Hello all. Just wanted to gather some opinions on title question, to gauge whether my report is a bit solid
Backdrop: There are two different lectures for the same class, under different professors. They are not different in size by too much (both around 100-120 students). Recently, both classes had a midterm. The average results for both were noticeably different.
Now, the question is: can we reliably use the average test scores to indicate if the professor is doing a…less-than-stellar job?
As part of a project for a class, I surveyed exactly 15 students from each class (I only knew a small amount of them, to minimize any bias or whatnot). The sample size is a bit small, but I didn’t want to draw too much attention to myself. The reported results were as follow:
Class A (The slightly bigger class that I am not in): The total scores were all around the same range, with one or two out of that range. The most reported scores were in the range of 30-35 percent, with the two outliars being at 68% and 85%. The average score, if all are taken into account, was 38% (rounded to whole #).
Class B (The slightly smaller class I am in): We had the opposite situation, where scores varied wildly. There were ‘clusters’, but no other observable trend (so far as I could see). The most reported scores were in the range of 45-60 percent (which already indicates a stark difference to me). The average score was 61% (scores outside the numerous range tended to be above 60%).
If both classes are learning the same subject under the same syllabus/lesson plan (I checked them, they are pretty similar with the exception of 1 or 2 topics), why are the average scores so different?
Some possible solutions I thought up were:
-The 1st professor is a harsh grader
-The 1st professor included harder, or introduced new topics in the middle of the test (some of our professors are known to have done this before)
-The 1st professor made the questions more difficult (I am doubtful of this one since their practice midterm was identical to ours).
-Since the sample sizes are small, the results may be an error.
-The smarter people congregated to one lecture(?)
AND the one that I want to focus on:
-The 1st professor’s students didn’t learn/know the topics as well as the 2nd professor’s students.
Could the reason the 1st class did worse on the test reflect on the professor’s teaching method and skill? Most of his class’s scores we packed together, because they tended to miss similar topics. At the same time, most of them reported having way less time for each question than they needed.
In contrast, the 2nd class felt they did worse on parts that differed for most of the group. Also (being in the class), I noticed that many students left early since they finished quickly.
Taking these both into account, is it fair to assume that the first professor overestimated how much his students knew? Or how well they mastered the topics? If his test’s average is far below what a normal average would be for a math class (around 60-70?), then does that mean the professor is failing on some level to prepare the students?
Of course, it is expected for students to master these topics outside of lectures, and most of them do. Almost all of them reported studying at least 2-3 days before the exam. Those same people then reported that they were caught off guard anyways. Again, is this the professor expecting his students to know more than what they’re told/suggested? If a professor exhibits this trait, can he/she be considered a ‘bad professor’?
This is the gist of my report. What I would like, are any observations or questions that maybe I overlooked, as well as y’all’s personal opinions.
TLDR: Does lower test score average mean the professor might be ‘bad’? Or should other factors be to blame? Opinions, observations, all welcome.
(Note: Sorry for the long ol’ post. It’s past midnight, and in my bored stupor, I decided I may as well gather some opinions on my basic report before I show it to my professor)