eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Andrew Rumbach

Available Survey Results

PLAN414, Spring 2013
PLAN670, Fall 2011

Andrew Rumbach: PLAN414, Spring 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 414 - Building Community Resilience Crn (Section): 87066 (001)    
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  
3.91 11 0.54 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.4 11 0.52 Freq(%) 6 (55%) 4 (36%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.91 11 0.3 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 10 (91%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 3 (27%) 6 (55%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 11 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 4 (36%) 5 (45%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Discussion of readings, writing assignments, and presentations
The small activities that we have done in class were to me the most valuable aspect of the course. It allows us to get some hands-on experience of what is being discussed in class. It is one thing to just lecture day after day, hoping that the students will understand the material. Being able to go outside and try to exercise the topic is the best way to teach in my own opinion.
Studying different community responses to disasters. I learned about the importance of interconnections between community members in order to create resilience. I enjoyed the movie about Versailles, New Orleans.
the learning of the different types of resilience in the social, economic, and environmental sector.
Expanding on the social aspect involved in a natural disaster, focusing on resilience and how to improve it. Good examples of how students could better understand the course material.
In only two short class sessions, Mr. Rumbach was able to improve the entire class's ability to write, cite, and develop discussion and research papers. He used short in-class activities to do so which were highly effective.
The readings as well as the in class discussions involving resilience in urban planning.
readings & discussions & debate
Lectures and videos were engaging
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The first paper that we were assigned to read was incredibly boring.
the group debate policy brief paper
n/a
none
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 6 (55%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Getting in small groups to discuss questions about the readings before discussing as a class was really helpful. I think it helped stimulate discussion. Being able to help each other edit our second response paper and having the opportunity to revise it was useful. I would have liked to do that for all three papers.
Nothing to improve, keep up the good work!
n/a
none
Fewer readings
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.7 11 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 8 (73%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.73 11 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 9 (82%)
34. Other comments:
Andrew always provided feedback on how to become better writers. I appreciated the time he spent in order to help develop the class' writing skills, whether it was in class exercises or personal feedback on assignments. He also listened to students with an open mind, often times taking notes about topics that he wasn't familiar with so that he could do further research later. It was clear that Andrew was always open to new ideas and concepts.
I really enjoyed the debates over improving Hawaii's resilience.
n/a
none

Andrew Rumbach: PLAN670, Fall 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 670 - Seminar in DMHA Crn (Section): 75685 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.93 15 0.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 14 (93%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 11 (73%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 7 (47%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 14 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 6 (43%) 5 (36%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 14 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 3 (21%) 9 (64%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 15 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (20%) 5 (33%) 6 (40%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 15 1.16 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 2 (13%) 7 (47%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 15 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 4 (27%) 6 (40%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 15 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 6 (40%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.87 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (33%) 7 (47%) 3 (20%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 15 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 7 (47%) 5 (33%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
* Showing 0 out of 11 survey responses.

 

15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
* Showing 0 out of 11 survey responses.

 

16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (53%) 7 (47%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 14 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (29%) 9 (64%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (40%) 9 (60%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.21 14 1.19 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 3 (21%) 8 (57%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 15 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 11 (73%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 7 (47%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
* Showing 0 out of 8 survey responses.

 

27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 15 1.16 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 7 (47%) 6 (40%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 15 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 8 (53%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 14 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 10 (71%) 2 (14%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.13 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 5 (33%) 6 (40%)
32. Other comments:
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
-- snipped --
* Showing 0 out of 7 survey responses.