The Awards: 6

Although I was nominated, I didn’t win the Kathleen W. Klawe Prize for Excellence in Teaching of Large Classes this year. Oh, well. Congrats to the winner in the Department of Chemistry.

I did, however, receive two TUTAs: one for "The Fine Print" in my syllabus, and the other was shared by everyone who taught in Spring, 2011 term (the award was: we were all named to the Teaching Honour Roll--every single instructor).  Oh, and I also made the Teaching Honour Roll with Distinction for all of my Fall, 2011 courses. Let’s see what kind of feedback I got in PSYCO 104.

(***Warning! Snarkiness filters are now disengaged! Proceed at your own risk!***)
“...the pacing of classes was too slow. As a result, I found it difficult to focus in class & often times drifted into Stage 1 sleep. If anything, I prefer Dr. L’s blog to the class - sorry.”
(Good application of knowledge about sleep stages there. However, blog material will not be on the exam.)

“Class is to slow. Move faster through material during class in order to cover all topics in text. Then students do not have to learn a majority of exam material on their own.”
( don’t want to learn material on your own? Really?)

“Very biased towards evolution. did not know textbook information was needed for midterm 1. Would be nice if turned speakers louder.”
(1. It is a science course, right? 2. I told you in class that most questions would come from the textbook, and that information is also on the syllabus. 3. Please let me know this before the course is over. Thanks.)

“Dr Loepelmann, here’s a haiku for you.
     Dr. Loepelmann
     You are the ray of sunshine
     Of my gloomy life.
Best prof evarrrrr!!”
(Nice! Thanks! Um, sorry about your life, though.)

“I believe that examining on questions in the textbook NOT covered in class is [not] fair to students. Important aspects of the course which is tested on exams should all be covered in class.”
“I would recommend if he could just base his exam on his notes or specifically tell us which page or information from the text his exam will be on.”
“The amount of information included in the course are not all tested so should therefore not be used.”
“I didn’t purchase a textbook and there was nothing on them that wasn’t discussed in class or was in the notes.”
“...liked how the textbook made up the majority of the test questions, yet the lecture notes expanded on the ideas of gave a different viewpoint instead of simply rehashing what we’ve already seen in the textbook.”
 “The textbook was boring and too long. The instructor’s exams were TOO HARD for a 100 level course. We have to study both the textbook and his notes for the exams. Are you kidding me? The information from the two sources doesn’t at all relate. I will never recommend this instructor to anyone, in fact I will tell them to avoid him. I hate Dr. Loepelmann.” [f-bomb deleted from comment]
(Thanks for spelling my name right.)

(“Good news, everyone! There was!” Also, STOP SHOUTING.)

“Dr. Loepelmann is a top class teacher. Entertaining, fun, friendly, open, are words I would use to describe him. I have a certain phobia of questions. I was taught as a child that ‘there is no such things as a stupid question’ but I never believed that. Dr. Loepelmann is someone I feel comfortable bringing my questions to.”
(Thank you. And you’re welcome.)

“We should go for a Beer!”
(Only if you can find beer with caffeine in it.)

“Learned much about my future desired profession.”
(Good luck to you, future psychologist.)

“Dr. Loepelmann always had jokes up his sleeve in every lecture. I would like to know if he comes up with them before the lecture, or on the spot.”

“Karsten Loepelmann is the bomb. So fun and funny and intelligent.”
(You have no proof of that.)

“Dress up everyday!!! In Jedi uniforms!!!”

“I really appreciate the ‘For Further Reading’ section. It shows the dedication of the teacher and allows those who are interested to pursue more info. Thank you.”
“I found myself researching what we learned outside of class -- a very good sign.”
(Keep on learning...!)

Here are some comments from my PSYCO 267: Perception class:
“To the Department: Why would you cancel this course? It was so refreshing to take a course that emphasized understanding and not just simply memorizing...Perception is a worthwhile subject!”
“I am disappointed that this class will no longer.”
“This class shouldn’t be cancelled. What were they thinking.”
“So sad it’s being cancelled.”
“Don’t get rid of PSYCO 267! It’s an interesting & valuable addition to any aspiring psychologist’s repertoire.”
“[heart] perception”
“The loss of PSYCH 267 as a course is a travesty!”
(Just to be clear: PSYCO 267 will be renamed PSYCO 367. It is PSYCO 365: Advanced Perception that will be killed. However, I plan to teach it as a special topics course. So it’s not dead, just a zombie.)

“Multiply choice was designed to trick students and not reflect their knowledge. It is also not fair that the tests were more heavily weighted on text.”
(I don’t understand. How is that not fair? I did tell you about the weighting.)

“Dr. Loepelmann spoke VERY quietly and was always very hard to hear.”
(PLEASE let me know this before the course is over. My time machine is in the shop.)

“Instructor was overall not helpful when it came to notes for missed classes. Offers no assistance - Insists students find help from other students - Not him.”
“Thanks for emailing me the notes when I needed them!”
(Er, um...right. Sorry. And you're welcome.)

“Wonderful to see lots of recent research applied into the course...”

“Excellent instructor, deserving of a raise.”
(Aw. Thanks, mom!)

“Stay funny.”
(I wish.)

“...the instructor seemed like he would fit in on The Big Bang Theory. That was awesome.”
(But they already have a short, handsome nerd with glasses.)

“The amount of animal abuse talked about in this course bothered me and affected my learning as an intelligent, compassionate human being. Other research options are available and should be used in modern research. Animals are not ours to use for research, entertainment, or personal gain. The intelligence of humans can be measured by their compassion and understanding for the suffering of others.”
(No animals were harmed in the making of this blog.)

“Nice prof; attempted to make dry material interesting. Give him A for effort =)”
(Sorry, there are no grades for effort in university. Oh, and I’m not a prof, technically.)

“I wish you posted more on your blog through the term. You have some serious nerd credibility. Although you responded to every comment but mine on one post so I was kind of pissed at you for a week. Now I feel sad. Sorry...Live long and prosper.”
(May the force be with you.)

Why aren’t you studying?


Anastasia said...

What about Star Trek uniforms?

Karsten A. Loepelmann said...

@Anastasia: Never gonna happen. I'm a nerd, not a geek.

Anonymous said...

Slow day at work, this post made my day! Thanks Dr. Loepelmann!

Karsten A. Loepelmann said...

@Anonymous: You're welcome, Madame Samarasekera.

Anastasia said...

I have researched the difference between geeks and nerds on the Interwebs and concluded that you are in denial of your own geekosity.

Briana said...

Hey Dr. Loepelmann,

I was your student many years ago, but today's XKCD comic made me think of you so I decided to pass it along. Hope you enjoy:


P.S. I was sorry to read on your blog that advanced perception will be killed. I took that course with you and found it very cool. I'm glad you're resurrecting it as a special topics class!

Karsten A. Loepelmann said...

@Briana: Hey, thanks for thinking of me. I geeked out when I saw that comic!

Find It