Intellectual Assessments Evaluations

Course Evaluations for Intellectual Assessment

How was this an effective learning experience for you; what worked for you?

–          What worked for me out of this course was administering the test and getting hands on experience. Hands on experience by test administration is an effective learning tool for this class.

–          The testing procedures and the knowledge of how to implement tests to individuals. Also, the conclusions pertaining to test results. The foundation of intelligence testing was essential.

–          The class readings and hands on experience with the intelligence tests were valuable and helpful. The debates stimulated thinking and learning of the important issues in psychological testing.

–          The practical experience.

–          A tape was shown by the instructor – he asked the examinee about Dr. King and the examinee responded that he cheated on his wife – after questioning her again she commented that he was a ayuyl nights leader. I found it offensive and that portion of the tape should have been omitted.

–          I particularly like the approach which required students to self-study others than just memorizing the material presented in class.

–          I think by performing a test on an adult or child really helped me learn how to give the WISC or WAIS also the quizzes  were helpful.

–          Yes. Hands on training. Weekly quizzes kept me abreast of reading.

–          It pushed me to over extend myself. The work load was to heavy. Dr. Choca is too demanding of his students.

–          It was very time consuming work that forced me to sacrifice and manage time effectively. Nothing in the class worked for me. Every assignment was a stretch and made others outside of my class get involved, which frustrated the class work even more. One thing did work and that was weekly quizzes.

–          This has been an effective learning experience because I read both text books completely. In addition to this, we had the luxury of administering  IQ tests.

–          Hand on experience – It was great being able to use the test. Dr. Choca is a great teacher, very knowledgeable, expert level.

–          The testing procedure, real life experience, quizzes

–          Effective yes, presentation of material great, class size appropriate for course content. Teacher availability = great.

–          The application of learning something real and practical is good. Things to do every week was nice.

–          It is a new experience, worth acquiring. By and large, I enjoy the class and learn something.

–          I enjoyed getting to actually test people with a real IQ test. I thought it was very interesting and gave me a chance to see if I really would like to give the test at a job.

–          2009

–          Had very clear course requirements and a well-organized class structure. He was willing to help with class material outside of class too.

–          Real-world clinical examples of his experience really helped understand course content(se) video w/ admin [sic], WAIS/WISC, great feedback on protocols made sure we were doing them perfectly. Very clear well organized lectures.

–          Weekly evaluations of our understanding of the material & administration of the WAIS & WISC.

–          Weekly quizzes kept me on track w/ [sic] readings & cementing the most important parts of the class. Guest lecturers were a great addition.

–          Weekly test emphasized reading; willingness to work with students for extended time was very helpful.

–          Weekly quizzes were great – really helped me to grasp a lot of information quickly & process it for later use. I really liked writing the case conceptualizations – I thought it was very clinically relevant & a great skill to practice.

–          Well prepared. Gave interesting case examples. Invited guest lecturers.

–          Video of assessment. Weekly quizzes.

–          Allowance for question & answer sessions.

–          Use of quizes [sic] instead of major exams was good. Dr. Choca provided good case examples.

–          Video tape of test administration.

–          Weekly quizzes helped with keeping up w/ [sic] reading & learning.

–          Visual aids, presentations.

–          Was understanding and flexible. Brought in many relevant items/things (testing kits, speakers, studies).

How was this an ineffective learning experience for you; what didn’t work for you?

–           What did not work for me was the abundance of quizzes and the text books. The text book was too wordy (WISC) and didn’t provide question and answer at the end of the chapters.

–          The numerous amount of test that needed to be conducted made it difficult to work around examinees schedules. More importantly the lack of opportunity to inquire about assigned readings before weekly quizzes are given made it difficult to understand information at times.

–          No flaws of course. But the course tried to compact in too much material without focusing on or reviewing reading material.

–          I found the tests (quizzes) surprising in the material that was asked. I would have liked some class practice.

–          The teacher didn’t teach. No follow up discussion of book or test material was given. I felt this could have been done with out the need of a teacher in this format. Too many protocols required if we were unsupervised each time.

–          There was just a lot of work to be done each week.

–          Would of liked feedback on quiz content.

–          I didn’t like the weekly quizzes. Some of the material were too detailed to comprehend written explanation.

–          Testing 12 subjects, the debates, his lectures.

–          Basically, we prepared our selves for the weekly quizzes. Dr. Choca did not lecture or go over information prior to taking quizzes. However, he did explain pertinent info in lectures after taking the weekly quizzes.

–          Quizzes were extremely hard. Maybe a study guide would help.

–          Some lectures were not relevant to quizzes. More book information should have been included in the lecture.

–          More class discussion on theoretical views and controversial issues.

–          The quizzes are sometimes worded in a way that makes the quiz a lot harder than it should be.

–          More explanation should be provided regarding which chapter should be studied for the next quiz.

–          I thought that the quizzes on the book were quite difficult and it was hard to know what would asked on the quiz.

–          2009

–          The WAIS and WISC books were very helpful. The weekly quizzes were more effective in [facilitating] my ability to learn.

–          Being able to administer actual WAIS/WISC assessments, bk’s [sic] were good, I enjoyed the guest lectures.

–          Text books were very helpful. Organization/syllabus was informative & well-structured.

–          Textbooks were helpful, though occasionally confusing b/c [sic] the instructor would disagree w/ [sic] what the textbook said.

–          Completing WAIS & WISC made learning info more concrete [?].

–          Viewing actual demonstration of administering the tests. Powerpoints were organized very well.

–          Online presentations of class material.

–          Useful textbooks. Appreciated powerpoint slides.

–          Schedule of assignments. Amount of weekly assignments (gave more chance to raise grade).

–          Power point presentations were helpful.

–          Guest lectures were great! I encourage more guest speakers in lecture classes.

–          Power points, text & weekly write ups helped w/ [sic] learning material.

–          Organized well.

–          Everything that was online.

Please give the instructor suggestions for improving the course or the teaching style.

–           Less quizzes and more stimulating lectures. Being able to provide more concrete explanation of scores for the class.

–          Minimize the number of tests required to give. Also, allow allotted time span to inquire about assigned readings.

–          It would be great to review and discuss the reading material instead of just quizzing to assess understanding.

–          I would have like to see interpretations of scores for some of the practice test.

–          The chapter should be covered in more detail. Less quizzes maybe 2-3 on WAIS and 2-3 on WISC.

–          I believe there is a need for additional discussion time on the various subjects covered in class.

–          Having each student have WAIS instead of sharing them.

–          It would be helpful to learn from quiz mistakes, but understand time constraint.

–          Lighten up. Perhaps you could become more flexible. Rules are not set in stone.

–          Less work and more substance. I felt like because of all the assignments and questions about assignments he did not get to lecture. I felt as if I taught myself the WISC and WAIS.

–          Dr. Choca is very knowledgeable in the field of IQ testing. I recommend that Dr. Choca 1st teach the information and then quiz students on information explained. During this course, Dr. Choca administered at least 14 quizzes whereby students read and interpreted information from text books and were later tested. I understand Dr. Choca’s concern of the students ability to learn future IQ test.

–          On the day of the presentation have students not do a WISC and the quiz and do report. It is very hard.

–          Provide better examples of reports.

–          It would be very helpful if the instructor inform the class of the chapter for the next quiz.

–          I think it would be good to have a few more examples of case reports with some examples of activities people would have with certain abilities on the WISC and WAIS.

–          Administration of test protocol in class so instructor observes administration errors, rapport, timing appropriately. Case studies examined in class. Students should be able to review protocols after they are graded and before coming to next class. Distribute at least 2 examples of 5 point case write ups. Use Sattler’s text as suggested reading.

–          2009

–          Maybe more practice with interpreting test scores and writing reports.

–          More discussion/reflection about reactions to admin. WISC. More disc. on beh. observations. [sic]

–          Examples of case write ups from the beginning would be helpful in knowing what was expected of us.

–          Updated WAIS book ASAP (obviously). More thorough feedback (perhaps provide examples?) on case reports.

–          None – I honestly love the way this course was set up and because of it I was challenged but still performed well. I wish this was a two-semester class.

–          Talk a little more in class about the material from the test that we are to be quizzed on.

–          Updated textbook for next class.

–          Quizes [sic] at times covered material we did not cover in reading or class.

–          Allowing students to correct protocols for ½ the points missed because it is a learning experience.

–          More guidance on case reports than repeating “write about the patient not the test.”

–          I felt at times the class would go off on a tangent and we wouldn’t focus on important material.

–          Full example of case write-up. Don’t use double negatives in query questions.

–          None.

Please provide any other comments:

–          2009

–          I enjoyed being freely able to ask questions about several aspects of the field & in assessment more specifically. Learned a lot.

–          Good course.

–          Dr. Choca is a great instructor. His use of clinical examples and questions posed to the group was great. Lectures were comprehensive to testing history, administration, scoring, & interpretation. GREAT CLASS! Thanks! *I would like to testing [sic] as a result of this class.

–          N/A

–          Finding 5 children is difficult.

–          We never found out distribution of grades.

–          I really enjoyed the guest lectures à especially the nature/nurture one.

–          Great job encourging [sic] discussion.

Comments from the Summer session, 2004:

This was a very informative course which was well designed and presented. Dr. Choca did an excellent job in presenting material which although not especially difficult required meticulous adherence to procedural detail. This course was very valuable in preparing its students for professional responsibilities required for testing, report writing, research and public presentations. The only change that I would recommend is to have a little more time dedicated to evaluating reports. This could even be assigned as a student responsibility, having students evaluate their peers reports for homework.

For the most part, I enjoyed this class. I appreciate the small class size. I also appreciated the commitment to the ethics code by having us run three assessments on a fictional character as opposed to being graded on our understanding of our own personality. I benefited from Dr. Choca’s expertise and his commitment to excellence. I struggled, however, with the weekly quizzes; I never seemed to encode the right information. Perhaps that was our intelligence test. Answering questions marked: “A and B”, “all of the above”, “none of the above”, made me crazy—and it comprised 80% of my grade!

I particularly enjoyed the case reports and spent quite a bit of time on them even though they were only worth 2% of my grade. I would benefit much more if there was more feedback. I need to know what I do well as well as what I need to improve.

This class was a big disappointment for me. The method of instruction was very ineffective for my learning style; we had weekly quizzes over readings we had not been lectured on and our lectures were never covered on the next weeks’ quiz. I spent much of my time quizzing what would be on the quizzes b/c large concepts were ignored in favor of minute points. We spent most of the semester focusing on the scoring of the various assessments while the actual content of what should be in a report was glossed over on the last day of class. I learned more in 2 weeks of having Dr. Craig as a guest lecturer than I did in a whole summer w/ Dr. Choca.

The instructor was very knowledgeable and it was a good learning experience. Given the short amount of time we had I feel that the time we spent on the debates could have been spent better, e.g. doing scoring exercises. I wish we had spent more time on scoring and interpretation exercise in scoring all of the tests as Melvin, but I wish we could have taken the tests as ourselves, as I feel I would’ve learned much more that way. The weekly quizzes worked well, but indications of the correct answers would’ve made this an even more effective learning experience. More emphasis should have been placed on report writing and more feedback on the reports that we did write would have been welcome. Overall, it was an effective and good learning experience.

Overall, I feel like I learned a great deal about personality assessment and specifically the mmpl-2 and the mcml-III. Before this course, I had no experience with these different protocols and I actually enjoyed taking the assessments, and interpreting the assessments after scoring them. I also like the way the material was presented in class. Suggestions:  I think that Dr. Choca should have given quizzes after covering the material in class. Furthermore, I feel that an effort need to be made to make sure the quizzes cover the material that has been assigned for the week. There were a few times where the quiz material did not match up with what was listed on the syllabus. Also, I think in future sessions of this course, an emphasis on report writing should be made. I do feel that the supplemental material (i.e. reports) Dr. Craig shared gave us were helpful. In the future it may be helpful to provide students with examples of actual reports. I find to be very helpful in the learning process. I took neuropsychological assessment and the professor provided us with numerous reports which really helped tie the class material together. I also think it would be helpful if we had a few more assignments or if the % distribution was more evenly spread out between assignments. Having the quizzes account for 70% of our grades is a bit intensive. Perhaps more points can be given for reports and other assignments. Overall I enjoyed the class.

The class format would have been better if it were less lecture and more interactive. I would have benefited more if there were an opportunity to ask questions about the assigned reading prior to being tested on it. It could have been useful to cover more than three assessments (MMPI, MCMI, EAS). Knowing that the Rorschach is the 2nd most used assessment; an introduction to that test was warranted. More case studies could have been helpful, as could a session on integrating reports. Additionally, a class that has many assignments should not receive most of the grade from quizzes. 90% of the grade coming from quizzes is unfair and unnecessary.

Class format could be shorter with 2 sessions per week. The instructor presents expert-level knowledge of the field, combining theoretical and practical expertise. Improvements:  timely feedback (especially for report) with some class-wide follow-ups review/discussion; videos presenting various approaches/techniques in the field, less reliance on tests for final grade. The instructor’s presentations were very well-organized and interestingly presented. More small-group in-class activities could be included.

Overall, I learned a lot in this class. It was an interesting exercise to compare the 3 test instruments, score them, and do the write-ups. I would have liked more direction on the structure of the actual write-ups, and suggest that more time be spent on writing excellent reports in class. I agree with your assertion that students don’t receive the necessary training to write good reports, and I think that assessment classes are the perfect place to learn how. Also, it might be interesting to substitute the great debates with case reports/presentations. For example, students could form small groups and be given different cases w/ tests results, interview results, etc. It would be the groups’ job to interpret and present recommendations to the rest of the class for critique. Something like med students have to do. I think it would sharpen interpretation and diagnostic skills overall.

Fall 2004:

Course Evaluations for Class 620

How was this an effective learning experience for you; what worked for you?

 –          Administering the tests was great learning experience.

–          I feel administering the IQ test was a learning experience that will be valuable in my career. I also enjoyed the debates and presentations presented of various issues that are involved in the field. They allowed me to gain more knowledge of research and hot debates.

–          Administering the tests

–          Giving the tests and scoring them. Debating issues surrounding testing patients with answering questions and addressing political issues. Having the test kits for the entire semester.

–          Administering actual WAIS and WISC tests was a great experience.

–          Administering IQ tests was a good experience for me. Public speaking is very important, therefore, oral presentations was an effective learning experience for me.

–          I learned how to administer the WISC and WAIS. I also learned the controversies associated with intelligence. It was a helpful course because it gave insight to different intellectual theories.

–          Hands on experience with the test administration

–          Actually having an opportunity to use the test kits to test individuals and score interpret the results was a very effective learning experience – I feel I gained a significant amount of knowledge through direct experience with the tests.

How was this an ineffective learning experience for you; what didn’t work for you?

 –          The quizzes were difficult, it’s hard to know everything about a 60-80 page chapter. The grading of the test administrations was not consistent.

–          The quizzes

–          Quizzes every week that we did not review was ineffective for me.

–          The first administration of the WAIS was hard because I wasn’t accustomed to it.

–          I feel the textbook over the WISC, although informative was much more difficult to understand and I don’t feel I retained as much from reading the second book as I did from reading the first (WAIS) text.

Please give the instructor suggestions for improving the course or the teaching style.

 –          Less weight on quiz grades (less than 70%) and more on the test administration.

–          We need a break! This class is too long, I need to rest my body and mind for 5 minutes.

–          Dr. Choca is a great instructor

–          I would have liked it if he would have gone over the weekly quizzes. Also, I felt that it was to fastidious with scoring the administration, we should have reviewed our mistakes more. So than being scored harshly.

–          The course could be improved by discussing the assigned chapter in class otherwise everything else is good.

–          I felt I needed more exposure to learning more about what to actually look for and report. I am not very confident that I learned all I could from the #s. Maybe and idea could be to substitute 1 of the WAIS and WISC for a group assignment where everyone is given the same numbers and watch a clip of the test subjects behavior and report on it (with not too stiff a penalty for information left out). Then come back and review findings and what your own personal opinions are toward the assignment. (Ex. it was an ACID profile, SCAD profile, would you say this person might be LD or have attention problems or is it not a good reflection based on your views, were low scores on certain tests due to deficits or attention.)

–          I enjoyed the debates – they helped me to gain new perspective on certain topics I can’t say at this that there is anything I would change about this course.


IDEA Ratings (T Scores):

Fall, 2004

Overall Measures of Effectiveness

1. Progress on relevant objectives: 55

2. Improved student attitude: 49

3. Overall excellence of teacher: 46

4. Overall excellence of course: 56

Essential Objectives

1. Factual knowledge: 66

2. Principles and theories: 55

4. Professional skills: 59

Important Objectives

3. Apply course material: 64

5. Team skills: 34

8. Oral and written communication skills: 49

9. Use of resources to answer questions: 42

11. Analysis and critical evaluation: 56

Categories for the above T Scores:

Low: below 37

Low Average: 37-44

Average: 45-55

High Average: 56-63

High: above 63