Table 2
Subscale “Professor Satisfaction” of the Subject Assessment Questionnaire.
| Academic year | ||||||
| 2017/2018 | 2018/2019 | p– value | d | |||
| M | SD | M | SD | |||
| 1. The professor complied with the teaching guide | 4.44 | 0.73 | 4.40 | 0.72 | .86 | 0.06 |
| 2. The professor used the assessment criteria included in the teaching guide | 4.33 | 0.71 | 4.33 | 0.76 | .93 | 0.00 |
| 3. Theory and practice were well coordinated | 3.89 | 1.36 | 4.21 | 1.01 | .53 | 0.30 |
| 4. The selected activities promoted learning | 3.22 | 1.30 | 4.12 | 1.10 | .04 | 0.80 |
| 5. The professor’s explanations helped me understand the content | 3.89 | 1.17 | 4.12 | 0.99 | .59 | 0.23 |
| 6. The professor demonstrated mastery of the subject | 4.22 | 0.97 | 4.67 | 0.66 | .15 | 0.64 |
| 7. The professor promoted student participation in class | 4.22 | 0.97 | 4.32 | 0.79 | .83 | 0.12 |
| 8. The professor solved doubts and provided guidance | 4.33 | 0.87 | 4.32 | 0.87 | .96 | 0.01 |
| 9. The resources used were adequate for learning | 4.22 | 1.39 | 4.24 | 0.90 | .57 | 0.02 |
| 10. I am satisfied with the support provided by the professor | 4.00 | 0.93 | 4.25 | 1.04 | .34 | 0.24 |
| 11. The professor increased my interest in the subject | 3.44 | 1.67 | 4.00 | 1.04 | .43 | 0.49 |
| 12. Global score of the professor’s performance | 3.67 | 1.22 | 4.25 | 0.84 | .17 | 0.65 |
| Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; p-value = Mann-Whitney U test; d Cohen = Effect size. | ||||||
