Periodisk emnerapport våren 2019
The course was taught using the morphology textbook by Geert Booij (2012) and the syntax textbook by Andrew Carnie (2013), which are suitable in terms of both extent and content, and generally worked very well. (These textbooks were also used in V17 and V18.) Attendance was good throughout the semester. Out of 69 students who were registered for the course, 66 students showed up at the beginning of the semester, and most of them came to class regularly, which indicates that the students were satisfied with the course, the reading, and the quality of teaching.
At the end of the semester, students were asked to fill out an evaluation form via nettskjema. In total, 44 students filled out the evaluation form (i.e., approximately 64% of the students). Overall, the students’ evaluations were very positive, with 35 students [= 79,6%] reporting that they were satisfied [godt fornøyd] or very satisfied [svært godt fornøyd]. As for the more critical comments, several students wrote that that they would like to have more obligatory homework assignments and/or group sessions with practical problem solving in addition to the lectures. It is clear from their answers that such group sessions should be added to the 18 lectures, rather than replacing some of the lectures. 43 out of 44 students (97,7%) answered “no” to the question of whether there are parts of the course’s content that should have been reduced. By contrast, 19 out of 44 students (43,2%) answered “yes” to the question of whether there are parts of the course’s content for which more time should have been used. The possibility of adding group sessions to the lectures is worth considering for future times that this class is taught, and will have to be evaluated on the basis of resources/capacity.
When asked about the learning outcomes, 39 students (88,6%) agreed to the statement that the course has taught them to analyze problems; 41 students (93,2%) agreed to the statement that the course has taught them facts, ideas and methods; and 32 students (72,7%) agreed to the statement that the course has taught them practical skills. This confirms that LING1112 is successful in teaching analytical skills and methods, which is a core aim of this type of course.
Responses on which type of examination students would prefer in such a course were balanced. 17 students (38,6%) were in favor of school exams, 16 students (36,4%) would have preferred a 3-day home examination, and the remaining 11 students (25%) would have been in favor of other examination forms.
Out of the students who were registered, 59 students submitted and passed the kvalifiserings-oppgave. In June, all 59 students took the 4-hour school exam, of which 56 students passed. The grade distribution was 19 A, 11 B, 12 C, 5 D, 9 E and 3 F. The average grade amounted to a C. Overall, these numbers indicate that the course was successful.
The course was organized similarly in Vår 2017 and Vår 2018 (but without student evaluations), and the numbers/results were similar.
Patrick G. Grosz