Theories of language change)
| The teacher is well prepared | 1.8 |
| The course is well structured | 2.04 |
| The course encourages the students to participate in the discussion | 1.84 |
| >The course could strenghten my interest in that topic | 2.2 |
| The teacher reacts flexibly to suggestions from the students | 1.73 |
| The teacher is able to impart problems and methods relevant to the topic | 2.2 |
| The teacher is also available outside from the normal teaching hours | 1.42 |
| The topic of the course is suitable for the acquisition of research skills | 1.84 |
| The teacher offers an appropriate support for students who elaborate their own contributions | 1.58 |
| The critic of the teacher is helpful | 1.78 |
| Total avarage | 1.84 |
The relationship between various topics and the main topic of that course which waslanguage changehas taken a back seat
some of the notions remained unclear to me, maybe whe should have pinned down more clearly some of the major definitions. The termprepositional phraseI could only understand after three sessions. As for some of the joint group exercises, it became not clear what their orginal goal was.
I consider as not appropriate. If the students are interested in the topic they will attend the lecture voluntarily. The same is true for the mandatory tutorials. I think they are usefull as a voluntary supplement. Apart from that, it was a very informative course.