Bertram Gallant, Tricia Le

teaching MGT 16

Class approval

88.2%

average

135.4%

projected (next term)

i.e. 300 respondents (333 total) approved of this course.


46.2%

Percentile among all classes

32.8%

Percentile among MGT classes

Instructor approval

85.9%

average

152.4%

projected (next term)

i.e. 298 respondents (333 total) approved of this instructor's teaching of the course.


36.4%

Percentile among all classes

29.2%

Percentile among MGT classes

Instructor-class rating differential

-2.3%

average

17.0%

projected (next term)

This is the difference between the instructor and class approval ratings. A higher value indicates a professor which can compensate for the negative qualities of a class.


30.4%

Percentile among all classes

29.2%

Percentile among MGT classes

Grade (GPA)

3.22

average

3.08

projected (next term)


49.3%

Percentile among all classes

35.8%

Percentile among MGT classes

Estimated time commitment

≈3:55

average

≈1:16

projected (next term)

The average amount of time outside of class needed per week.


17.2%

Percentile among all classes

28.5%

Percentile among MGT classes



This chart shows all MGT 16 classes' instructor and class recommended percentages. The dotted lines represent averages for each axis.

The top right quadrant represents good classes with good professors. Bottom right represents good classes with underwhelming professors, top left represents bad classes redeemed by their professors, and bottom left represents classes with subpar professors and classes.


This chart shows all MGT 16 time commitments and average GPAs. The dotted lines represent averages for each axis.

A point in the top right quadrant is an easy but time-consuming class. Bottom right is hard and time-consuming, bottom left is hard but light on workload, and top left is easy in all respects.

(C) 2019 David Cao, Tung Doan