UNT | University of North Texas

Main menu

Charlie Riccardelli

Title
Teaching Fellow
Department
English
College
College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences

Education

PhD, University of North Texas.
Major: Creative Writing
MFA, William Paterson University, 2012.
Major: Creative/Professional Writing
BA, Susquehanna University, 2009.
Major: Creative Writing

Current Scheduled Teaching*

TECM 2700.003, Technical Writing, Spring 1 2019
TECM 2700.006, Technical Writing, Spring 1 2019
TECM 2700.021, Technical Writing, Spring 1 2019
TECM 2700.024, Technical Writing, Spring 1 2019
TECM 1700.001, Introduction to Professional, Science, and Technical Writing, Fall 1 2018 Syllabus
TECM 1700.002, Introduction to Professional, Science, and Technical Writing, Fall 1 2018 Syllabus
TECM 1700.008, Introduction to Professional, Science, and Technical Writing, Fall 1 2018 Syllabus

* Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Previous Scheduled Teaching*

TECM 2700.002, Technical Writing, Summer 5W1 2018 SPOT
TECM 2700.804, Technical Writing, Summer 5W2 2018 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.002, Technical Writing, Spring 2018 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.027, Technical Writing, Spring 2018 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.032, Technical Writing, Spring 2018 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.006, Technical Writing, Fall 2017 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.008, Technical Writing, Fall 2017 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.011, Technical Writing, Fall 2017 Syllabus SPOT
ENGL 3140.001, Intermediate Creative Writing: Fiction, Summer 5W1 2017 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.001, Technical Writing, Summer 5W1 2017 Syllabus SPOT
ENGL 2100.001, Introduction to Creative Writing, Spring 2017 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.004, Technical Writing, Spring 2017 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.005, Technical Writing, Spring 2017 Syllabus SPOT
ENGL 2220.006, Survey of World Literatures from 1700 to the Present, Fall 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.007, Technical Writing, Fall 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.027, Technical Writing, Fall 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.005, Technical Writing, Summer 5W1 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.027, Technical Writing, Spring 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.030, Technical Writing, Spring 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.032, Technical Writing, Spring 2016 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.001, Technical Writing, Fall 2015 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.002, Technical Writing, Fall 2015 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.028, Technical Writing, Fall 2015 Syllabus SPOT
ENGL 1320.001, College Writing II, Summer 5W1 2015 Syllabus SPOT
TECM 2700.004, Technical Writing, Summer 5W1 2015 Syllabus SPOT
ENGL 1320.006, College Writing II, Spring 2015 Syllabus
ENGL 1320.041, College Writing II, Spring 2015 Syllabus
TECM 2700.035, Technical Writing, Spring 2015 Syllabus
ENGL 1320.024, College Writing II, Fall 2014 Syllabus
ENGL 1320.027, College Writing II, Fall 2014 Syllabus
TECM 2700.023, Technical Writing, Fall 2014 Syllabus
TECM 2700.003, Technical Writing, Summer 5W1 2014 Syllabus
TECM 2700.002, Technical Writing, Spring 2014 Syllabus
TECM 2700.013, Technical Writing, Spring 2014 Syllabus
TECM 2700.013, Technical Writing, Fall 2013 Syllabus
TECM 2700.023, Technical Writing, Fall 2013 Syllabus

* Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

,
Overall
Summative Rating
1
Challenge and
Engagement Index
2
Response Rate
0
out of 5
0
out of 7
%
of
students responded
A Challenge and Engagement Index of "n/a" means
there were not enough student responses to calculate a score.
  • 1 Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • 2 Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE