15 13 38 38 Mean 1.26 1.28 1.40 1.61 1.87 1.68 1.82 1.92 1.95 2.05 1.95 2.33 2.31 1.82 1.97

N 178 175 160 179 178 174 178 178 162 169 177 69 68 176 177 Mean 1.12 1.14 1.24 1.51 1.74 1.55 1.79 1.54 1.53 1.82 1.71 1.86 1.82 1.71 1.79

ESOL Central

N 75 78 78 81 82 79 81 81 82 82 80 69 66 81 81 Mean 1.32 1.19 1.33 1.56 1.61 1.53 1.63 1.60 1.60 1.74 1.74 1.90 2.12 1.63 1.69

Northeast

N 200 202 188 209 209 207 208 206 204 201 204 134 135 198 200 Mean 1.17 1.18 1.31 1.53 1.56 1.71 1.66 1.49 1.58 1.59 1.68 1.81 1.83 1.64 1.68

Northwest

N 99 100 98 110 110 109 110 109 109 109 106 64 62 109 109 Mean 1.14 1.15 1.11 1.33 1.25 1.28 1.27 1.29 1.26 1.39 1.33 1.31 1.34 1.28 1.31

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 7 8/8/2005

Page 34: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

ESOL Southeast

N 552 548 532 568 568 562 563 566 565 556 561 404 414 566 564 Mean 1.14 1.16 1.32 1.52 1.54 1.63 1.66 1.45 1.54 1.59 1.68 1.70 1.69 1.64 1.68

Southwest

N 1324 1322 1297 1377 1391 1369 1365 1382 1377 1364 1360 645 651 1376 1366 Mean 1.26 1.28 1.32 1.59 1.57 1.67 1.71 1.55 1.60 1.70 1.71 1.98 1.97 1.67 1.68

N 2250 2250 2193 2345 2360 2326 2327 2344 2337 2312 2311 1316 1328 2330 2320 Mean 1.22 1.23 1.31 1.56 1.54 1.64 1.67 1.51 1.57 1.65 1.69 1.84 1.85 1.64 1.67

FREN Central

N 27 27 27 27 27 27 26 27 27 25 26 13 16 27 27 Mean 1.00 1.11 1.00 1.19 1.26 1.15 1.42 1.30 1.52 1.40 1.50 1.38 1.31 1.15 1.15

Northwest

N 35 36 36 36 36 36 34 36 35 36 36 9 8 36 36 Mean 1.03 1.03 1.17 1.22 1.42 1.25 1.59 1.31 1.46 1.58 1.33 1.56 1.63 1.78 1.64

Southwest

N 40 39 38 40 39 39 39 39 38 36 38 20 20 40 39 Mean 1.05 1.10 1.16 1.30 1.38 1.23 1.41 1.28 1.50 1.36 1.21 1.50 1.35 1.28 1.28

N 102 102 101 103 102 102 99 102 100 97 100 42 44 103 102 Mean 1.03 1.08 1.12 1.24 1.36 1.22 1.47 1.29 1.49 1.45 1.33 1.48 1.39 1.42 1.37

GEOG Central

N 18 18 17 18 18 18 17 18 17 14 18 2 1 18 18 Mean 1.00 1.22 1.06 1.33 1.28 1.22 1.71 1.22 1.41 1.57 1.72 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.22

Northeast

N 16 16 15 16 16 16 15 16 16 16 16 2 2 16 16 Mean 1.06 1.25 1.27 1.56 1.38 1.44 1.80 1.19 1.25 1.38 1.31 1.00 1.50 1.38 1.38

Northwest

N 72 72 71 72 72 71 72 72 71 69 72 8 8 72 72 Mean 1.03 1.01 1.03 1.21 1.18 1.18 1.49 1.07 1.20 1.45 1.26 1.75 1.63 1.24 1.13

Southeast

N 13 13 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 2 2 13 13 Mean 1.00 1.62 1.08 1.62 1.62 1.62 2.23 1.46 1.69 2.85 1.62 2.00 2.00 1.54 2.00

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 8 8/8/2005

Page 35: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

GEOG Southwest

N 33 31 30 33 33 33 33 33 32 33 33 11 10 29 30 Mean 1.09 1.68 1.10 1.58 1.52 1.52 1.70 1.48 1.78 1.82 1.61 1.73 1.60 1.55 1.77

N 152 150 145 152 152 151 150 152 149 145 152 25 23 148 149 Mean 1.04 1.25 1.08 1.38 1.32 1.32 1.65 1.22 1.40 1.66 1.43 1.64 1.61 1.35 1.37

GEOL Central

N 47 46 45 47 47 47 47 46 44 45 47 34 35 47 47 Mean 1.04 1.02 1.13 1.53 1.72 1.51 1.85 1.35 1.55 1.53 1.81 1.35 1.40 1.62 1.66

Northwest

N 123 124 118 126 126 121 126 126 121 123 123 93 97 125 126 Mean 1.09 1.19 1.21 1.50 1.70 1.42 1.67 1.37 1.46 1.54 1.46 1.38 1.40 1.58 1.63

Southeast

N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 9 8 8 9 9 Mean 1.22 1.44 1.56 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.11 1.33 1.38 2.13 1.89 1.63 1.63 2.00 2.00

Southwest

N 77 74 75 78 77 78 77 78 73 77 76 55 55 77 76 Mean 1.13 1.20 1.27 1.71 2.03 1.68 1.83 1.79 1.70 1.79 1.89 1.64 1.60 1.83 2.07

N 256 253 247 260 259 255 259 259 246 253 255 190 195 258 258 Mean 1.10 1.17 1.23 1.58 1.81 1.54 1.77 1.49 1.54 1.63 1.67 1.46 1.47 1.67 1.78

GERM Central

N 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 12 5 5 12 12 Mean 1.08 1.67 1.17 1.17 1.33 1.25 1.67 1.58 1.20 1.33 1.42 1.60 1.60 1.25 1.33

N 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 12 5 5 12 12 Mean 1.08 1.67 1.17 1.17 1.33 1.25 1.67 1.58 1.20 1.33 1.42 1.60 1.60 1.25 1.33

GOVT Central

N 506 503 429 511 518 507 516 511 481 493 504 112 106 517 511 Mean 1.16 1.20 1.39 1.64 1.72 1.59 1.86 1.48 1.73 1.86 1.76 1.78 1.83 1.69 1.81

Northeast

N 179 177 166 182 182 180 179 182 173 174 177 51 50 182 181 Mean 1.13 1.10 1.34 1.78 1.57 1.58 1.76 1.37 1.72 1.94 1.76 1.61 1.60 1.64 1.73

Northwest

N 783 773 705 789 785 782 782 783 753 761 782 123 119 785 782

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 9 8/8/2005

Page 36: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.12 1.19 1.30 1.68 1.73 1.64 2.00 1.45 1.60 1.88 1.72 1.80 1.83 1.70 1.84

GOVT Southeast

N 208 204 197 210 209 210 207 207 203 198 205 68 61 206 206 Mean 1.09 1.10 1.18 1.46 1.42 1.41 1.57 1.36 1.47 1.66 1.54 1.51 1.49 1.51 1.46

Southwest

N 1010 988 942 1027 1027 1022 1022 1019 990 980 1007 283 269 1024 1019 Mean 1.09 1.12 1.21 1.39 1.42 1.40 1.59 1.26 1.42 1.66 1.50 1.54 1.61 1.45 1.44

N 2686 2645 2439 2719 2721 2701 2706 2702 2600 2606 2675 637 605 2714 2699 Mean 1.11 1.16 1.27 1.55 1.58 1.52 1.77 1.37 1.55 1.78 1.63 1.64 1.68 1.59 1.65

GUST Central

N 474 471 457 478 482 478 479 480 468 442 471 297 295 477 470 Mean 1.09 1.11 1.29 1.37 1.32 1.40 1.55 1.28 1.46 1.75 1.48 1.61 1.68 1.44 1.40

Northeast

N 314 304 304 322 320 319 318 321 316 307 317 198 196 321 317 Mean 1.05 1.12 1.23 1.34 1.35 1.35 1.50 1.35 1.47 1.78 1.50 1.54 1.45 1.39 1.39

Northwest

N 444 439 429 448 449 448 444 445 443 433 443 207 226 450 448 Mean 1.10 1.11 1.24 1.39 1.39 1.41 1.54 1.32 1.44 1.70 1.46 1.62 1.64 1.37 1.38

Southeast

N 268 252 249 272 272 269 270 271 268 262 268 199 194 273 267 Mean 1.04 1.16 1.27 1.38 1.40 1.34 1.46 1.27 1.36 1.60 1.47 1.52 1.56 1.36 1.40

Southwest

N 848 833 813 870 873 871 866 870 861 844 856 659 652 870 860 Mean 1.07 1.10 1.26 1.38 1.40 1.42 1.51 1.31 1.45 1.65 1.52 1.54 1.58 1.44 1.47

N 2348 2299 2252 2390 2396 2385 2377 2387 2356 2288 2355 1560 1563 2391 2362 Mean 1.08 1.11 1.26 1.37 1.38 1.40 1.52 1.31 1.44 1.69 1.49 1.56 1.59 1.41 1.42

HECO Central

N 73 72 69 77 77 76 76 77 75 74 74 29 29 78 77 Mean 1.21 1.13 1.41 1.82 2.22 1.86 2.11 1.61 1.83 1.82 1.89 1.83 1.90 1.86 2.06

Northwest

N 28 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 27 27 28 4 5 28 28 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.29 1.07 1.15 1.67 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.18 1.04

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 10 8/8/2005

Page 37: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

HECO Southwest

N 39 39 34 40 40 39 40 40 34 36 37 16 15 39 39 Mean 1.26 1.13 1.53 2.20 2.43 1.97 2.20 1.98 2.35 2.19 2.03 1.94 1.93 2.28 2.59

N 140 139 130 145 145 143 144 145 136 137 139 49 49 145 144 Mean 1.18 1.10 1.37 1.78 2.06 1.73 1.97 1.61 1.82 1.89 1.80 1.80 1.82 1.84 2.01

HIST Central

N 548 548 476 566 566 561 563 562 527 530 551 131 124 561 560 Mean 1.11 1.23 1.37 1.48 1.50 1.52 1.87 1.39 1.57 1.78 1.66 1.78 1.81 1.69 1.61

Northeast

N 213 210 199 214 214 214 213 211 202 204 209 52 47 214 212 Mean 1.04 1.15 1.19 1.52 1.53 1.45 1.77 1.36 1.55 1.69 1.73 1.67 1.66 1.63 1.59

Northwest

N 1065 1037 970 1064 1076 1070 1063 1068 1024 1025 1057 219 211 1066 1066 Mean 1.07 1.32 1.26 1.53 1.47 1.51 1.89 1.37 1.53 1.73 1.67 1.72 1.81 1.62 1.61

Southeast

N 294 290 283 292 297 292 292 295 290 279 282 71 69 296 295 Mean 1.10 1.21 1.22 1.42 1.40 1.39 1.58 1.29 1.51 1.74 1.71 1.62 1.64 1.55 1.49

Southwest

N 1019 981 960 1040 1039 1036 1034 1029 995 997 1011 282 260 1036 1021 Mean 1.09 1.27 1.22 1.48 1.48 1.49 1.74 1.37 1.53 1.74 1.61 1.71 1.75 1.59 1.59

N 3139 3066 2888 3176 3192 3173 3165 3165 3038 3035 3110 755 711 3173 3154 Mean 1.08 1.27 1.26 1.49 1.48 1.49 1.80 1.36 1.54 1.74 1.65 1.71 1.76 1.61 1.59

HUMA Central

N 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 9 10 3 2 11 11 Mean 1.18 1.36 1.09 2.27 2.18 1.73 2.00 1.27 1.82 1.78 1.50 2.00 2.50 2.09 2.18

Northeast

N 16 17 16 16 17 17 16 17 17 16 16 2 2 17 15 Mean 1.19 1.12 1.19 1.38 1.47 1.47 1.56 1.24 1.53 1.88 1.44 3.00 3.00 1.47 1.40

Northwest

N 33 33 32 33 33 33 32 33 27 31 33 2 3 33 33 Mean 1.09 1.12 1.13 1.82 1.76 1.58 1.97 1.73 2.04 1.94 2.03 2.00 2.00 1.79 2.03

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 11 8/8/2005

Page 38: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

HUMA Southeast

N 24 24 23 25 25 24 24 25 23 23 25 5 5 25 23 Mean 1.25 1.29 1.22 1.72 2.04 1.63 1.75 1.76 1.74 1.91 1.96 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.83

Southwest

N 47 47 46 49 49 48 48 49 47 43 47 8 8 49 49 Mean 1.26 1.51 1.22 1.59 1.63 1.75 1.73 1.41 1.49 1.74 1.81 1.75 1.75 1.43 1.69

N 131 132 128 134 135 133 131 135 125 122 131 20 20 135 131 Mean 1.20 1.31 1.18 1.70 1.76 1.65 1.79 1.52 1.69 1.84 1.82 1.85 1.90 1.61 1.81

JAPN Central

N 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 13 14 14 2 2 14 14 Mean 1.08 1.08 1.00 1.21 1.36 1.21 1.50 1.07 1.38 1.14 1.21 2.50 2.50 1.14 1.21

Northwest

N 23 23 23 22 23 23 22 22 23 22 22 7 8 23 23 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.09 1.26 1.09 1.41 1.05 1.30 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.13 1.09 1.04

N 36 36 36 36 37 37 36 36 36 36 36 9 10 37 37 Mean 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.14 1.30 1.14 1.44 1.06 1.33 1.14 1.17 1.33 1.40 1.11 1.11

MATD Central

N 621 618 557 629 629 622 619 626 605 596 615 340 346 620 618 Mean 1.16 1.11 1.42 1.59 2.00 1.61 1.87 1.63 1.88 2.04 1.87 1.98 2.00 1.87 2.02

Northeast

N 562 553 517 568 562 563 563 562 538 535 555 278 279 562 563 Mean 1.09 1.09 1.28 1.36 1.57 1.34 1.56 1.33 1.50 1.77 1.60 1.70 1.68 1.54 1.55

Northwest

N 945 938 836 962 961 951 952 954 922 898 935 319 333 950 940 Mean 1.09 1.14 1.33 1.40 1.63 1.41 1.71 1.38 1.58 1.80 1.64 1.78 1.73 1.65 1.66

Southeast

N 529 493 469 522 530 530 525 533 521 501 516 242 238 529 527 Mean 1.04 1.18 1.33 1.38 1.51 1.33 1.58 1.35 1.51 1.83 1.59 1.63 1.73 1.53 1.50

Southwest

N 1210 1187 1146 1232 1229 1219 1221 1224 1189 1162 1203 532 529 1220 1208 Mean 1.07 1.14 1.27 1.35 1.57 1.37 1.57 1.32 1.52 1.73 1.55 1.58 1.59 1.54 1.56

N 3867 3789 3525 3913 3911 3885 3880 3899 3775 3692 3824 1711 1725 3881 3856

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 12 8/8/2005

Page 39: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.09 1.13 1.32 1.40 1.65 1.41 1.65 1.39 1.59 1.82 1.63 1.72 1.73 1.62 1.65

MATH Central

N 475 469 370 486 486 484 477 483 458 470 472 115 110 482 478 Mean 1.14 1.26 1.55 1.55 1.82 1.54 1.95 1.48 1.76 1.76 1.81 2.00 2.05 1.84 1.95

Northeast

N 211 208 175 212 214 209 211 214 208 203 206 67 66 212 212 Mean 1.07 1.13 1.34 1.34 1.48 1.33 1.53 1.31 1.50 1.66 1.51 1.57 1.55 1.39 1.38

Northwest

N 843 833 707 853 854 849 850 850 791 818 826 184 183 841 836 Mean 1.11 1.17 1.40 1.52 1.84 1.50 1.84 1.44 1.70 1.71 1.64 1.88 1.90 1.81 1.92

Southeast

N 276 275 227 277 277 275 273 276 265 260 271 47 46 271 272 Mean 1.11 1.09 1.40 1.43 1.69 1.46 1.69 1.33 1.60 1.78 1.62 1.74 1.74 1.65 1.61

Southwest

N 1204 1171 1025 1234 1229 1228 1232 1228 1178 1201 1207 368 362 1219 1216 Mean 1.09 1.19 1.36 1.41 1.61 1.41 1.67 1.41 1.58 1.64 1.57 1.69 1.76 1.61 1.62

N 3009 2956 2504 3062 3060 3045 3043 3051 2900 2952 2982 781 767 3025 3014 Mean 1.10 1.18 1.40 1.46 1.70 1.45 1.75 1.41 1.64 1.69 1.63 1.77 1.82 1.69 1.74

MUAP Central

N 5 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 4 2 2 5 5 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Northwest

N 13 10 14 13 17 17 14 17 17 15 15 4 5 17 17 Mean 1.15 1.20 1.14 1.15 1.12 1.12 1.14 1.12 1.18 1.13 1.13 1.25 1.20 1.06 1.12

Southwest

N 9 5 8 6 9 9 8 9 9 9 7 2 3 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.11 1.13 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

N 27 19 26 23 31 31 26 31 31 29 26 8 10 31 31 Mean 1.07 1.11 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.10 1.12 1.10 1.13 1.10 1.08 1.13 1.10 1.03 1.06

MUSI Central

N 115 103 98 113 116 116 115 116 114 109 110 31 31 116 115 Mean 1.06 1.13 1.11 1.27 1.28 1.22 1.34 1.24 1.33 1.41 1.35 1.32 1.29 1.24 1.22

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 13 8/8/2005

Page 40: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

MUSI Northwest

N 82 78 79 79 87 86 83 87 77 81 78 12 14 86 86 Mean 1.05 1.23 1.11 1.28 1.37 1.26 1.45 1.32 1.44 1.62 1.32 1.58 1.43 1.24 1.37

Southwest

N 70 64 64 68 73 72 72 72 70 67 72 15 15 72 72 Mean 1.06 1.33 1.19 1.31 1.25 1.32 1.47 1.22 1.40 1.67 1.39 1.40 1.33 1.49 1.33

N 267 245 241 260 276 274 270 275 261 257 260 58 60 274 273 Mean 1.06 1.21 1.13 1.28 1.30 1.26 1.41 1.26 1.38 1.54 1.35 1.40 1.33 1.31 1.30

PHED Central

N 117 95 104 114 118 116 116 117 111 117 112 67 64 119 117 Mean 1.03 1.17 1.12 1.22 1.23 1.28 1.42 1.14 1.26 1.48 1.39 1.34 1.36 1.31 1.34

Northeast

N 9 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.22 1.22 1.00 1.11 1.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.00

Northwest

N 26 23 25 26 26 24 26 26 25 24 25 13 12 26 26 Mean 1.12 1.09 1.16 1.04 1.04 1.08 1.15 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.08 1.25 1.12 1.12

Southwest

N 19 16 17 19 21 20 20 21 21 21 20 6 6 21 20 Mean 1.00 1.13 1.06 1.16 1.24 1.20 1.25 1.19 1.24 1.38 1.30 1.00 1.17 1.10 1.10

N 171 139 155 168 174 169 171 173 166 171 166 94 90 175 172 Mean 1.04 1.14 1.12 1.18 1.19 1.23 1.36 1.12 1.20 1.41 1.31 1.26 1.30 1.25 1.26

PHIL Central

N 199 201 191 205 211 210 209 208 201 200 207 45 43 209 209 Mean 1.16 1.22 1.16 1.29 1.36 1.28 1.55 1.19 1.35 1.49 1.39 1.60 1.67 1.36 1.39

Northeast

N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 2 2 6 6 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.17 2.00 1.83 2.00 1.17 1.33 1.67 1.40 2.00 2.00 1.17 1.17

Northwest

N 80 75 72 81 81 80 80 81 76 77 79 16 16 80 80 Mean 1.16 1.28 1.32 1.54 1.73 1.56 1.84 1.40 1.51 1.73 1.80 2.00 1.94 1.56 1.76

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 14 8/8/2005

Page 41: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

PHIL Southeast

N 27 19 25 28 28 27 28 28 26 26 27 12 12 28 28 Mean 1.19 1.26 1.20 1.36 1.36 1.41 1.75 1.39 1.62 1.62 1.74 1.50 1.25 1.32 1.43

Southwest

N 109 107 90 109 110 110 108 110 108 105 107 26 25 109 110 Mean 1.04 1.10 1.23 1.26 1.31 1.29 1.45 1.21 1.31 1.56 1.43 1.62 1.60 1.37 1.38

N 421 408 384 429 436 433 431 433 417 414 425 101 98 432 433 Mean 1.13 1.20 1.21 1.35 1.42 1.35 1.60 1.25 1.39 1.56 1.50 1.66 1.65 1.40 1.45

PHYS Central

N 143 143 115 144 144 143 143 144 127 139 141 107 106 144 142 Mean 1.13 1.38 1.77 1.86 2.25 1.80 2.17 1.92 2.27 2.04 2.19 2.43 2.30 2.31 2.50

Northwest

N 110 96 103 99 111 109 110 110 106 110 108 88 91 111 110 Mean 1.17 1.64 1.50 1.95 2.23 1.80 2.40 1.50 1.78 1.89 2.06 1.80 1.75 2.08 2.35

Southeast

N 46 44 42 48 48 47 47 48 44 45 47 47 48 47 47 Mean 1.17 1.25 1.48 1.65 1.81 1.51 1.66 1.38 1.57 1.73 1.94 1.60 1.56 1.72 1.74

Southwest

N 161 156 135 163 168 168 167 165 160 162 162 136 141 167 166 Mean 1.10 1.23 1.31 1.49 1.89 1.57 1.87 1.64 1.67 1.80 1.77 1.66 1.64 1.84 1.96

N 460 439 395 454 471 467 467 467 437 456 458 378 386 469 465 Mean 1.13 1.37 1.51 1.72 2.07 1.69 2.07 1.67 1.86 1.89 1.99 1.90 1.84 2.03 2.20

PSYC Central

N 603 593 541 609 610 608 607 609 582 579 605 187 179 602 598 Mean 1.07 1.09 1.20 1.36 1.38 1.37 1.59 1.24 1.42 1.62 1.46 1.56 1.56 1.43 1.45

Northeast

N 208 205 190 210 210 209 209 210 201 200 205 69 70 210 208 Mean 1.09 1.07 1.14 1.27 1.32 1.28 1.50 1.20 1.37 1.50 1.44 1.46 1.53 1.31 1.34

Northwest

N 786 777 737 796 797 792 791 791 774 758 787 150 143 791 785 Mean 1.09 1.12 1.21 1.45 1.50 1.44 1.71 1.36 1.52 1.75 1.59 1.70 1.82 1.55 1.56

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 15 8/8/2005

Page 42: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

PSYC Southeast

N 298 294 282 302 301 301 303 302 296 293 297 75 70 300 298 Mean 1.02 1.06 1.13 1.33 1.32 1.32 1.50 1.19 1.35 1.68 1.40 1.65 1.71 1.42 1.37

Southwest

N 786 772 740 800 801 791 800 800 773 764 787 240 230 796 790 Mean 1.06 1.07 1.21 1.49 1.44 1.46 1.65 1.40 1.53 1.71 1.57 1.61 1.68 1.55 1.49

N 2681 2641 2490 2717 2719 2701 2710 2712 2626 2594 2681 721 692 2699 2679 Mean 1.07 1.09 1.19 1.41 1.42 1.40 1.62 1.31 1.47 1.68 1.52 1.60 1.67 1.49 1.48

SOCI Central

N 138 135 122 137 136 135 137 136 134 130 134 31 31 138 134 Mean 1.20 1.18 1.35 1.63 1.80 1.74 1.82 1.51 1.76 1.88 1.84 1.94 1.97 1.68 1.79

Northeast

N 117 117 115 119 119 119 119 118 115 115 119 46 44 117 117 Mean 1.07 1.14 1.14 1.50 1.38 1.34 1.45 1.19 1.32 1.68 1.39 1.63 1.59 1.35 1.29

Northwest

N 405 401 377 405 406 404 400 406 384 393 396 118 114 399 401 Mean 1.13 1.13 1.25 1.44 1.66 1.50 1.65 1.35 1.51 1.67 1.53 1.60 1.61 1.47 1.55

Southeast

N 102 102 96 103 104 104 104 104 101 99 102 29 26 105 105 Mean 1.03 1.07 1.21 1.38 1.49 1.48 1.62 1.47 1.61 1.86 1.61 1.86 1.96 1.54 1.54

Southwest

N 477 462 440 478 485 482 474 483 454 450 466 116 109 482 479 Mean 1.06 1.25 1.24 1.48 1.37 1.42 1.75 1.29 1.46 1.74 1.56 1.73 1.73 1.51 1.53

N 1239 1217 1150 1242 1250 1244 1234 1247 1188 1187 1217 340 324 1241 1236 Mean 1.10 1.18 1.24 1.48 1.52 1.48 1.69 1.34 1.51 1.73 1.57 1.70 1.71 1.50 1.54

SPAN Central

N 231 225 225 236 236 233 233 236 220 224 230 109 121 231 232 Mean 1.10 1.19 1.28 1.36 1.55 1.36 1.60 1.38 1.53 1.59 1.50 1.67 1.67 1.48 1.56

Northeast

N 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 32 25 28 32 32 Mean 1.00 1.25 1.03 1.38 1.38 1.34 1.50 1.41 1.31 1.48 1.34 1.52 1.46 1.41 1.50

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 16 8/8/2005

Page 43: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

SPAN Northwest

N 244 246 244 253 253 252 251 253 242 241 249 90 117 252 249 Mean 1.07 1.05 1.21 1.32 1.46 1.31 1.48 1.24 1.38 1.51 1.37 1.56 1.44 1.33 1.41

Southeast

N 87 86 86 89 89 89 89 89 87 83 89 46 50 89 89 Mean 1.07 1.07 1.14 1.16 1.21 1.13 1.22 1.08 1.17 1.33 1.16 1.17 1.22 1.09 1.13

Southwest

N 231 229 218 233 230 232 231 232 221 221 232 80 86 232 230 Mean 1.10 1.12 1.20 1.34 1.42 1.34 1.58 1.43 1.54 1.57 1.48 1.66 1.66 1.41 1.48

N 825 818 805 843 840 838 836 842 802 800 832 350 402 836 832 Mean 1.08 1.12 1.21 1.32 1.45 1.32 1.52 1.32 1.44 1.53 1.41 1.56 1.53 1.37 1.45

SPCH Central

N 293 288 259 292 295 297 293 295 287 284 292 81 82 296 294 Mean 1.14 1.19 1.25 1.53 1.35 1.40 1.55 1.38 1.54 1.69 1.47 1.53 1.60 1.35 1.52

Northeast

N 119 119 112 118 120 120 120 119 118 115 119 26 27 120 118 Mean 1.02 1.05 1.13 1.29 1.18 1.23 1.38 1.21 1.28 1.57 1.25 1.35 1.41 1.26 1.28

Northwest

N 294 219 241 243 296 291 285 294 281 277 281 61 57 297 295 Mean 1.09 1.27 1.27 1.46 1.29 1.32 1.46 1.33 1.32 1.66 1.40 1.51 1.63 1.30 1.30

Southeast

N 100 101 92 99 102 103 100 101 99 97 102 35 35 102 103 Mean 1.30 1.17 1.36 1.69 1.70 1.68 1.73 1.44 1.61 1.82 1.62 1.74 1.66 1.65 1.75

Southwest

N 265 260 244 270 271 268 271 270 262 263 266 80 78 271 271 Mean 1.08 1.15 1.25 1.53 1.35 1.37 1.66 1.45 1.46 1.82 1.56 1.59 1.67 1.48 1.55

N 1071 987 948 1022 1084 1079 1069 1079 1047 1036 1060 283 279 1086 1081 Mean 1.11 1.18 1.25 1.50 1.35 1.38 1.55 1.37 1.44 1.72 1.46 1.55 1.61 1.39 1.46

TECA Central

N 55 55 55 59 59 59 59 58 58 59 58 28 29 59 59 Mean 1.09 1.22 1.18 1.59 1.54 1.49 1.58 1.43 1.55 1.51 1.55 1.57 1.48 1.49 1.56

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 17 8/8/2005

Page 44: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 ACADEMIC SUBJECTS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

TECA Northeast

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . . 1.00 1.00

Northwest

N 128 128 119 127 129 127 129 127 126 123 129 33 32 129 129 Mean 1.09 1.13 1.18 1.40 1.44 1.29 1.45 1.24 1.39 1.55 1.51 1.64 1.72 1.47 1.50

Southeast

N 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Mean 1.00 1.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.00

Southwest

N 53 53 49 54 54 54 54 54 53 52 53 16 15 54 54 Mean 1.02 1.13 1.20 1.13 1.07 1.11 1.24 1.07 1.28 1.79 1.28 1.31 1.33 1.11 1.07

N 249 249 236 253 255 253 255 252 250 247 253 89 88 255 255 Mean 1.07 1.15 1.17 1.37 1.36 1.28 1.41 1.23 1.38 1.56 1.45 1.52 1.52 1.38 1.40

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_ACAD.spo 18 8/8/2005

Page 45: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

ACCT Central

N 130 129 118 130 130 130 129 126 123 127 128 51 53 128 127 Mean 1.09 1.10 1.39 1.55 1.85 1.59 1.90 1.44 1.74 1.74 1.87 1.96 1.81 1.88 1.97

Northeast

N 18 17 16 19 19 19 19 19 19 18 18 1 1 19 19 Mean 1.11 1.53 2.06 1.79 2.00 1.74 2.26 1.58 1.63 1.72 1.83 3.00 3.00 1.95 2.21

Northwest

N 172 171 144 171 172 172 174 174 166 167 171 35 36 171 173 Mean 1.08 1.15 1.24 1.53 1.65 1.49 1.82 1.34 1.56 1.62 1.54 1.57 1.53 1.65 1.68

Southeast

N 63 64 61 64 64 64 64 63 64 62 63 11 10 64 63 Mean 1.05 1.09 1.25 1.30 1.34 1.22 1.58 1.19 1.44 1.60 1.40 1.73 1.80 1.31 1.38

Southwest

N 374 365 343 379 378 376 377 377 364 363 374 122 119 376 376 Mean 1.12 1.18 1.33 1.62 1.81 1.57 1.86 1.45 1.68 1.80 1.69 1.91 1.94 1.68 1.84

N 757 746 682 763 763 761 763 759 736 737 754 220 219 758 758 Mean 1.10 1.16 1.33 1.56 1.75 1.53 1.84 1.40 1.64 1.73 1.67 1.86 1.84 1.68 1.79

ACNT Central

N 104 97 79 107 108 107 108 106 101 103 105 29 30 105 106 Mean 1.08 1.22 1.39 1.70 1.86 1.62 1.92 1.48 1.73 1.68 1.66 1.86 1.93 1.83 1.94

Northeast

N 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 5 5 Mean 1.20 1.20 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.40 1.40 2.20 2.80 2.40 2.00 2.00 2.40 2.20

Northwest

N 48 47 43 47 47 47 48 47 42 45 47 14 14 48 47 Mean 1.13 1.38 1.30 1.51 1.87 1.57 1.69 1.91 1.88 1.67 1.72 1.79 1.79 1.81 1.94

Southeast

N 14 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 13 14 5 5 14 14 Mean 1.07 1.08 1.23 1.64 1.57 1.50 1.57 1.43 1.71 1.62 1.50 1.80 1.80 1.50 1.50

Southwest

N 111 102 98 108 111 111 110 108 105 110 108 44 42 110 110 Mean 1.12 1.18 1.39 1.53 1.69 1.45 1.68 1.42 1.63 1.79 1.60 1.82 1.76 1.61 1.75

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 1 8/8/2005

Page 46: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 282 264 237 281 285 284 285 280 267 276 279 93 92 282 282 Mean 1.10 1.22 1.37 1.60 1.79 1.55 1.78 1.53 1.72 1.74 1.65 1.83 1.83 1.73 1.85

AERM Central

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

ARTC Southwest

N 130 102 118 122 133 132 123 133 124 119 127 56 62 133 130 Mean 1.12 1.29 1.22 1.49 1.53 1.37 1.63 1.53 1.64 1.73 1.65 1.68 1.65 1.53 1.68

N 130 102 118 122 133 132 123 133 124 119 127 56 62 133 130 Mean 1.12 1.29 1.22 1.49 1.53 1.37 1.63 1.53 1.64 1.73 1.65 1.68 1.65 1.53 1.68

AUMT Northeast

N 166 166 164 170 169 168 168 168 164 168 168 168 168 170 169 Mean 1.16 1.19 1.29 1.51 1.49 1.40 1.83 1.32 1.48 2.53 1.75 1.40 1.41 1.54 1.50

N 166 166 164 170 169 168 168 168 164 168 168 168 168 170 169 Mean 1.16 1.19 1.29 1.51 1.49 1.40 1.83 1.32 1.48 2.53 1.75 1.40 1.41 1.54 1.50

BCIS Central

N 38 37 36 38 39 38 38 38 38 38 39 23 26 39 38 Mean 1.11 1.19 1.19 1.68 1.77 1.53 1.66 1.39 1.71 1.66 1.72 1.74 1.54 1.90 2.00

Northeast

N 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 13 12 13 12 Mean 1.08 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.46 1.15 1.54 1.31 1.31 1.77 1.50 1.46 1.25 1.54 1.25

Northwest

N 73 70 69 75 75 75 75 75 70 75 73 36 45 73 73 Mean 1.08 1.13 1.10 1.60 1.67 1.39 1.53 1.36 1.39 1.63 1.66 1.42 1.40 1.73 1.64

Southeast

N 12 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 1 1 12 11 Mean 1.17 1.08 1.18 1.42 1.17 1.17 1.33 1.25 1.25 1.60 1.25 2.00 2.00 1.42 1.18

Southwest

N 54 52 50 55 53 55 55 55 53 55 54 29 30 54 54 Mean 1.07 1.08 1.12 1.44 1.49 1.36 1.45 1.25 1.25 1.60 1.41 1.31 1.27 1.33 1.43

N 190 184 179 193 192 193 193 193 186 191 190 102 114 191 188

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 2 8/8/2005

Page 47: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.09 1.13 1.13 1.53 1.59 1.38 1.52 1.33 1.40 1.63 1.56 1.47 1.39 1.62 1.60

BITC Northeast

N 17 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 17 17 17 17 17 Mean 1.12 1.13 1.12 1.53 1.35 1.18 1.29 1.18 1.35 1.50 1.65 1.41 1.24 1.18 1.18

N 17 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 17 17 17 17 17 Mean 1.12 1.13 1.12 1.53 1.35 1.18 1.29 1.18 1.35 1.50 1.65 1.41 1.24 1.18 1.18

BMGT Central

N 52 53 49 53 53 53 53 52 51 52 53 18 17 53 53 Mean 1.06 1.09 1.16 1.40 1.32 1.40 1.58 1.23 1.43 1.50 1.49 1.39 1.53 1.32 1.28

Northeast

N 24 22 20 24 24 24 24 24 23 24 24 3 3 24 24 Mean 1.17 1.09 1.15 1.25 1.29 1.33 1.33 1.21 1.26 1.54 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.25

Northwest

N 47 45 44 47 47 47 47 47 47 45 47 8 8 47 46 Mean 1.04 1.04 1.07 1.19 1.28 1.19 1.17 1.15 1.32 1.42 1.30 1.63 1.63 1.28 1.20

Southeast

N 24 22 19 21 22 22 21 23 21 20 20 8 6 24 22 Mean 1.04 1.05 1.21 1.14 1.09 1.09 1.33 1.09 1.10 1.80 1.20 1.38 1.17 1.08 1.09

Southwest

N 63 58 60 63 63 63 63 63 62 61 60 32 31 62 62 Mean 1.02 1.03 1.12 1.35 1.32 1.25 1.41 1.25 1.40 1.61 1.42 1.47 1.42 1.29 1.37

N 210 200 192 208 209 209 208 209 204 202 204 69 65 210 207 Mean 1.05 1.06 1.13 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.38 1.20 1.34 1.55 1.40 1.43 1.43 1.28 1.27

BNKG Central

N 12 12 11 12 12 12 10 12 12 11 12 5 5 11 11 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.08 1.00 1.17 1.50 1.08 1.25 1.09 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.18 1.09

N 12 12 11 12 12 12 10 12 12 11 12 5 5 11 11 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.08 1.00 1.17 1.50 1.08 1.25 1.09 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.18 1.09

BUSG Central

N 80 75 69 79 80 80 79 80 79 73 74 31 29 80 80 Mean 1.03 1.01 1.22 1.24 1.16 1.18 1.34 1.23 1.27 1.26 1.31 1.32 1.38 1.21 1.21

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 3 8/8/2005

Page 48: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

BUSG Northeast

N 25 19 21 23 25 25 24 25 25 22 25 11 11 25 25 Mean 1.00 1.21 1.29 1.35 1.12 1.08 1.33 1.08 1.24 1.68 1.28 1.45 1.45 1.16 1.16

Northwest

N 91 72 72 84 91 90 88 91 89 83 87 20 17 91 91 Mean 1.00 1.18 1.18 1.27 1.31 1.33 1.52 1.18 1.29 1.48 1.39 1.55 1.41 1.30 1.30

Southeast

N 27 22 25 23 27 26 27 25 25 25 26 3 3 27 27 Mean 1.04 1.14 1.32 1.39 1.33 1.27 1.41 1.28 1.32 1.96 1.35 1.33 1.33 1.30 1.30

Southwest

N 78 59 70 68 79 78 75 78 76 73 73 28 24 78 77 Mean 1.04 1.15 1.26 1.37 1.38 1.32 1.77 1.35 1.45 1.77 1.53 1.57 1.63 1.41 1.31

N 301 247 257 277 302 299 293 299 294 276 285 93 84 301 300 Mean 1.02 1.12 1.23 1.30 1.27 1.26 1.51 1.23 1.32 1.56 1.39 1.46 1.46 1.29 1.27

CDEC Central

N 75 68 68 76 76 76 75 76 76 76 76 57 55 77 75 Mean 1.16 1.18 1.21 1.37 1.42 1.32 1.47 1.29 1.45 1.37 1.39 1.39 1.40 1.35 1.49

Northwest

N 6 6 5 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 3 4 8 8 Mean 1.00 1.33 1.00 1.75 1.38 1.38 2.00 1.38 1.71 1.86 1.86 1.67 2.50 1.50 1.50

Southwest

N 10 10 9 10 10 10 9 10 10 9 10 3 3 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.00 2.33 1.67 1.00 1.00

N 91 84 82 94 94 94 92 94 93 92 93 63 62 94 92 Mean 1.13 1.17 1.18 1.37 1.37 1.29 1.48 1.27 1.42 1.38 1.39 1.44 1.48 1.33 1.45

CETT Central

N 87 87 80 88 89 89 89 89 88 87 88 85 87 89 89 Mean 1.05 1.10 1.23 1.30 1.27 1.28 1.37 1.24 1.24 1.47 1.31 1.36 1.33 1.35 1.34

Northwest

N 12 12 10 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 11 11 13 13 Mean 1.25 1.25 1.40 1.62 1.38 1.46 1.77 1.46 1.46 1.77 1.50 1.82 1.73 1.62 1.69

N 99 99 90 101 102 102 102 102 101 100 100 96 98 102 102

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 4 8/8/2005

Page 49: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.07 1.12 1.24 1.34 1.28 1.30 1.42 1.26 1.27 1.51 1.33 1.42 1.38 1.38 1.38

CHEF Central

N 119 102 110 109 122 121 116 119 120 119 113 104 100 119 116 Mean 1.04 1.21 1.13 1.49 1.45 1.50 1.64 1.46 1.52 1.62 1.51 1.46 1.45 1.49 1.50

N 119 102 110 109 122 121 116 119 120 119 113 104 100 119 116 Mean 1.04 1.21 1.13 1.49 1.45 1.50 1.64 1.46 1.52 1.62 1.51 1.46 1.45 1.49 1.50

CHIN Central

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 1 8 8 Mean 1.38 1.13 1.63 1.50 2.38 1.50 2.25 1.25 1.75 1.63 1.75 . 1.00 1.50 1.63

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 1 8 8 Mean 1.38 1.13 1.63 1.50 2.38 1.50 2.25 1.25 1.75 1.63 1.75 . 1.00 1.50 1.63

CJSA Northwest

N 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 5 5 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.33 1.67 1.20 1.20

Southwest

N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 3 3 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.56 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

N 14 12 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 6 6 14 14 Mean 1.00 1.08 1.00 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.43 1.07 1.17 1.33 1.07 1.07

CMSW Southeast

N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 4 4 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.44 1.33 1.33 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.25 1.33 2.00 2.25 1.22 1.33

N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 4 4 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.44 1.33 1.33 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.25 1.33 2.00 2.25 1.22 1.33

CNBT Central

N 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 3 7 1 1 7 7 Mean 1.14 1.29 1.14 1.29 1.43 1.29 1.43 1.29 1.43 2.00 1.29 2.00 2.00 1.29 1.29

N 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 3 7 1 1 7 7 Mean 1.14 1.29 1.14 1.29 1.43 1.29 1.43 1.29 1.43 2.00 1.29 2.00 2.00 1.29 1.29

CPMT Central

N 31 30 30 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 27 28 32 32 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.09 1.06 1.16 1.00 1.09 1.28 1.09 1.07 1.14 1.13 1.06

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 5 8/8/2005

Page 50: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

CPMT Northwest

N 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 7 7 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.29 1.14 2.00 1.43 1.43 1.14 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.40 1.40 1.71 1.86

N 38 37 37 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 32 33 39 39 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.26 1.13 1.21 1.03 1.13 1.28 1.13 1.13 1.18 1.23 1.21

CRPT Central

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

CRTG Southwest

N 10 10 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 6 8 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.40 1.50 1.80 2.60 1.90 2.10 1.60 1.70 1.60 1.56 1.67 2.50 1.67 1.56

N 10 10 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 6 8 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.40 1.50 1.80 2.60 1.90 2.10 1.60 1.70 1.60 1.56 1.67 2.50 1.67 1.56

CSME Central

N 179 179 179 183 182 183 179 183 176 175 182 171 169 183 182 Mean 1.12 1.18 1.22 1.50 1.62 1.43 1.55 1.49 1.47 1.77 1.55 1.43 1.47 1.48 1.49

Northeast

N 86 86 84 90 90 90 90 89 90 89 90 89 89 90 90 Mean 1.07 1.08 1.35 1.32 1.48 1.42 1.34 1.44 1.42 1.70 1.57 1.31 1.34 1.44 1.48

Northwest

N 175 174 171 177 177 176 177 177 172 170 174 174 172 178 177 Mean 1.07 1.09 1.05 1.20 1.31 1.23 1.38 1.32 1.25 1.65 1.30 1.20 1.23 1.20 1.23

N 440 439 434 450 449 449 446 449 438 434 446 434 430 451 449 Mean 1.09 1.13 1.18 1.35 1.47 1.35 1.44 1.41 1.37 1.71 1.46 1.31 1.35 1.36 1.39

CVTT Southeast

N 125 115 122 126 125 125 127 127 125 124 127 94 93 127 127 Mean 1.16 1.38 1.30 1.62 1.82 1.65 1.82 1.48 1.50 1.60 1.93 1.63 1.71 1.51 1.86

N 125 115 122 126 125 125 127 127 125 124 127 94 93 127 127 Mean 1.16 1.38 1.30 1.62 1.82 1.65 1.82 1.48 1.50 1.60 1.93 1.63 1.71 1.51 1.86

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 6 8/8/2005

Page 51: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

DAAC Southeast

N 113 108 108 115 118 118 115 118 118 118 118 50 52 118 117 Mean 1.04 1.06 1.13 1.37 1.36 1.36 1.58 1.26 1.37 1.69 1.55 1.58 1.62 1.28 1.27

N 113 108 108 115 118 118 115 118 118 118 118 50 52 118 117 Mean 1.04 1.06 1.13 1.37 1.36 1.36 1.58 1.26 1.37 1.69 1.55 1.58 1.62 1.28 1.27

DEMR Northeast

N 55 52 55 56 55 54 53 56 56 54 55 56 55 56 56 Mean 1.07 1.40 1.13 1.39 1.29 1.35 1.49 1.30 1.25 1.57 1.62 1.27 1.49 1.41 1.34

N 55 52 55 56 55 54 53 56 56 54 55 56 55 56 56 Mean 1.07 1.40 1.13 1.39 1.29 1.35 1.49 1.30 1.25 1.57 1.62 1.27 1.49 1.41 1.34

DFTG Northeast

N 135 123 131 137 137 138 138 136 130 134 134 78 86 137 138 Mean 1.10 1.29 1.23 1.39 1.45 1.30 1.49 1.27 1.45 1.53 1.46 1.45 1.40 1.41 1.33

Northwest

N 58 53 50 59 59 59 56 58 59 55 58 36 40 58 59 Mean 1.03 1.26 1.06 1.44 1.54 1.36 1.50 1.34 1.49 1.49 1.43 1.56 1.43 1.50 1.44

Southwest

N 78 81 72 81 81 81 80 81 79 80 80 48 53 81 80 Mean 1.06 1.22 1.19 1.28 1.40 1.33 1.38 1.32 1.38 1.48 1.36 1.46 1.49 1.49 1.51

N 271 257 253 277 277 278 274 275 268 269 272 162 179 276 277 Mean 1.08 1.26 1.19 1.37 1.45 1.32 1.46 1.30 1.44 1.51 1.42 1.48 1.43 1.45 1.40

DMSO Southeast

N 36 34 35 35 36 35 35 34 35 36 34 33 33 36 36 Mean 1.22 1.29 1.43 2.20 1.97 1.97 2.34 1.74 1.69 1.64 1.82 1.82 1.88 1.86 2.22

N 36 34 35 35 36 35 35 34 35 36 34 33 33 36 36 Mean 1.22 1.29 1.43 2.20 1.97 1.97 2.34 1.74 1.69 1.64 1.82 1.82 1.88 1.86 2.22

DNTA Southeast

N 89 83 84 84 86 83 86 86 84 81 83 72 73 88 88 Mean 1.00 1.05 1.01 1.33 1.49 1.31 1.56 1.45 1.48 2.02 1.52 1.39 1.30 1.52 1.56

N 89 83 84 84 86 83 86 86 84 81 83 72 73 88 88 Mean 1.00 1.05 1.01 1.33 1.49 1.31 1.56 1.45 1.48 2.02 1.52 1.39 1.30 1.52 1.56

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 7 8/8/2005

Page 52: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

EECT Central

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 6 7 8 8 Mean 1.75 1.38 1.63 2.13 2.25 2.00 2.00 1.75 2.25 1.57 2.00 1.50 1.71 1.63 2.13

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 6 7 8 8 Mean 1.75 1.38 1.63 2.13 2.25 2.00 2.00 1.75 2.25 1.57 2.00 1.50 1.71 1.63 2.13

EMSP Southeast

N 279 248 258 273 284 279 283 284 283 279 282 245 246 280 278 Mean 1.16 1.32 1.34 1.89 1.51 1.56 1.85 1.46 1.49 1.51 1.71 1.58 1.69 1.60 1.58

N 279 248 258 273 284 279 283 284 283 279 282 245 246 280 278 Mean 1.16 1.32 1.34 1.89 1.51 1.56 1.85 1.46 1.49 1.51 1.71 1.58 1.69 1.60 1.58

ENGR Northwest

N 16 16 12 16 16 16 16 16 15 14 16 2 2 16 16 Mean 1.31 1.56 1.50 1.44 2.50 1.50 1.81 1.38 1.47 1.79 1.69 1.00 1.00 1.81 2.19

N 16 16 12 16 16 16 16 16 15 14 16 2 2 16 16 Mean 1.31 1.56 1.50 1.44 2.50 1.50 1.81 1.38 1.47 1.79 1.69 1.00 1.00 1.81 2.19

ETWR Southwest

N 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 8 4 4 8 8 Mean 1.13 1.25 1.29 2.13 2.00 2.13 2.00 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.13 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.75

N 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 8 4 4 8 8 Mean 1.13 1.25 1.29 2.13 2.00 2.13 2.00 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.13 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.75

FITT Central

N 20 18 17 19 20 20 18 20 20 18 19 12 12 20 20 Mean 1.05 1.33 1.00 1.63 1.25 1.40 1.39 1.30 1.40 1.39 1.42 1.50 1.58 1.30 1.35

N 20 18 17 19 20 20 18 20 20 18 19 12 12 20 20 Mean 1.05 1.33 1.00 1.63 1.25 1.40 1.39 1.30 1.40 1.39 1.42 1.50 1.58 1.30 1.35

FSHD Central

N 218 192 192 197 225 223 210 226 218 206 216 132 136 226 225 Mean 1.10 1.27 1.20 1.31 1.33 1.26 1.40 1.29 1.37 1.51 1.45 1.29 1.26 1.34 1.38

N 218 192 192 197 225 223 210 226 218 206 216 132 136 226 225 Mean 1.10 1.27 1.20 1.31 1.33 1.26 1.40 1.29 1.37 1.51 1.45 1.29 1.26 1.34 1.38

FSHN Central

N 80 69 70 77 82 81 81 81 78 76 81 26 26 82 78 Mean 1.03 1.13 1.04 1.18 1.21 1.17 1.36 1.32 1.31 2.17 1.31 1.23 1.38 1.30 1.32

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 8 8/8/2005

Page 53: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 80 69 70 77 82 81 81 81 78 76 81 26 26 82 78 Mean 1.03 1.13 1.04 1.18 1.21 1.17 1.36 1.32 1.31 2.17 1.31 1.23 1.38 1.30 1.32

HALT Northwest

N 6 5 6 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 6 6 Mean 1.17 1.80 1.50 1.33 1.25 1.67 1.33 1.17 1.50 1.83 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.33 1.33

N 6 5 6 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 6 6 Mean 1.17 1.80 1.50 1.33 1.25 1.67 1.33 1.17 1.50 1.83 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.33 1.33

HAMG Central

N 4 1 2 2 6 4 4 6 6 4 2 0 0 6 6 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.33 1.25 1.25 1.17 1.67 2.50 1.00 . . 2.00 1.33

N 4 1 2 2 6 4 4 6 6 4 2 0 0 6 6 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.33 1.25 1.25 1.17 1.67 2.50 1.00 . . 2.00 1.33

HART Central

N 111 113 110 112 114 111 112 113 113 110 110 114 114 114 112 Mean 1.09 1.15 1.08 1.75 1.85 1.64 1.64 1.48 1.65 1.87 1.69 1.67 1.71 1.60 1.83

Southwest

N 131 129 128 133 133 132 132 130 129 126 127 132 130 131 130 Mean 1.09 1.09 1.05 1.35 1.57 1.39 1.42 1.47 1.47 1.79 1.50 1.40 1.46 1.37 1.42

N 242 242 238 245 247 243 244 243 242 236 237 246 244 245 242 Mean 1.09 1.12 1.07 1.53 1.70 1.50 1.52 1.47 1.56 1.83 1.59 1.52 1.58 1.47 1.61

HITT Southeast

N 79 70 69 78 84 83 79 82 81 74 73 48 43 82 80 Mean 1.14 1.23 1.28 1.69 1.58 1.67 1.96 1.61 1.68 1.82 1.90 1.60 1.60 1.62 1.83

N 79 70 69 78 84 83 79 82 81 74 73 48 43 82 80 Mean 1.14 1.23 1.28 1.69 1.58 1.67 1.96 1.61 1.68 1.82 1.90 1.60 1.60 1.62 1.83

HLAB Southeast

N 36 35 36 36 36 36 36 36 35 36 36 26 26 36 36 Mean 1.00 1.17 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.06 1.06 1.25 1.06 1.08 1.15 1.08 1.08

N 36 35 36 36 36 36 36 36 35 36 36 26 26 36 36 Mean 1.00 1.17 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.06 1.06 1.25 1.06 1.08 1.15 1.08 1.08

HPRS Southeast

N 31 29 29 32 32 32 32 32 31 30 32 13 12 32 32 Mean 1.03 1.14 1.03 1.34 1.19 1.28 1.34 1.19 1.39 1.43 1.28 1.69 1.67 1.25 1.19

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 9 8/8/2005

Page 54: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 31 29 29 32 32 32 32 32 31 30 32 13 12 32 32 Mean 1.03 1.14 1.03 1.34 1.19 1.28 1.34 1.19 1.39 1.43 1.28 1.69 1.67 1.25 1.19

HRPO Central

N 44 45 32 45 45 44 45 44 41 45 45 6 6 45 44 Mean 1.02 1.11 1.09 1.40 1.53 1.45 1.49 1.20 1.34 1.47 1.33 1.50 1.67 1.44 1.45

Northeast

N 21 21 18 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 4 3 21 21 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.38 1.14 1.19 1.29 1.14 1.24 1.29 1.19 1.25 1.00 1.33 1.14

Northwest

N 28 27 24 28 28 28 27 28 28 26 27 6 6 27 28 Mean 1.04 1.19 1.25 1.39 1.29 1.29 1.63 1.25 1.32 1.62 1.48 1.17 1.50 1.44 1.32

Southeast

N 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.56 1.33 1.50 1.22 1.78 1.11 1.78 2.00 1.56 2.50 2.50 1.33 1.11

Southwest

N 34 30 31 36 36 36 36 36 32 35 34 11 10 36 36 Mean 1.03 1.27 1.16 1.44 1.47 1.50 1.75 1.36 1.63 1.86 1.44 1.45 1.40 1.44 1.56

N 136 132 114 139 138 138 138 138 131 136 136 29 27 138 138 Mean 1.02 1.14 1.18 1.40 1.41 1.38 1.57 1.24 1.42 1.60 1.38 1.45 1.52 1.42 1.38

IBUS Central

N 15 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 6 6 15 15 Mean 1.00 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.13 1.27 1.00 1.07 1.27 1.07 1.67 1.67 1.07 1.07

Northwest

N 25 21 21 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 6 6 26 26 Mean 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.19 1.23 1.23 1.35 1.12 1.19 1.31 1.23 1.67 1.67 1.31 1.31

Southwest

N 12 12 10 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 11 4 4 12 12 Mean 1.08 1.25 1.60 1.58 1.75 1.42 1.83 1.17 1.30 1.42 1.27 2.75 2.75 2.00 2.00

N 52 47 45 53 53 53 53 53 51 53 52 16 16 53 53 Mean 1.02 1.13 1.18 1.23 1.30 1.25 1.43 1.09 1.18 1.32 1.19 1.94 1.94 1.40 1.40

IMED Southwest

N 53 50 50 48 55 54 52 55 52 50 50 28 30 55 54 Mean 1.02 1.26 1.02 1.35 1.36 1.17 1.48 1.27 1.37 1.38 1.42 1.32 1.37 1.44 1.35

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 10 8/8/2005

Page 55: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 53 50 50 48 55 54 52 55 52 50 50 28 30 55 54 Mean 1.02 1.26 1.02 1.35 1.36 1.17 1.48 1.27 1.37 1.38 1.42 1.32 1.37 1.44 1.35

INDS Central

N 86 67 83 78 89 89 87 89 88 87 89 41 44 89 88 Mean 1.07 1.06 1.06 1.26 1.37 1.37 1.38 1.36 1.36 1.31 1.54 1.29 1.36 1.30 1.35

N 86 67 83 78 89 89 87 89 88 87 89 41 44 89 88 Mean 1.07 1.06 1.06 1.26 1.37 1.37 1.38 1.36 1.36 1.31 1.54 1.29 1.36 1.30 1.35

ITCC Central

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

N 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

ITMC Central

N 28 28 27 29 29 29 29 29 29 28 28 16 21 29 29 Mean 1.04 1.29 1.22 1.45 1.66 1.52 1.97 1.48 1.48 1.46 1.68 1.63 1.76 1.45 1.59

N 28 28 27 29 29 29 29 29 29 28 28 16 21 29 29 Mean 1.04 1.29 1.22 1.45 1.66 1.52 1.97 1.48 1.48 1.46 1.68 1.63 1.76 1.45 1.59

ITNW Central

N 6 6 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 6 1 1 6 6 Mean 1.17 1.33 1.20 1.50 2.17 2.00 1.83 1.33 1.50 1.40 1.83 2.00 1.00 1.83 2.00

Southwest

N 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 6 10 10 Mean 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.80 1.60 1.70 1.90 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.60 1.60 1.67 1.70 1.70

N 16 16 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 16 6 7 16 16 Mean 1.13 1.19 1.13 1.69 1.81 1.81 1.88 1.44 1.50 1.47 1.69 1.67 1.57 1.75 1.81

ITSC Central

N 47 43 41 48 48 48 47 47 45 46 47 27 30 47 47 Mean 1.02 1.09 1.05 1.33 1.40 1.31 1.47 1.32 1.27 1.22 1.34 1.37 1.30 1.45 1.47

Northeast

N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 6 6 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.50 1.17 1.17 1.67 1.33 1.67 1.67 1.33 1.17

Northwest

N 30 30 29 31 31 31 31 31 29 30 31 16 16 31 31

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 11 8/8/2005

Page 56: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.10 1.03 1.14 1.48 1.68 1.35 1.58 1.45 1.55 1.63 1.45 1.44 1.44 1.52 1.52

ITSC Southeast

N 32 32 31 32 32 32 31 32 31 30 32 20 20 32 32 Mean 1.13 1.19 1.13 1.28 1.28 1.31 1.26 1.25 1.26 1.47 1.41 1.45 1.40 1.47 1.38

Southwest

N 82 83 79 81 84 83 81 83 82 74 80 54 61 82 82 Mean 1.05 1.13 1.30 1.57 1.62 1.46 1.59 1.46 1.54 1.50 1.68 1.76 1.64 1.63 1.61

N 197 194 186 198 201 200 196 199 193 186 196 120 130 198 198 Mean 1.06 1.11 1.19 1.44 1.51 1.38 1.51 1.38 1.42 1.45 1.51 1.58 1.50 1.54 1.51

ITSE Central

N 26 25 24 27 27 27 27 27 27 26 27 11 13 26 26 Mean 1.08 1.32 1.38 1.63 1.56 1.59 1.74 1.30 1.48 1.46 1.52 1.82 1.92 1.50 1.54

Southwest

N 52 52 48 44 53 53 43 52 50 42 48 19 23 51 51 Mean 1.06 1.19 1.33 1.66 1.79 1.55 1.93 1.50 1.58 1.67 1.75 1.63 1.61 1.73 1.82

N 78 77 72 71 80 80 70 79 77 68 75 30 36 77 77 Mean 1.06 1.23 1.35 1.65 1.71 1.56 1.86 1.43 1.55 1.59 1.67 1.70 1.72 1.65 1.73

ITSW Central

N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 9 9 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.11 1.44 1.11 1.33 1.33 1.44 1.22 1.22 1.00 1.00 1.56 1.33

Northwest

N 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 8 8 Mean 1.00 1.13 1.14 1.13 1.38 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.25 1.38 1.25 1.40 1.20 1.25 1.13

N 17 17 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 7 7 17 17 Mean 1.00 1.06 1.13 1.12 1.41 1.12 1.24 1.24 1.35 1.29 1.24 1.29 1.14 1.41 1.24

LGLA Central

N 107 103 90 110 110 107 109 111 105 108 106 33 34 108 106 Mean 1.10 1.21 1.20 1.32 1.37 1.36 1.39 1.22 1.41 1.38 1.26 1.33 1.47 1.45 1.43

N 107 103 90 110 110 107 109 111 105 108 106 33 34 108 106 Mean 1.10 1.21 1.20 1.32 1.37 1.36 1.39 1.22 1.41 1.38 1.26 1.33 1.47 1.45 1.43

MCHN Central

N 95 96 95 97 101 100 98 100 101 98 100 99 99 101 100 Mean 1.04 1.01 1.06 1.10 1.17 1.13 1.13 1.15 1.18 1.13 1.16 1.15 1.15 1.11 1.11

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 12 8/8/2005

Page 57: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 95 96 95 97 101 100 98 100 101 98 100 99 99 101 100 Mean 1.04 1.01 1.06 1.10 1.17 1.13 1.13 1.15 1.18 1.13 1.16 1.15 1.15 1.11 1.11

MDCA Southeast

N 127 127 124 127 128 128 127 128 128 128 125 94 91 127 126 Mean 1.15 1.17 1.21 1.35 1.51 1.44 1.48 1.38 1.40 1.77 1.50 1.41 1.38 1.44 1.56

N 127 127 124 127 128 128 127 128 128 128 125 94 91 127 126 Mean 1.15 1.17 1.21 1.35 1.51 1.44 1.48 1.38 1.40 1.77 1.50 1.41 1.38 1.44 1.56

MLAB Southeast

N 77 71 68 79 78 77 79 79 78 76 77 79 75 79 77 Mean 1.00 1.04 1.07 1.41 1.42 1.26 1.42 1.29 1.32 1.41 1.30 1.37 1.33 1.39 1.52

N 77 71 68 79 78 77 79 79 78 76 77 79 75 79 77 Mean 1.00 1.04 1.07 1.41 1.42 1.26 1.42 1.29 1.32 1.41 1.30 1.37 1.33 1.39 1.52

MLSC Northeast

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 . . 2.00 2.00

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 . . 2.00 2.00

MRKG Central

N 30 27 24 31 30 30 29 30 29 30 30 8 8 31 30 Mean 1.03 1.11 1.38 1.39 1.63 1.43 1.52 1.37 1.31 1.80 1.50 1.75 1.75 1.39 1.60

Northwest

N 29 26 26 29 29 29 29 28 29 29 28 6 6 29 29 Mean 1.14 1.12 1.46 1.41 1.34 1.34 1.62 1.32 1.38 1.66 1.54 1.83 1.83 1.41 1.48

N 59 53 50 60 59 59 58 58 58 59 58 14 14 60 59 Mean 1.08 1.11 1.42 1.40 1.49 1.39 1.57 1.34 1.34 1.73 1.52 1.79 1.79 1.40 1.54

MUSC Northwest

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . . 1.00 1.00

N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . . 1.00 1.00

MUSP Northwest

N 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 13 8/8/2005

Page 58: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

N 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

NMTT Southeast

N 69 59 64 75 74 72 73 74 72 73 74 70 69 72 73 Mean 1.14 1.56 1.25 1.72 1.74 1.46 2.00 1.58 1.47 1.84 1.50 1.47 1.51 1.51 1.85

N 69 59 64 75 74 72 73 74 72 73 74 70 69 72 73 Mean 1.14 1.56 1.25 1.72 1.74 1.46 2.00 1.58 1.47 1.84 1.50 1.47 1.51 1.51 1.85

OTHA Southeast

N 62 63 61 65 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 43 43 65 65 Mean 1.23 1.14 1.15 1.52 1.67 1.57 1.86 1.57 1.68 1.65 1.94 1.53 1.60 1.60 1.80

N 62 63 61 65 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 43 43 65 65 Mean 1.23 1.14 1.15 1.52 1.67 1.57 1.86 1.57 1.68 1.65 1.94 1.53 1.60 1.60 1.80

PBAD Northeast

N 16 16 15 16 16 15 16 16 13 14 14 12 13 16 16 Mean 1.06 1.13 1.07 1.44 1.63 1.67 1.38 1.63 1.69 1.57 1.50 2.08 1.77 1.94 1.75

N 16 16 15 16 16 15 16 16 13 14 14 12 13 16 16 Mean 1.06 1.13 1.07 1.44 1.63 1.67 1.38 1.63 1.69 1.57 1.50 2.08 1.77 1.94 1.75

PHRA Southeast

N 180 175 160 169 183 174 180 181 174 167 170 128 123 179 180 Mean 1.18 1.27 1.36 1.67 1.87 1.73 1.86 1.73 1.79 2.11 1.92 1.65 1.80 2.06 2.02

N 180 175 160 169 183 174 180 181 174 167 170 128 123 179 180 Mean 1.18 1.27 1.36 1.67 1.87 1.73 1.86 1.73 1.79 2.11 1.92 1.65 1.80 2.06 2.02

PHTC Central

N 32 31 30 33 32 33 33 33 33 30 32 33 33 33 33 Mean 1.22 1.26 1.27 1.36 1.41 1.21 1.61 1.24 1.36 1.37 1.63 1.15 1.21 1.33 1.30

N 32 31 30 33 32 33 33 33 33 30 32 33 33 33 33 Mean 1.22 1.26 1.27 1.36 1.41 1.21 1.61 1.24 1.36 1.37 1.63 1.15 1.21 1.33 1.30

POFI Central

N 83 79 71 85 85 85 83 85 80 79 84 55 57 83 81 Mean 1.05 1.05 1.27 1.40 1.47 1.33 1.49 1.39 1.51 1.43 1.40 1.56 1.53 1.45 1.56

Northeast

N 42 41 36 40 42 42 37 42 41 36 40 34 32 42 42 Mean 1.10 1.02 1.17 1.43 1.43 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.32 1.53 1.55 1.44 1.53 1.31 1.43

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 14 8/8/2005

Page 59: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

POFI Northwest

N 34 34 32 34 34 34 34 34 32 30 32 12 15 34 33 Mean 1.03 1.06 1.16 1.50 1.56 1.38 1.56 1.32 1.34 1.77 1.41 1.67 1.73 1.50 1.48

Southeast

N 62 62 57 57 65 64 61 64 63 56 58 44 42 65 65 Mean 1.11 1.05 1.16 1.54 1.42 1.30 1.49 1.22 1.35 1.63 1.40 1.55 1.45 1.38 1.34

Southwest

N 98 99 86 101 101 100 100 99 97 97 96 62 62 98 102 Mean 1.14 1.05 1.19 1.56 1.63 1.48 1.71 1.45 1.64 1.78 1.61 1.63 1.60 1.63 1.70

N 319 315 282 317 327 325 315 324 313 298 310 207 208 322 323 Mean 1.09 1.05 1.20 1.49 1.51 1.36 1.54 1.35 1.48 1.63 1.49 1.57 1.55 1.48 1.53

POFL Central

N 9 8 6 8 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 1 1 9 9 Mean 1.11 1.13 1.17 1.38 1.78 1.25 1.67 1.33 1.50 2.00 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.78 1.89

N 9 8 6 8 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 1 1 9 9 Mean 1.11 1.13 1.17 1.38 1.78 1.25 1.67 1.33 1.50 2.00 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.78 1.89

POFM Central

N 47 46 43 49 49 49 48 48 47 47 48 20 20 48 48 Mean 1.02 1.09 1.05 1.27 1.41 1.27 1.31 1.25 1.28 1.36 1.35 1.55 1.55 1.29 1.31

Northeast

N 26 25 25 26 26 26 26 26 25 24 26 17 17 26 26 Mean 1.00 1.08 1.04 1.08 1.00 1.08 1.19 1.19 1.24 1.42 1.23 1.59 1.53 1.12 1.12

Northwest

N 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 10 10 8 10 2 2 9 10 Mean 1.20 1.00 1.20 1.67 2.44 1.60 1.70 2.30 2.20 2.13 1.60 2.00 2.50 2.11 2.60

Southeast

N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 6 3 2 6 6 Mean 1.17 1.00 1.00 1.83 1.83 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.60 1.50 1.67 1.50 1.67 1.83

Southwest

N 38 37 33 39 39 38 39 39 38 35 38 16 15 39 39 Mean 1.05 1.05 1.03 1.44 1.62 1.16 1.41 1.23 1.45 1.54 1.58 1.56 1.53 1.79 1.59

N 127 124 117 129 129 129 129 129 126 119 128 58 56 128 129

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 15 8/8/2005

Page 60: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

Mean 1.05 1.06 1.05 1.33 1.48 1.24 1.36 1.33 1.41 1.49 1.42 1.59 1.57 1.48 1.48

POFT Central

N 75 68 65 73 75 74 72 74 75 73 72 36 36 74 73 Mean 1.09 1.13 1.32 1.52 1.57 1.41 1.53 1.38 1.52 1.59 1.63 1.72 1.89 1.61 1.62

Northeast

N 15 14 12 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 15 7 7 15 15 Mean 1.00 1.14 1.25 1.27 1.20 1.13 1.47 1.00 1.20 1.64 1.47 1.57 1.43 1.20 1.33

Northwest

N 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 6 6 10 10 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.10 1.20 1.20 1.10 1.20 1.60 1.30 1.17 1.17 1.30 1.30

Southeast

N 47 45 44 46 48 48 45 48 48 44 46 33 31 47 47 Mean 1.04 1.11 1.20 1.70 1.67 1.44 1.58 1.42 1.56 1.70 1.74 1.76 1.65 1.68 1.64

Southwest

N 43 43 37 43 44 44 44 43 42 43 43 22 23 44 44 Mean 1.00 1.07 1.11 1.37 1.23 1.23 1.36 1.14 1.36 1.81 1.58 1.32 1.39 1.34 1.32

N 190 180 167 187 192 191 186 190 190 184 186 104 103 190 189 Mean 1.05 1.11 1.22 1.51 1.46 1.34 1.48 1.29 1.45 1.67 1.61 1.61 1.63 1.52 1.51

PSTR Central

N 51 52 52 46 52 51 53 53 51 52 50 51 51 52 52 Mean 1.08 1.06 1.04 1.33 1.13 1.16 1.23 1.13 1.14 1.48 1.26 1.16 1.29 1.10 1.06

N 51 52 52 46 52 51 53 53 51 52 50 51 51 52 52 Mean 1.08 1.06 1.04 1.33 1.13 1.16 1.23 1.13 1.14 1.48 1.26 1.16 1.29 1.10 1.06

PTAC Northeast

N 23 23 20 23 23 23 22 23 23 22 22 10 10 23 23 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.04 1.09 1.04 1.27 1.13 1.09 1.18 1.32 1.40 1.30 1.17 1.13

N 23 23 20 23 23 23 22 23 23 22 22 10 10 23 23 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.04 1.09 1.04 1.27 1.13 1.09 1.18 1.32 1.40 1.30 1.17 1.13

PTHA Southeast

N 103 88 93 98 105 104 101 105 105 100 97 91 90 105 105 Mean 1.16 1.28 1.35 1.81 1.94 1.76 1.88 1.98 1.78 2.05 1.86 1.87 1.80 1.86 1.95

N 103 88 93 98 105 104 101 105 105 100 97 91 90 105 105 Mean 1.16 1.28 1.35 1.81 1.94 1.76 1.88 1.98 1.78 2.05 1.86 1.87 1.80 1.86 1.95

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 16 8/8/2005

Page 61: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

RADR Southeast

N 375 330 333 376 383 367 382 383 374 378 381 270 244 384 383 Mean 1.04 1.16 1.16 1.36 1.45 1.37 1.59 1.40 1.43 1.50 1.46 1.40 1.40 1.43 1.51

N 375 330 333 376 383 367 382 383 374 378 381 270 244 384 383 Mean 1.04 1.16 1.16 1.36 1.45 1.37 1.59 1.40 1.43 1.50 1.46 1.40 1.40 1.43 1.51

RELE Southeast

N 12 11 8 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 5 5 12 12 Mean 1.00 1.36 1.63 1.17 1.25 1.25 1.33 1.25 1.83 1.58 1.42 1.60 1.60 1.58 1.25

Southwest

N 110 84 106 98 111 109 103 111 108 97 98 47 47 109 109 Mean 1.05 1.25 1.07 1.30 1.25 1.26 1.41 1.16 1.27 1.56 1.29 1.43 1.43 1.28 1.29

N 122 95 114 110 123 121 115 123 120 109 110 52 52 121 121 Mean 1.04 1.26 1.11 1.28 1.25 1.26 1.40 1.17 1.33 1.56 1.30 1.44 1.44 1.31 1.29

RNSG Southeast

N 516 512 501 522 528 518 525 525 508 506 497 390 388 523 522 Mean 1.09 1.16 1.24 1.52 1.50 1.46 1.75 1.43 1.48 1.64 1.54 1.43 1.46 1.49 1.55

N 516 512 501 522 528 518 525 525 508 506 497 390 388 523 522 Mean 1.09 1.16 1.24 1.52 1.50 1.46 1.75 1.43 1.48 1.64 1.54 1.43 1.46 1.49 1.55

RSPT Southeast

N 82 78 76 83 83 84 82 84 84 81 82 25 25 83 82 Mean 1.21 1.51 1.41 2.00 2.04 1.90 2.35 1.83 1.79 1.94 2.06 1.72 1.80 2.05 2.22

N 82 78 76 83 83 84 82 84 84 81 82 25 25 83 82 Mean 1.21 1.51 1.41 2.00 2.04 1.90 2.35 1.83 1.79 1.94 2.06 1.72 1.80 2.05 2.22

RSTO Central

N 70 69 69 72 72 71 69 72 70 69 72 41 42 72 72 Mean 1.01 1.07 1.09 1.19 1.25 1.21 1.36 1.18 1.26 1.43 1.33 1.51 1.55 1.22 1.17

N 70 69 69 72 72 71 69 72 70 69 72 41 42 72 72 Mean 1.01 1.07 1.09 1.19 1.25 1.21 1.36 1.18 1.26 1.43 1.33 1.51 1.55 1.22 1.17

RTVB Southwest

N 27 25 27 27 28 28 27 28 27 25 26 19 18 27 28 Mean 1.11 1.72 1.22 1.26 1.46 1.71 1.63 1.25 1.44 1.68 1.81 1.74 1.72 1.37 1.50

N 27 25 27 27 28 28 27 28 27 25 26 19 18 27 28 Mean 1.11 1.72 1.22 1.26 1.46 1.71 1.63 1.25 1.44 1.68 1.81 1.74 1.72 1.37 1.50

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 17 8/8/2005

Page 62: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR: SUMMARY OF MEANS REPORT : SPRING 2005 WORKFORCE SECTIONS

Subject College Q01 Q02 Q03 Q04 Q05 Q06 Q07 Q08 Q09 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15

RUSS Northwest

N 10 11 11 10 11 11 10 11 11 10 10 4 4 11 11 Mean 1.10 1.09 1.00 1.40 1.27 1.27 1.30 1.09 1.09 1.20 1.20 1.75 1.75 1.09 1.09

N 10 11 11 10 11 11 10 11 11 10 10 4 4 11 11 Mean 1.10 1.09 1.00 1.40 1.27 1.27 1.30 1.09 1.09 1.20 1.20 1.75 1.75 1.09 1.09

SGNL Southeast

N 16 15 15 16 16 16 16 15 13 16 16 4 13 16 16 Mean 1.06 1.27 1.07 1.31 1.63 1.38 1.69 1.20 1.69 1.38 1.38 2.50 2.54 1.25 1.44

N 16 15 15 16 16 16 16 15 13 16 16 4 13 16 16 Mean 1.06 1.27 1.07 1.31 1.63 1.38 1.69 1.20 1.69 1.38 1.38 2.50 2.54 1.25 1.44

SLNG Southeast

N 32 31 28 32 29 31 30 29 29 30 31 13 16 32 31 Mean 1.22 1.58 1.25 2.06 2.07 1.81 1.93 1.55 1.93 1.70 1.74 1.92 2.38 1.63 1.94

N 32 31 28 32 29 31 30 29 29 30 31 13 16 32 31 Mean 1.22 1.58 1.25 2.06 2.07 1.81 1.93 1.55 1.93 1.70 1.74 1.92 2.38 1.63 1.94

SRGT Southeast

N 96 93 95 95 97 97 97 97 98 94 97 88 86 97 98 Mean 1.07 1.14 1.08 1.40 1.49 1.41 1.60 1.40 1.46 1.46 1.57 1.30 1.38 1.31 1.37

N 96 93 95 95 97 97 97 97 98 94 97 88 86 97 98 Mean 1.07 1.14 1.08 1.40 1.49 1.41 1.60 1.40 1.46 1.46 1.57 1.30 1.38 1.31 1.37

VNSG Southeast

N 363 350 353 370 374 366 372 371 370 368 365 245 244 372 369 Mean 1.10 1.25 1.18 1.62 1.56 1.54 2.00 1.45 1.41 1.74 1.55 1.47 1.51 1.48 1.64

N 363 350 353 370 374 366 372 371 370 368 365 245 244 372 369 Mean 1.10 1.25 1.18 1.62 1.56 1.54 2.00 1.45 1.41 1.74 1.55 1.47 1.51 1.48 1.64

VTHT Northwest

N 41 40 41 42 42 42 41 42 42 39 42 26 24 41 40 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.07 1.05 1.27 1.07 1.10 1.72 1.07 1.08 1.04 1.05 1.05

N 41 40 41 42 42 42 41 42 42 39 42 26 24 41 40 Mean 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.07 1.05 1.27 1.07 1.10 1.72 1.07 1.08 1.04 1.05 1.05

Houston Community College System Office Of Institutional Research

RG: SP2005_WFC.spo 18 8/8/2005

Page 63: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System SEOI – Instructor Office of Institutional Research Updated on: 1/06/03

INSTRUCTOR’S DIRECTIONS

Enclosed are two sets of forms. All students are requested to complete an SEOI Questionnaire. The Written Comments form is optional. Please do not staple the forms together. 1. Specify an individual and location for the student proctor to return completed surveys, usually a department or campus office. 2. Recruit a student proctor to conduct the survey. Review with the student proctor their directions as the proctor (see Student Proctor's Directions). 3. Give the survey packet to the student proctor. Inform the student proctor about the return

of the surveys (name of individual and location). In order to ensure proper handling of SEOI forms, be sure to give the student proctor the envelope in which the survey materials were received. This is the return envelope.

4. Write your name and the Class number (not the course number) on the blackboard.

Explain to your students that the purpose of this survey is to improve certain aspects of the course and to help you improve the way you teach. Please be sure to explain that the survey is anonymous. Under no circumstances will the instructor know the student’s identity. Introduce the student proctor to the class.

5. Leave the room and do not return until the students have completed and turned in their surveys to the student proctor. The proctor is responsible for turning the materials in. Please make sure the student proctor understands where to turn in the survey packet.

If you have any questions regarding these directions please call 713-718-6259

Page 64: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Houston Community College System SEOI – Proctor Office of Institutional Research Updated on: 1/06/03

STUDENT PROCTOR’S DIRECTIONS

Enclosed are two sets of forms. All students are requested to complete an SEOI Questionnaire. The Written Comments form is optional. Please do not staple the forms together. 1. Make sure that the Class number that the instructor wrote on the board matches the class

number on the survey packet. After the instructor has left the room, pass out both sheets of the Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI) survey. Keep any extra forms in your possession.

2. Read “Statement of Intent” to the students:

This survey instrument has been designed to identify strengths and weaknesses of your instructor and your perceptions of the effectiveness of the class instruction. Please give us your serious and fair evaluation of both your and class instruction.

3. Read the following instructions to the students:

• Use only a #2 pencil or a blue or black ink pen. • Write the instructor’s name and bubble in the Class number in the upper

right corner of the Questionnaire and the Written Comments sheet, if used. (Check to see that this is being done properly.)

• Fill out the Questionnaire independently, without consultation with other students. • Do not sign your name or leave any marks of identification on the answer sheet. • If this is a lecture class, you do not need to complete Section III. If this is a lab, clinical, workshop or practicum class complete all sections. • Written comments are optional but very much encouraged.

4. When students have completed the survey, collect the forms, place them face up in the

same direction, and place both completed and unused forms into the original envelope and close it.

5. Return the envelope (containing all forms) to the location and individual specified by

your instructor. (This is most likely the department or campus secretary) Do not return the forms to the instructor.

Page 65: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

Click here to view the SEOI Survey Instrument.

Page 66: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

updated on:12/14/01

INFORMATION SHEET - STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION (SEOI) PROGRAM

HOW TO READ THE INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTOR REPORT

Your individual evaluation report contains the following information: • Name, Class Number (CRN), Course Title, Course Number • Question identification numbers (Q01 – Q15) appear across the top of the evaluation report. The

numbers correspond with the items on the standard questionnaire forms. • TOTAL - The "TOTAL " row shown reflects the total number of students in a specific course who

responded to each item. The numbers underneath "TOTAL" correspond to the items on the answer scale for the standard questionnaire.

Values for the answer scale to Questions 01-03: 1 = YES 2 = NEUTRAL 3 = NO 4 = NO BASIS FOR JUDGMENT

Values for the answer scale to Questions 04-15: 1 = STRONGLY AGREE 2 = AGREE 3 = NEUTRAL 4 = DISAGREE 5 = STRONGLY DISAGREE 6 = NO BASIS FOR JUDGMENT

• MEAN - Averaged scores for each questionnaire item per individual class. At the bottom of the last page for each report, you will find cumulative statistics which provide the following information: • TOT. FREQ (total frequency) - Indicates the cumulative sum of students from your combined classes who

responded to each item. • TOTAL MEAN - Indicates combined mean scores for each questionnaire item for all your classes. • SYST MEAN – Indicates the combined mean scores on each questionnaire item for your discipline across the

entire college system. NOTE: If you taught more than one course during the semester, the data for those courses appear on the printout under the respective course numbers. Now, turn to the other side of this sheet for an illustration of how to read your report.

Page 67: Results of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI)Overview of SEOI Responses, Spring 2005 In the responses discussed below, respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed, indicated

updated on:12/14/01

HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM STUDENT EVALUATION REPORT - BY INSTRUCTOR

NAME CRN Q01 Q02 Q03 Q4 ……. Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 DOE, J. M. 54321 ABCD 2301 TOTAL 8 8 8 8 ……. 8 0 0 0 1 3 7 7 3 7 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 3 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 MEAN 1.87 1.12 1.25 1.25 1.12 0 0 0 TOT. FREQ 8 8 8 8 ……. 8 0 0 0 1 3 7 7 3 7 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 3 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 TOTAL MEAN 1.87 1.12 1.12 1.87 ……. 1.12 0 0 0 SYST MEAN 1.85 1.20 1.19 1.85 1.17 0 0 0

FOR QUESTIONS 01 - 03: Look at the TOTAL Now look under the column Q01: • Eight students responded to questionnaire item

one. • Three students answered "Yes" to Question 1. • Three students answered "Neutral" to Question 1. • Two students answered "No" to Question 1. • None of the students answered "No Basis for

Judgement" to Question 1. There are four possible answers to Q1-Q3, but if a field is not populated, it does not appear on the report.

FOR QUESTIONS 04 - 15: Look at the TOTAL.

Now look under the column Q04: • Eight students responded to questionnaire item

four. • Three students answered "Strongly Agree" to

Question 4. • Three students answered "Agree" to Question 4. • Two students answered "Neutral" to Question 4 • None of the students answered "Disagree",

"Strongly Disagree", or "No Basis for Judgement" to Question 4. There are six possible answers to Q4-Q15, but if a field is not populated, it does not appear on the report.

Look at the TOT. FREQ row that (number of responses). Now look under column Q01: • The total number of responses for all classes taught by the instructor is eight. In the example, the number for the

cumulative statistic is the same because the instructor only taught one class. For an instructor who taught more than one class, the cumulative statistics would reflect the total responses received from all students taught during the semester.

The System mean is the cumulative average for all instructors from the appropriate teaching area who participated in the program during the semester. These figures provide comparative performance information.