| Statement | Mean | Std. dev. | Skewness | Kurtosis | |
| Academic performance and level of understanding of students under the teaching technique adopted in the school |
| ||||
| ACA1 | How successfully, on a scale of 1 to 5, did the school’s instructors employ teaching aids (such as visuals, real-world examples, etc.) to make sure you understood the subject matter? | 3.05 | 1.116 | −0.066 | −0.414 |
| ACA2 | On a scale of 1 - 5, how well did the teaching style adopted in the school help you understand the course material? (1-being not well, and 5 being very well)? | 3.34 | 1.086 | −0.314 | −0.457 |
| ACA3 | On a scale of 1 - 5, how active did you feel in the course material under the teaching technique adopted in the school? (1 being not active, and 5 being highly active) | 3.20 | 1.066 | −0.071 | −0.386 |
| ACA4 | How well did you perform academically in the course on a scale of 1 to 5? | 3.78 | 0.875 | −0.352 | 0.037 |
| ACA5 | How well, on a scale of 1 to 5, did the teachers handle and resolve any concerns you had with the course material? | 3.16 | 1.096 | 0.018 | −0.558 |
| Evaluation of student’s level of comprehension in a course taught by a single lecturer |
| ||||
| SNG1 | How much did you feel committed to the lecturer’s course? From 1 (not committed) to 5 (very committed) | 3.66 | 1.014 | −0.546 | −0.019 |
| SNG2 | How would you rank the lecturer’s teaching style on a scale of 1 to 5? 1 represents poor, and 5 represents exceptional? | 3.53 | 0.965 | −0.246 | −0.052 |
| SNG3 | On a scale of 1 to 5, how well do you think the lecturer understands the subject matter? 1 is considered poor, and 5 is considered extraordinary? | 3.83 | 0.931 | −0.541 | 0.087 |
| SNG4 | How much, if anything, did you learn from the lecturer’s course on a scale of 1 to 5? (1 is very little, and 5 is a lot) | 3.53 | 0.987 | −0.511 | 0.175 |
| SNG5 | How well is the instructor simplifying complex ideas on a scale of 1 to 5? 1 represents poor, and 5 represents exceptional. | 3.40 | 1.022 | −0.209 | −0.440 |
| Student learning outcomes in a course delivered by team of instructors |
| ||||
| TEA1 | How would you consider your overall impression of the team-teaching strategy on a scale of 1 to 5? 1 represents poor, and 5 represents great. | 3.49 | 1.064 | −0.349 | −0.490 |
| TEA2 | How would you grade the teachers’ cooperation and collaboration in the team-teaching technique on a scale of 1 to 5? 1 represents inadequate, and 5 represents fantastic. | 3.61 | 1.025 | −0.480 | −0.180 |
| TEA3 | How much, if anything, did you gain from the team-taught course on a scale of 1 to 5? (1 is very little, and 5 is a lot) | 3.57 | 1.011 | −0.421 | −0.362 |
| TEA4 | How well did the team-teaching approach suit your learning method on a scale of 1 to 5? From 1 (not well) to 5 (extremely well). | 3.44 | 1.025 | −0.312 | −0.329 |
| TEA5 | Would a very high percentage of the student populace benefit from team teaching? 1 being extremely unlikely, to 5 being very likely. | 3.57 | 1.079 | −0.433 | −0.456 |