eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Kent Killam

Available Survey Results

Kent Killam: ITS218, Fall 2007

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Information Technology
Course: ITS 218 - Help Desk Support Crn (Section): 15646 (0)    
1. Course objectives and procedures (for example, attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
2. Course objectives were met.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
4. Class activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were helpful and well suited to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 2 (40%)
8. Regular attendance or participation was important to student success in the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 5 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 2 (40%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
12. The instructor used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 2 (40%)
13. The instructor was willing to help students during office hours and/or via email.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 3 (60%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 5 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 2 (40%)
17. The instructor made helpful comments on assignments and exams in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 2 (40%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: A=Superior; B=Good; C=Average; D=Poor; F=Inferior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   A   B   C   D   F  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 4 (80%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
I would change the grading evaluation. Your group grade should not be 50% of your overall grade. I understand the concept of teaching us to work together, but when one person in your group is not doing his part of the work, he still gets a "free" ride.
N/A
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
good
He is a great teacher, however, he needs to re look into the group grading.
Excellent.
Great, easy to understand, comprehensive
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
yes
yes
Yes.
Yes
22. Other comments:
Always, explains topics to you if you need help.
Great Job Mr. Killam