
Classes I have taught
I taught my own class for all courses below, listed in order
from graduate school to remedial mathematics. My
responsibilities included developing and presenting lectures,
creating homework, worksheets, quizzes, and test, tutoring in
office hours, grading and assigning final grades.

SeibergWitten Theory (Spring 2004).
Topics course for graduate students. (IU)

Riemannian and Symplectic Geometry.
Introduction to Riemannian geometry: manifolds, metrics, LeviCivita
connections. We will use this technology to introduce and
investigate Symplectic Geometry. (LSU, Math 75902, Fall 2006)

Topology I. Basic notions of
general topology, with emphasis on Euclidean and metric
spaces, continuous and differentiable functions, inverse
function theorem and its consequences. (LSU, Fall 2005)

Geometry for Teachers. Supervised
two GAANN fellows. (LSU)

Step Courses for Teachers. Math
3001 and 3002. (LSU)

Multivariable Calculus. Supervised one
teaching assistant. (MSU)

Elementary Measurement and Geometry.
Supervised teaching assistants. (MSU)

Elementary Mathematics for Teachers. Course
supervisor for Fall 2003 semester. Supervised 4
instructors. (MSU and IU)

Calculus I. Supervised two
teaching assistants per semester. (IU)

Survey of Calculus with Applications.
Also known as ``Harvard Calculus.'' (MSU)

College Algebra. Worked in a special
program for disadvantaged and under prepared students
(Enrichment Program). Supervised teaching assistants. (MSU)

Intermediate Algebra. Enrichment
Program. Supervised teaching assistants. (MSU)
Student Evaluations
At Louisiana State University
Here is the list of scores at LSU. The highest mark is 5
and the number in [] is the departmental average. At LSU,
5 means `strongly agree',
4 means `agree',
3 means `undecided',
2 means `disagree', and
1 means `strongly disagree'. The
questions that were asked are as follows: 1.
The instructor motivated me to do my best.
2. I have learned a lot in this class.
3. The instructor clearly communicated the learning objectives
of the course.
4. The instructor communicated clearly and understandably.
5. The instructor was available for assistance outside the
course.
6. The instructor was concerned about student learning.
7. The instructor was well prepared for each class.
8. The graded work reflected the important aspects of the
course.
9. The instructor demonstrated respect for the students.
10. Overall, the instructor was an effective teacher.
11. Summary of all questions. Here
are the means to those questions:
When 
Course 
Q1 
Q2 
Q3 
Q4 
Q5 
Q6 
Q7 
Q8 
Q9 
Q10 
Q11 
F2005 
M3001 
4.78
[4.12] 
4.80
[4.10] 
4.80
[4.17] 
4.70
[4.13] 
4.60
[4.33] 
4.90
[4.29] 
4.80
[4.49] 
4.80
[4.28] 
4.80
[4.46] 
4.80
[4.26] 
4.78
[4.26] 
F2005 
M7510 
4.60
[4.12] 
4.47
[4.10] 
4.45
[4.17] 
4.45
[4.13] 
4.40
[4.33] 
4.40
[4.29] 
4.45
[4.49] 
4.15
[4.28] 
4.10
[4.46] 
4.25
[4.26] 
4.37
[4.26] 
S2005 
M4005 
4.82
[4.20] 
4.82
[4.25] 
4.82
[4.31] 
4.91
[4.23] 
4.82
[4.40] 
4.82
[4.39] 
4.95
[4.52] 
4.18
[4.40] 
4.95
[4.54] 
4.86
[4.36] 
4.79
[4.36] 
At Michigan State University Here is my complete list of student evaluations from fall 1995 until
2000 at Michigan State University. Note that 4 is the highest mark and the number in [ ] is
the average for all teachers who taught that course.
Term
Code 
Course 
Section 
Enthusiasm 
Concern for
students' 
Preparedness
for classes 
Understanding
of Material 
Communication
skills 
Overall
Excellence 
response
count 
F95 
Remed.
Algebra 
1 
4.00 [3.28] 
3.93 [3.04] 
3.93[3.36] 
3.87 [3.28] 
3.80 [2.93] 
3.93 [3.04] 
15 [8350] 
S96 
Algebra 
1 
4.00 [3.22] 
3.88[2.86] 
4.00 [3.31] 
3.88 [3.13] 
3.88 [2.70] 
3.88 [2.87] 
8 [11271] 
F96 
Remed.
Algebra 
1 
4.00 [3.28] 
3.73 [3.04] 
3.88[3.36] 
3.73 [3.28] 
3.65 [2.93] 
3.73 [3.04] 
26 [8350] 
F96 
Remed.
Algebra 
2 
3.93 [3.28] 
3.24 [3.04] 
3.69[3.36] 
3.79 [3.28] 
3.55 [2.93] 
3.62 [3.04] 
29 [8350] 
S97 
Harvard
Calc. 
1 
3.95 [3.46] 
3.75[3.18] 
3.95 [3.50] 
3.90 [3.45] 
3.85 [3.01] 
3.90 [3.20] 
20 [7210] 
Sum97 
Calc III 
1 
3.95 [3.22] 
3.86[3.01] 
3.90 [3.25] 
3.90 [3.31] 
3.90 [2.85] 
3.76 [2.99] 
21 [3750] 
F97 
Harvard
Calc 
1 
3.83 [3.46] 
3.72[3.18] 
3.78 [3.50] 
3.72 [3.45] 
3.61 [3.01] 
3.50 [3.20] 
18 [7210] 
F98 
Math for Teach. 
1 
4.00 [3.52] 
3.50[3.20] 
3.81 [3.40] 
4.00 [3.35] 
3.88 [3.13] 
3.75 [3.19] 
16 [2533] 
F98 
Math
for
Teach. 
2 
4.00 [3.52] 
3.77[3.20] 
3.92 [3.40] 
3.92 [3.35] 
3.92 [3.13] 
3.69 [3.19] 
13 [2533] 
S99 
Math
for
Teach. 
1 
3.77 [3.52] 
2.65[3.20] 
3.15 [3.40] 
2.88 [3.35] 
2.62 [3.13] 
2.69 [3.19] 
26 [2533] 
Sum99 
Meas. & Geo. 
1 
4.00 [3.46] 
3.63[3.08] 
3.79 [3.31] 
3.74 [3.28] 
3.79 [3.02] 
3.68 [3.03] 
19 [1450] 
F99 
Math
for
Teach. 
1 
4.00 [3.52] 
3.31[3.20] 
3.69 [3.40] 
3.62 [3.35] 
3.23 [3.13] 
3.38 [3.19] 
26 [2533] 
F99 
Math.
for
Teach. 
2 
3.93 [3.52] 
2.93[3.20] 
3.40 [3.40] 
3.53 [3.35] 
3.00 [3.13] 
2.93 [3.19] 
15 [2533] 
S00 
Math.
for
Teach. 
1 
4.00 [3.52] 
3.64[3.20] 
3.91 [3.40] 
3.86 [3.35] 
3.68 [3.13] 
3.73 [3.19] 
22 [2533] 
In general my scores at MSU are at least one
standard deviation above the average scores. Notable exceptions
are S99 and one class of F99. This is interesting because
these average scores occurred during semesters we (Tom Parker
and I) were recreating the course from near scratch and we were
still doing a lot of retooling of the content and form. Students
also knew that they were learning more challenging content than
students who took the course in previous semesters and they
often reported this during the course and on the evaluations.
At Indiana University Here are all of my
evaluations from Indiana University. The rating system
is different from MSU's straight scale. At IU,
4 means `strongly agree',
3 means `agree',
2 means `undecided',
1 means `disagree', and
0 means `strongly disagree'. The
questions that were asked are as follows: 1.
Overall, I would rate the quality of this course as
outstanding.
2. Overall, I would rate this instructor as outstanding.
3. My instructor is well prepared for class meetings.
4. My instructor explains the material clearly.
5. My instructor is enthusiastic about teaching this course.
6. My instructor is knowledgeable on course topics.
7. My instructor is regularity available for consultation.
8. The grading procedures for the course are fair. Here
are the means to those questions:
When 
Course 
Q1 
Q2 
Q3 
Q4 
Q5 
Q6 
Q7 
Q8 
F2001 
Teacher 
2.79 
3.00 
3.53 
3.21 
3.74 
3.84 
2.95 
2.68 
S2002 
Calc. I 
2.96 
3.36 
3.72 
3.52 
3.62 
3.8 
3.56 
3.40 
F2003 
Calc. I 
3.40 
3.40 
3.76 
3.52 
3.88 
3.92 
3.32 
3.72 
F2003 
Calc. I 
3.31 
3.31 
3.88 
3.19 
4.00 
3.88 
3.42 
3.85 
Ironically, I am most proud of my lowest
scores (Q1 and Q2 for Fall2001, Mathematics for
Teachers). Apparently the scores for F2001 are some of
the highest ever posted for that course. The calculus
evaluations are excellent as well, but it easier to get high
evaluations for such classes. You
may also be wondering about my grade distributions. To see for yourself, visit: http://registrar.indiana.edu/GradeDistribution.
Student Comments
Nice comments:
Listed below are all comments (good and bad) made by my Math 4005 class at
LSU in Spring 2005.
I really liked this class. Dr. Baldridge encouraged us to be better teachers,
which is not something I have found elsewhere. He was really positive
about U.S. education and U.S. teachers. I really appreciated that because
it made me more positive. He was a great professor, and I would love for
an opportunity to take him again. Also, he really challenged me, which is
also something that does not happen often.
Quite possibly one of the best pure teaching jobs I have sat through
during college. I have learned more about education and teaching math than
in any of my EDCI classes. He motivated me to study further about
mathematics.
I like the fact we used the Singapore books because they showed a different way
of teaching/learning. I do think the class could have had more information
on how to teach the class rather than doing all the problems in the books.
I will however keep the books and your text to supplement my teaching in the
years to come.
I felt like the only part of the course that could have been improved was the
level of guidance in seeing how to teach the material to the kids.
I think that could have been more directed.
Professor Baldridge did a great job.
Thank you Professor Baldridge. You have honestly been one of the most inspiring
persons I've had the privilege of being taught by. I hope I can, one day,
be as effective as you have been.
He a math genius. (Sorry I couldn't help it). *See humorous
comments below.
I think that focusing this course on education is important because so many
people in the course are ed. majors. Thank you for taking the time to not
only talk about good teaching, but to actually demonstrate it as well.
The following 5 comments came the same Calc.
III. class (out
of 21):

By far the best math professor I have had at
MSU. I'm thinking of becoming a math major because of this
class.  Calc. III Student.

He is very good at explaining the simplest
manner so it is easily understandable. He is also good at
approaching an explanation from a different perspective if his
first perspective isn't understood.  Calc. III student.

I feel that Scott was a good teacher, probably
the best math teacher I have had yet at MSU. He really did a
good job at explaining everything so that we could understand
the material.  Calc. III student.

Scott is the best calc teacher I have had to
date here at MSU. If all profs and TA's were more like him the
whole calc sequence would be much more bearable.  Calc III
Student.

I think this TA was a very good teacher. He
did an excellent job on showing us what the goal of the course
was, then took us step by step to get there. He was very
enthusiastic and wanted to make sure math majors and engineers
understood concepts because they will be needed for other
courses. His explanations and example problems were good. 
Calc. III student
A group of prospective teachers:

Out of all my professors here at MSU, I feel
that Scott was the only one that I have had who truly cared
about my performance. I really appreciated all of Scott's
motivation, words of advice, and concern for my learning. He
has gone out of his way to make sure I understand the
material. Scott is one of the teachers that I will remember
10, 20, 30 ... years from now.  prospective teacher

Scott is the most influential teacher I have
had at MSU. He shows an extraordinary understanding of math,
and he is able to communicate the concepts to the class in a
very systematic matter. I enjoyed the challenge he put forward
everyday.  prospective teacher.

Great teacher, loves math, a lot of teachers
could not teach material this deep. He did a damn fine job. 
prospective teacher.
Other Students:

The best math teacher I had in 4 years at MSU
(I have taken 5 math classes!)  prospective teacher.

Wow! This was the best class I have ever
taken. I do not enjoy math and usually do not do very well.
Although my grade isn't great, I feel like I have learned a
lot of knowledge. I think educational/teaching background you
gave was useful and important. Kudos Scott! Thanks.
prospective teacher.

Good Teacher. Added a lot more than just math
to the course. This gave an overall better view of the
mathematics that was taught.  prospective teacher.
Difficult Material:

Disliked the frustration!! (I know we need to
work through it to be successful in understanding!) Liked how
he integrated actual ways to teach elementary students this
material.  Measurement and Geometry Student

Scott is an awesome math teacher despite my
perpetual frustration with the tough material. The other
section of Math 202 worked on tessellation, did no proofs and
no constructions, while we worked our butts off for the
semester  it is frustrating that the required math education
for teachers is so variable.  Measurement and Geometry
Student

I liked just about all the information taught.
It was challenging, but not impossible to work with.  Math
201 student
I liked the difficulty of the material. It made me stay on my
toes and learn.  prospective teacher
Humorous (and sometimes sad):

"Good overall, but absent minded. Knows his
stuff, he is a real math nerd."  Calc. III student.

"He a math genius."  Remedial Algebra
student. (Yes, the missing "is" is not a typo.)

Went into detail on most areas but every so
often skimmed over other areas that everyone already should
have known about.  Measurement and Geometry Student

You should consider letting students do their
test in groups.  Measurement and Geometry Student

I dislike math and I hope to got a good grade.
 prospective teacher
Needs improvement:

Assumed that we had a strong background in
math. It seems the material relied on a lot of skills I did
not have, even though I was successful in Math 201. 
Measurement and Geometry Student

You tended to skip over steps in problems that
you assumed that you assumed everyone knew how to do. I was
one who didn't know lots of small simple things  I needed
those steps, but you were very helpful in your office hours
with my questions.  Measurement and Geometry Student

Scott is an excellent teacher and has a great
understanding of the math concepts. Things he can improve on
is giving more examples about the material that he is
teaching. He gives homework problems and often there are no
examples to follow.  prospective teacher

He definitely knew what he was talking about,
but I felt he got frustrated when I didn't understand, which
was often.  prospective teacher
Student
Recommendations
In 1998 I was recommended for a Michigan State University teaching award. Part
of the application process required student recommendations. Here are three of
them:
