eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Ho Ng

Available Survey Results

Ho Ng: CHEM463L, Fall 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Chemistry
Course: CHEM 463L - Advanced Biochemistry Lab Crn (Section): 79225 (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  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%) 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  
2.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%)
6. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
7. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
8. Textbook andor other reading materials
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
9. Sensitivity to student problems and general rapport
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
10. Effective use of demonstrations, models, or visual aids
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
11. Absence of distracting mannerisms, pauses, etc.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
13. The instructor's voice was clear and understandable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
14. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
15. The instructor's presentation of abstract ideas and theories was clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%)
16. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
17. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
18. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
19. Assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%) 0 (0%)
20. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
21. The course is highly recommended if it were taught by this instructor.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
22. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
23. The exams gave students an opportunity to demonstrate what they had learned.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
24. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
25. Other comments:
Great lab for the fact that students were given the chance to work in groups on their "own" assigned project for a while. It was good as it allowed the techniques to be taught but in a way that performing the techniques actually yielded the results and that troubleshooting could be learned along the way as everything was not guaranteed to work. Dr. Ng often asks the students to figure out answers for themselves. Could have had more reading or been assigned more items to research on in order to bring more into the lab (to feel more prepared). Very enjoyable format and it would be wonderful if the lab could keep operating on a small scale with small groups. More tests/quizzes would have been fine!
Course was very engaging and informative. Structuring the course around a research project made the experiments more purposeful and enjoyable. Continuity of experiments was valuable in understanding the purpose of each step to the overall goal of the project. However, the lack of structure in the course made it difficult to prepare for labs and assignments. Overall, a very beneficial and highly recommended course.
The course could have been more organized and explanations of protocols and theories behind them could have been discussed slightly more clearly.