Visual Arts Department

Course Evaluation Analysis

Fall 2025 Semester • Yavapai College • Report Date: February 20, 2026

4.48/5.00
Department Average
30.7%199/648 students
Response Rate
45sections
Courses Analyzed
21instructors
Faculty Evaluated

Excellence Highlights

  • 2 faculty members achieved perfect 5.00 scoresJill Brugler, Dana Cohn
  • Top performer with volumeLaura Bloomenstein (4.86, 19 responses, 4 courses)
  • Ceramics program emerges as department strength3 of top 5 individual classes
  • 53% of faculty perform at or above department average

Areas of Concern

  • Q2 (Timely Grading) identified as weakest dimension4.31 avg vs 4.48 dept avg
  • 4 instructors with grading timeliness scores below 4.00Costa, Masten, Kolpakov, Petsche
  • 2 faculty members in critical performance zone (<3.50)Maureen Costa (2.69), Jodi Kolpakov (3.38)
  • Drawing I course shows inconsistency3 of 4 sections underperforming

Faculty Performance Overview

All 21 instructors ranked by overall average score. Colors indicate performance tier. Dashed line shows department average (4.48).

Q-Dimension Performance Summary

Department averages across 7 evaluation dimensions. Q2 (Timely Grading) is the weakest dimension at 4.31, requiring department-wide attention.

Course Performance: Top 5 vs Bottom 5

Direct comparison of highest and lowest performing courses. Note the significant gap between top (5.00) and bottom (2.62) performers.

Top 5 Classes

Bottom 5 Classes

Strategic Recommendations

  1. 1Implement department-wide grading timeliness improvement initiative
  2. 2Recognize and leverage Laura Bloomenstein's ceramics program excellence
  3. 3Provide intensive support for two faculty members in critical performance zone
  4. 4Standardize Drawing I curriculum and expectations
  5. 5Establish peer mentoring program pairing top and struggling performers