Number of Respondents: 12
Effectiveness of Course
How would you rate the organization of the course?
0 Below Average
0 Average
0 Good
12 Excellent
(Add-in) Respondent 3: “or above excellent. both in how every class is conducted & how the syllabus is organized
To whom would you recommend this course?
6 Everyone
4 Any student curious about this topic
3 Students specializing in this area (Respondent 3: “w/ some exceptions”)
0 Students preparing for comps
0 No one
3. How well did the course match your expectations from the description and follow the syllabus? explain if needed.
Respondent 1: “very closely”
Respondent 2: “very well. color has been an interest of mine and this course furthered it”
Respondent 3: “I believe Prof. Chuh has the ability to move beyond disciplinary bounds & discourses in such a way that permit meeting expectations but also moving beyond them”
Respondent 4: “Not at all what I anticipated”
Respondent 5: “Exceeded my expectations – opened up whole new vistas of thought that I haven’t foreseen from the description. Wonderfully generative in all ways.”
Respondent 6: “Exceeded expectations!”
Respondent 7: “Far exceeded expectations”
Respondent 8: “The course was different than what I had expected from the description, but in a way that I found really generative. We followed the syllabus almost exactly (if not exactly), I think.”
Respondent 9: “The class met my expectations in the sense that I learned new things and was pushed outside my comfort zone & into thinking about race & color in new ways. I was sort of confused throughout the semester, but not in a bad way, in a ‘I don’t know how to process/what to do with this information in a larger context.’ It was a new experience I had to get used to before it became generative”
Respondent 10: “The course in every way is mind-blowing. From the selections of reading materials, discussion, to projects development, everything is rather unprecedented to my learning experience”
Respondent 11: no response
Respondent 12: “I didn’t expect this to be so “art” focused. Even though I had no previous art experience, I was still able to engage.”
Respondent 13:
Respondent 14:
Respondent 15:
Use of Class Time
4. On average, the instructor spent most time on:
2 Lecture
10 Class discussion
Student presentations
(Add-in) Respondent 11: “the lecture component was highly appreciated in a seminar setting as a way to organize thoughts leading up to that day’s class”
5. On average, the instructor spent least time on:
2 Lecture
Class discussion
7 Student presentations
(Add-in) Respondent 8: [Lecture and student presentations] “about evenly distributed”
(Add-in) Respondent 9: [Lecture, class discussion, and student presentations] “in great balance”
6. Circle here if course time was evenly distributed among the previous choices. 4
(Add-in) Respondent 8: “We did more discussion, but lecture/presentation were about evenly distributed”
7. How would you rate the professor’s ability to use class time in an interesting and generative manner?
Below Average
1 Average
2 Good
9 Excellent
Other
8. Comment on the use of class time in this course.
Respondent 1: “class discussions were focused and open enough to allow for students to bring in varying perspectives;” “the comments given by Kandice at the beginning of class were extremely useful in returning to key questions and incorporating the material”
Respondent 2: “Excellent. This class was so generative that I always left with a different sense;” “I loved this class so much that it always went too quickly”
Respondent 3: “allowed students to engage fully though always having a handle on class topic & dynamics”
Respondent 4: no response
Respondent 5: no response
Respondent 6: “Class time was distributed and utilized perfectly;” “Class time was perfect. Lecture and student participation was distributed fairly and extremely generative”
Respondent 7: no response
Respondent 8: “I think that because there were varying experiences within the class with the material, it could be difficult to find entry points for some students”
Respondent 9: “It was a good mix of class discussion & the professor clearing up terms & concepts being used in class”
Respondent 10: “very effective”
Respondent 11: “Excellent structure of class, thoughtfully paced but always flexible so students felt at ease to speak on any pertinent topic at any given point of the class”
Respondent 12: “After some time, it seemed like the same overarching themes over and over.”
Respondent 13:
Respondent 14:
Respondent 15:
Scholarship
9. Describe the professor’s methodological, theoretical, or critical approaches emphasized in the course:
Respondent 1: “cultural studies approach – lots of attention to building attention to methodology as readers and writers”
Respondent 2: “affective, expanding, generative – being-with”
Respondent 3: “prof. Chuh is obviously interested in pedagogy. She’s also interested in a theoretical approach/understanding that uses theory as grounds for political animation/motivational action”
Respondent 4: no response
Respondent 5: “These are clear in her course description and her own scholarly work and commitments”
Respondent 6: “aesthetics, color theory, critical race, ethnic studies”
Respondent 7: no response
Respondent 8: “It was really helpful to be reminded from week to week of some of the guiding theories (?) and questions that informed our readings and discussions.”
Respondent 9: no response
Respondent 10: “Very well focused on developing the original critical approach. I would like more info. on the basic critical traditions involved in this discourse.”
Respondent 11: “Highly appreciated her encouraging pedagogical approach – reminders of realistic, materialist goals (paper writing) but also reminders of lont-term academic, intellectual goals”
Respondent 12: “Dr. Chuh is highly intelligent and well-read but never came off as arrogant or unapproachable.”
Respondent 13:
Respondent 14:
Respondent 15:
10. Rate the professor’s ability to alert students to developments in recent scholarship and refer them to unexplored areas of research:
Below Average
Average
2 Good
10 Excellent
Other
Availability and Evaluation
11. How responsive was the instructor to course work and conferences:
Not very
1 Acceptably
11 Very
(Add-in) Respondent 3: “Prof. Chuh is one of the most available professors I’ve come across at the GC”
12. Comment on the professor’s ability to include the perspectives or achievements of people traditionally excluded from the cannon (e.g. racial minorities, ethnic minorities, women, disabled people, those who challenge heteronormativity and gender conformity):
Respondent 1: “minoritized (?) subjects are centralized and we are asked to consider the implications/possibilities of minoritized (?) subjects as exemplary subjects”
Respondent 2: “Both in class discussion and in the syllabus – this was well-developed and continuously emphasized. Important and necessary discourses”
Respondent 3: “I think this is her purpose/goal”
Respondent 4: “Excellent. Knows so much about a variety of topics, writers, etc.”
Respondent 5: “The whole class was about centering (?) on these perspectives and experiences – indeed to reformulate aesthetic sense – moving (?) altogether away from [unreadable word] & Enlightenment/post-Enlightenment to something else”
Respondent 6: “Wonderfully [unreadable word] a lot. I wish all faculty at CUNY included more material from outside the white canon”
Respondent 7: “Fantastic”
Respondent 8: “Excellent”
Respondent 9: “This is all we did. It was wonderful.”
Respondent 10: “This course is exemplary in paying attention to the minoritized literary, artistic, philosophical….materials”
Respondent 11: no response
Respondent 12: “Because of the wide range of topics, everything was touched on briefly (versus few things in deeper discussion). It was a little about a lot, not a lot about a little. So, tho student must be very independent to guide himself/herself or seek out private office hours.”
Respondent 13:
Respondent 14:
Respondent 15:
Please use the space below to give further written evaluation of the course or to expand on any of the comments above:
Respondent 1: no response
Respondent 2: “This has been a wonderful and generative (?) engagment. Thank you”
Respondent 3: “one of the best classes I’ve taken. ever.”
Respondent 4: no response
Respondent 5: “Love Kandice!”
Respondent 6: “Great class. Beyond useful and important for my own scholarship.”
Respondent 7: no response
Respondent 8: “The class was, on the whole, really excellent and generative!”
Respondent 9: “Kandice Chuh was an amazing professor. Her insight & her explanations were worth taking the course alone. But the student engagement, the comments on our work, & the enagement with current events was more than expected in one course.”
Respondent 10: no response
Respondent 11: no response
Respondent 12: no response
Respondent 13:
Respondent 14:
Respondent 15:
