Ronda Smith

Ms. Smith is a kind instructor, and her teaching style was more that of a facilitator than a lecturer. I took her real estate principles class in the spring 03' semester.

Usually seated at the desk at the front of the classroom while teaching (facilitating), Ms. Smith spent practically all of the semester tediously walking the class through a study guide provided by the colleges real estate department. Regrettably, she did not spice up the course by sharing a lot of her own real estate sales experience with the class (some yes, but it wasnt much). And so there wasn't much of a dynamic to the learning environment, and the focus of all classes was solely on the so-called study guide.

While Ms. Smith's instruction/facilitation was satisfactory, the materials and tests provided to the class with were unacceptable. The materials were from the City College Real Estate Department. To start, the study guide was filled with typos and inaccuracies, and which was often difficult to follow because of proofreading and formatting errors. (I actually had to pay money for it - you may too.)

As for the exams, there were four take-home 100 question multiple-choice tests. Grades from the four exams, and nothing else, determined the final grade. -And the exams were horrible.

I've taken countless university level exams, and have never, ever, experienced such unfair sets of test questions. While the intent of the exams was probably meant to aid in learning, there were just too many ambiguous questions and ambiguous answers to stress over, even though the tests were multiple-choice. It was entirely unfair of the real estate department to develop such poor quality exam questions and a badly designed and inaccurate study guide. There was obviously little care in the preparation of quality exams that would effectively test and measure what was taught in the course. The failed attempt at reasonable course materials made me wish I had taken the course elsewhere. And any excuse that the exam questions were pulled from a test bank from a professional organization simply cannot be true.

To her credit, Ms. Smith was delightful instructor. She often spent considerable time correcting many of the errors in both the study guide and on the exams themselves. But not all errors were covered. And so many hours of suffering were spent figuring out the meanings of the exam questions and especially the meanings of the the answers. It was clear that I wasn't the only student in the class expressing disappointment in the quality of course materials.

If it were my within my authority, I'd save student's sanity by burning both the exams and study guide, and start over. Students expect and deserve better given our investment in time an money.

Wrapping up my rant on the course materials, I'm inclined to think that the pathetic quality of the study guide and tests represented an unmitigated arrogance by those who drafted them. Success in the course rested on those materials. While I got a good final course grade, I wanted professional therapy by semesters end.

To Ms. Smith, a "B". To the CCSF Real Estate Department, and the office overseeing that department, an "F".