eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations

Instructor: Kent Killam

Available Survey Results

Kent Killam: ITS 218, 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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 0.0 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?

N/A 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.

20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?

Great, easy to understand, comprehensive good Excellent. He is a great teacher, however, he needs to re look into the group grading.

21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?

Yes yes Yes. yes

22. Other comments:

Great Job Mr. Killam Always, explains topics to you if you need help.