eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Michelle Smith

Available Survey Results

BIOL172, Spring 2011
ZOOL142, Fall 2009
OCN201, Fall 2008

Michelle Smith: BIOL172, Spring 2011

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Biology
Course: BIOL 172 - Introduction to Biology II Crn (Section): 87875 (002)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
2.45 11 1.13 Freq(%) 3 (27%) 2 (18%) 4 (36%) 2 (18%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.91 11 0.3 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 10 (91%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 12 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 4 (33%) 5 (42%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 12 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (17%) 7 (58%) 2 (17%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.08 12 1.16 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 5 (42%) 5 (42%)
6. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 12 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 4 (33%) 6 (50%)
7. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 12 1.34 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 2 (17%) 3 (25%) 5 (42%)
8. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 12 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 8 (67%) 2 (17%)
9. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 12 1.03 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 8 (67%) 2 (17%)
10. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 12 1.14 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 5 (42%) 3 (25%)
11. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 12 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 6 (50%) 4 (33%)
12. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 12 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 4 (33%) 4 (33%) 2 (17%)
13. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 12 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 3 (25%) 7 (58%)
14. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.92 12 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (25%) 4 (33%) 4 (33%)
15. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 12 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 6 (50%) 4 (33%)
16. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.33 12 1.37 Freq(%) 2 (17%) 1 (8%) 2 (17%) 5 (42%) 2 (17%)
17. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Emphasizing the key points. I ended up studying irrelevant parts of the text book because I thought a more detailed understanding was needed for the exams. Possibly posting past exams for studying puposes. Or a review worksheet.
I think that Michelle Smith should offer more office hours because that would really help aid my studies.
Add assignments aside from just reading and 4 exams. She did not give specific direction as to the key concepts to study. The exams felt like random aspects of each chapter and I never knew exactly what to focus on in my studies. I understand needing to "know it all" but that's impossible when you are studying for 5-7 chapters of term heavy examination. The classes seemed to go ahead of the labs, or perhaps the labs were too behind. I'm not sure. I love her as a teacher, but the structure of the tests and objectifying a per exam focus need to be adhered for this class.
It would be nice to know what we need to be studying for the tests rather than a "study everything" approach. The note cards are helpful occasionally but I would have rather had a curve on tests than a note card. When students asked if something would be on the test, we were never given a straight answer, only a "it might be" for any and everything we asked about. We're covering a lot of material in the class. A study guide would have helped.
Work on defining "General info" if you're going to test on it. I got a little better at reading your mind this last exam, but I shouldn't have to nor should anyone else. It's not fair to be graded on a vast body of knowledge when you make no indication of what's important and often times skim over or even skip over the material that will be on the exam
18. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 12 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 4 (33%) 6 (50%)
19. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 12 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 3 (25%) 6 (50%)
20. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 12 1.09 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 5 (42%) 4 (33%) 2 (17%)
21. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 12 1.15 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 4 (33%) 4 (33%) 3 (25%)
22. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
Learning about the random facts about flowers and animals.
I liked how clear and concise Michelle was at explaining the topics covered in class. I also liked how easily approachable she was and how easy to talk to she was.
Michelle is highly knowledgeable in every aspect of biology and she has the experience and current professional interaction needed by any professor actively teaching sciences. Her ability to relate the topics to our lives is key.
The material was interesting and the chance to do extra credit was greatly appreciated.
The notecard was slightly helfpul dealing with the overwhelming exams
23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.75 12 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (17%) 8 (67%) 1 (8%)
24. Other comments:
Really just don't like the structure of her exams. Only complaint really.
I felt that the tests were harder than they should have been. The questions on the test were not what we studied. After the exam I even went to find out the answer and could not find any easy way to get it except by going to Wikipedia. It wasn't in our notes. I studied a lot for this class and feel that the grades I was getting on the tests did not reflect the amount of work I put in.

Michelle Smith: ZOOL142, Fall 2009     Back to top

Campus: Kapiolani Community College Department: Math & Science
Course: ZOOL 142 - Human Anatomy/Physiology II Crn (Section): 31768 (0)    
1. The instructor did not speak clearly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.0 9 1.0 Freq(%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%)
2. The instructor explained course procedure. (attendance, assignments, grading policy, exams, etc.)
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)
3. The instructor was available during office hours and/or via email.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
4. The instructor explained the course goals and objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
5. The instructor knew the subject area.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.89 9 1.27 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%)
6. The instructor encouraged students' participation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
7. The instructor was prepared for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 9 1.22 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
8. The instructor provided a good atmosphere for learning.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)
9. The instructor encouraged me to think for myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.89 9 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%)
10. The instructor's way of teaching assisted my learning.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.78 9 1.48 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%)
11. The instructor graded tests and assignments fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 9 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
12. The instructor informed students of their grades on exams and assignments promptly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)
13. The instructor demonstrated concern for students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)
14. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (56%) 4 (44%)
15. What are the instructor's major strengths as a teacher?
She was able to present the material very well and was always possitve.
Michelle's knowledge and passion for teaching make her a great instructor. She is prepared with lecture notes and slides, videos, and even Jeopardy review games. She takes the time to explain everything and breaks the information down in a way that helps you to grasp to concepts of such a vast array of information. She is personable and very easy going.
she knew the subject well
Michelle encourage a lot of discussion in the class on various topics but this was often because the students felt they knew more than she did. Her breadth of knowledge about A&P did not seem very broad so the students felt it necessary to share their experiences and knowledge about A&P. I found this undermining to the instructor because the students either had contradictory information to hers or brought up information about which she had no knowledge whatsoever. This also wasted time in class listening to stories that may or may not be founded in fact.
She knows how to effectively connect with the students and explain the content to a degree where we can understand it.
16. The instructor spoke clearly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 9 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)
17. What changes, if any, do you suggest to the instructor?
Area of studies are too broad. Instructor is going to fast, hard to understand. Did not have a specific area of focus on each chapter which makes many students in the class got poor grade on their test.
I would not change a thing.
If anything, I would have preferred to write our topic papers concurrently with the chapters being studies.
more specific on what is covered on the test. there is a lot of information to cover.
The instructor would be a better lecturer if she came to class prepared. She was often at a loss for words. Meaning she could not think of important terms we needed to know or did not know what abbreviations in her notes stood for. However, that information was actually in her notes so if she had read her notes before coming to class she would have known this information. The jeopardy reviews at first seemed helpful, however, I realized the questions in the review were not very to the actual exam. Also there were multiple reviews where we had to identify different organs, however identification was not on the exam. This is a waste of time. If jeopardy reviews more closely matched the types of questions on the exam students would do better on the exams.
I wouldn't suggest this instructor any changes.
18. The instructor was not available during office hours and/or via email.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
1.78 9 0.97 Freq(%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%)
19. How did the instructor show concern for students?
She would work with the student until the student got the concepts.
The instructor showed concern for me, personally, when I had a family crisis and was unable to attend classes. She followed-up on emails, let me know what was covered in the classes I missed, and did not dock my attendance grade. I am very appreciative of Michelle - I was able to still do well, even when going through an extremely trying time at home.
Michelle was also willing to answer questions or take comments in class. She asked about personal experiences which makes class more interesting when you can relate what you are learning to your own life. Michelle was also very willing to review questions on the exams and give students the benefit of the doubt.
She was willing to give students a prolonged deadline for assignments if something came up. She also explained things until the class understood it.
20. Would you recommend this instructor to students? Why or why not?
No, because teaching style is not good. Only lecture but did not show concrete examples for students to truly understand the subject. Need to specify what to study and aim for in each chapter instead of letting the student do the guessing of what needs to be learn.
Yes, she is a really good teacher and she cares about the students progress.
Absolutely. Michelle is not only a fun and caring person, but she is an excellent teacher. She knows what she is talking about and is great at sharing her knowledge in ways that you can comprehend, and even look forward to learning.
yes, she made the subject easy to understand but went very fast sometimes
No, because I do not feel the lecture was very helpful. Michelle read directly from her PowerPoint presentation and did not expand on the information. I did well in the class but this was because I studied hard on my own and added to her notes. I do not see the point of going to a lecture if the lecturer does not provide additional information. Also the notes did not follow the order of the book which made it harder to study from the notes. Instead of studying from page 1 to page 2, I had to study from page 2 to page 5 to page 3. The order of the notes made no sense. During class, Michelle went too quickly over important information. It would have been helpful if she repeated hormonal pathways (for example) more than once to help the class learn. Also there was very little emphasis on the specific parts of the notes we needed to know for the exam. Not every piece of info in the notes is important enough to memorize. Many instructors make that clear. Michelle did not do this often enough. Not everything in the notes can be equally important.
I would recommend this instructor to other students because I gained a lot of knowledge and it was in a effective way.
21. The instructor actively listened to students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
22. What else would you like to say about this instructor?
A very good and caring person, but not an effective teacher due to reasons listed above. Could use some improvement on teaching style such as being more specific on the subjects being study.
She is really friendly and funny.
slow down lectures and cover more areas that are on the exams
The PowerPoints should be bound and sold at the bookstore. It is an inconvenience to print PowerPoints every day before class. It also wastes me toner and my money. There are too many diagrams and pictures in the notes and there is no explanation of these diagrams in the notes. Diagrams without further explanation do not teach me anything. It's just a waste to print these slides out.
This instructor was one of the best instructors that I had for zoology. it was very easy for me to understand the material.

Michelle Smith: OCN201, Fall 2008     Back to top

Campus: Windward Community College Department: Natural Sciences
Course: OCN 201 - Science of the Sea Crn (Section): 64290 (0)    
1. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.43 14 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 8 (57%) 3 (21%) 2 (14%)
2. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
I need this to be taken seriously, I think that her teaching skills are very poor. She knows what she is talking about but all the students can not get the info across. She does not grade on a curve and she gives the worst test that anyone could take. The average grade is a failing score and she still don't grade on a curve or think that a lot of the questions were faulty. She needs more skill to teach at a Community College.
unprepared freindly educated
knowledgeable, understandable, not clear on instruction. new wardrobe
well organized
hard, unprepared,
confusing, unorganised
nice, confusing
knowledgeable Unexciting Not lenient
unorganized scattered nice
Knowledgeable Funny
passionate, fair, open
3. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.57 14 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 4 (29%) 6 (43%) 2 (14%)
4. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.21 14 1.12 Freq(%) 4 (29%) 6 (43%) 1 (7%) 3 (21%) 0 (0%)
5. The instructor clearly explains course procedures (attendance, assignments, exams, etc.).
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 14 1.45 Freq(%) 2 (14%) 1 (7%) 4 (29%) 2 (14%) 5 (36%)
6. The instructor is well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.0 14 1.41 Freq(%) 2 (14%) 4 (29%) 3 (21%) 2 (14%) 3 (21%)
7. The instructor is available for help outside of class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.14 14 1.17 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 3 (21%) 5 (36%) 3 (21%) 2 (14%)
8. The instructor clearly explains the goals, objectives, and overall purpose of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.43 14 1.4 Freq(%) 2 (14%) 1 (7%) 4 (29%) 3 (21%) 4 (29%)
9. The instructor allows time for questions and encourages them.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 14 1.14 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 3 (21%) 5 (36%) 5 (36%)
10. The instructor stimulates student's thinking about the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.36 14 1.22 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 5 (36%) 3 (21%) 3 (21%)