IV. ASSESSMENTS
Quantitative Student Evaluations
The results of student evaluations of my labs taught at Rutgers University from 93-98 consistently placed me among the highest ranked instructors for courses of equal level across the department (see Figures 1 and 3, see below). Results from my evaluations from upper level undergraduate stratigraphy labs (Figure 3) also demonstrate the success I had teaching advanced classes. My experience as a primary to university educator has shown that the teaching methodology described above produces enthusiastic students who are concerned more with understanding material than simple memorizing it. Furthermore, students develop the motivation to want to learn and explore the world in their lives. I believe it is this enthusiasm which is reflected in my evaluations.

Figure 1. Comparison showing rankings of my evaluations versus the mean of the other Physical Geology lab instructors . The evaluation is ranked from 1 being the lowest to 5 being the highest. Physical geology labs were conducted by the university (See evaluation package).

Questions used in evaluations.
1) The instructor was prepared for class and presented material in an organized manner.
2) The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions.
3) The instructor generated interest in the course material.
4) The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course material.
5) The instructor assigned grades fairly.
6) The labs related well to the lecture part of the class.
7) The labs proved useful in better understanding the lecture material.
8) I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course.
9) I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as:
10) I rate the overall quality of the course as

Figure 2. Comparison showing rankings of my evaluations versus the mean of the other Physical Geology lecture instructors . The evaluation is ranked from 1 being the lowest to 5 being the highest. Evaluations were conducted by the university.

Questions used in evaluations.
1) The instructor was prepared for class and presented material in an organized manner.
2) The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions.
3) The instructor generated interest in the course material.
4) The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course material.
5) The instructor assigned grades fairly.
6) The labs related well to the lecture part of the class.
7) The labs proved useful in better understanding the lecture material.
8) I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course.
9) I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as:
10) I rate the overall quality of the course as

Figure 3. Rankings of my stratigraphy lab evaluations. The evaluation is ranked from 1 being the lowest to 5 being the highest. On my own initiative, I conducted these evaluations for the stratigraphy labs.

Questions used in evaluations.
1) The instructor was prepared for class and presented material in an organized manner.
2) The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions.
3) The instructor generated interest in the course material.
4) The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course material.
5) The instructor assigned grades fairly.
6) The labs related well to the lecture part of the class.
7) The labs proved useful in better understanding the lecture material.
8) I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course.
9) I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as.
10) I rate the overall quality of the course as.