Faculty Survey - Spring 2017

Survey Interpretation
Survey Text
Survey Results
Other Surveys

Survey Interpretation

Computer Lab Management (CLM) periodically surveys faculty who teach in our computer classrooms. CLM uses this information to improve the quality of service in the computer classrooms.

The survey results(especially questions #2, #6 and #7) show that overall faculty are quite happy with the computer classrooms. The feedback regarding the SciLab projection change (we replaced the projector with two large TVs) has been mostly positive so we will investigate if a similar change is possible in other classrooms.

However, there were several questions and/or concerns raised by faculty so CLM will follow up on these items:

  • Sometimes the whiteboard markers didn't work. So we need to do a better job checking and replacing them.
  • There were several concerns about the layout of the desks. Currently several rooms have design trade-offs which make some aspect of teaching in the room problematic. We are always looking for feedback from faculty to improve the design of our rooms. For future renovations CLM will investigate alternative room layouts.

Survey Text

On 6/7/2017 Computer Lab Management sent an email to faculty who had taught in the computer rooms during Spring 2017 asking them to fill out this survey.

Survey Results

There were 28 responses.

Question 2. Please rate the following aspects of our services:

  Needs significant improvement Needs some improvement Needs little or no improvement No opinion
Classroom availability (able to reserve times needed) 0 2 21 5
Support from computer lab managers 0 1 25 2
Support from the Computer Room Consultant (CRC) 0 0 25 3
Preparedness of the classroom (room cleared out, whiteboard supplies, etc.) 0 4 23 1
Equipment reliability 0 1 26 1
Computer speed and usability 0 5 22 1
Classroom interruptions 0 5 20 1
Larger classrooms (to accommodate more students) 1 4 21 2
Larger classrooms (to allow more workspace at each station) 0 0 26 2
Smaller classrooms 0 2 20 6
Temperature control (room was too hot or too cold) 0 1 25 2
Cleanliness of the classroom 0 1 26 1
Classroom environment (for example: quieter, better layout) - Please specify below 0 3 24 1
Other - Please specify below 0 5 9 7

Classroom environment and Other reasons:

  • As an instructor it was difficult to move down the row of students to get to those who were furthest from the aisle. I.e. more space between rows wold have helped. (2020 SciLab)
  • It often took a while for the preceding class to leave the room
  • There are two switches for lights: one for front and the other for back. One can never know which one is for front and which is for back until before trying it. It will be much better if you can mark above the switches about which is for front and which is for back. (93 Hutchison)
  • We were mostly interacting with cloud computing using VNC. This occasionally bogged down, I suspect due to bandwidth.
  • The room I taught in was Art Annex 103 (Mac lab). I didn't see it in the list, but wanted to put that somewhere.
  • I used Wellman 102. That was not an option above.
  • SCC 2102 and 2103 are great. Cruess 207 computer lab is dirty, slow computers compared to SCC labs, and the projector was very "buggy". Computer attendants were not as informed as SCC lab attendants and lacked customer service skills. We need more PC options for Interior Design classes.

Question 3. How would you rate your overall experience teaching in CLM Computer Classrooms this quarter compared with previous quarters?

Better 8
Same 14
Worse 1
N/A 5

"Better" Reasons given: