eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Judith Stilgenbauer

Available Survey Results

ARCH341, Fall 2013
ARCH543, Spring 2013
ARCH690, Spring 2013
ARCH341, Fall 2012

Judith Stilgenbauer: ARCH341, Fall 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Architecture
Course: ARCH 341 - Int Arch Studio A Crn (Section): 79623 (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  
3.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%) 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 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 8 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 6 (75%)
8. I developed a greater sense of personal responsibility.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%)
9. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 8 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
student-instructor interaction. judith was able to talk to us one by one. the sign-up for desk critiques was also valuable.
I liked that we were taught tools to analyze the site.
the site exercises and lectures to prepare us for the final project.
Representation of drawings Site analysis Site exercises
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
none
none
14. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%)
15. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
16. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
17. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 8 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 6 (75%)
18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
19. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
20. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
21. The instructor was available and willing to help with individual problems outside of class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
22. The instructor uses class time well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
23. Work requirements and grading system were clear from the beginning.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 8 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 1 (13%) 4 (50%)
24. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%)
25. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
26. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%)
27. The instructor makes the course difficult enough to be stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%)
28. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
If you have any interests in landscape architecture, you need to take advantage of having Judith, a practicing and very knowledgable landscape architect. Even if you feel like your well suited for a career in architecture and not landscape, like myself, Judith's course and the way she teaches will bridge that understanding between the landscape and architecture and how you can integrate both into really neat designs. Judith is very knowledgable in her discipline and you can pretty much ask her anything and she'll be able to help you or at least aid in finding answers. One thing that I really appreciated about Judith as a teacher is that when we worked on our individual projects her advice and teaching and things she discussed with us were very tailored to our own projects. She pushed us to further our projects according to our designs and concepts and our own persona.
Her personality and teaching style. She's approachable. She also helps us push our designs in the nicest way possible
She offers very helpful critiques and offers different views on how to tackle some design issues.
Lectures on site analysis, drawing representation individual desk crits and also small group crits very helpful in improving our design and not just imposing their design excellent guest lecturers
29. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
none
-- snipped --
* Showing 1 out of 2 survey responses.

 

30. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I know she's busy, but I wish she gave us our grades earlier so we know our standing in class
nothing to improve. teaching methods were satisfactory progress report would be help in knowing how well we are doing in the course.
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
32. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
33. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
34. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 8 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 6 (75%)
35. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 8 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%)
36. My overall evaluation of this course is...
I wish we were able to spend more time with the professor and in studio. The school makes students take so many extra classes that we can't spend as much time in our studio course.. which I believe is most important to our career in architecture. Overall I enjoyed the course. It added a new perspective to my learning about landscape, ecology, and the built environment around us. Something I picked up from Judith especially that differed from the other professors at the same level was the knowledge and thinking about sustainable practices and designs and the process of refining those designs.
excellent and would like to take a course shes teaching again
I really liked this class. It exposed us to a great variety of tools that we can use to understand the site.
This landscape related design studio was very enjoyable especially working with someone who is passionate and excited about their expertise.
Challenging and difficult, but able. I was really got a lot out of this studio and I think Professor Stilgenbauer is an excellent studio professor to teach ARCH 341. I appreciated her guest lecturers and reviews also who came by and helped in our design
37. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
Course schedule. Allow maybe another extra week for production time
38. Other comments:
Awesome professor

Judith Stilgenbauer: ARCH543, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Architecture
Course: ARCH 543 - Arch Studio IV Crn (Section): 86841 (001)     3203 (331)     3460 (332)    
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  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 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%) 4 (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%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (100%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (67%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (100%)
8. I developed a greater sense of personal responsibility.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
9. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
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%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this 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%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
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 (75%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
new design methods new language in landscape architecture
Getting a different scale project was eye opening. The approach to urban and landscape design is so helpful to architectural design. The perspective is valuable in challenging the idea of boundaries and edges. The class will deeply strengthen my perspective on presentation also.
Developing a new way of thinking about design, knowing that it is not limited to buildings is not enough. You understand the difference of scales by actually doing it, and it is a tricky adjustment.
The Precedent Studies became strong guiding influences into the rest of the course. The mini-lectures by the teacher and some guest lectures were just as important in guiding the design process. The class structure was overall well organized. Also, many of the topics ran parallel with her seminar class, which was extremely helpful.
Learning how to map sites, precedence studies and figuring out how to create things.
Some of the guest lecturers provided valuable information
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
any
We must have spent a little too much time on precedents and other lectures and guest speaker presentations, albeit they were all important.
The design process started much too late, I think. The class may have been better served if the research had been shorter or some of it had run parallel with design time.
getting no technical site information and or computer advice.
14. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
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 stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
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%) 1 (25%)
16. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
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 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%)
18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
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%)
19. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
20. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
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%)
21. The instructor was available and willing to help with individual problems outside of class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
22. The instructor uses class time well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 2.31 Freq(%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%)
23. Work requirements and grading system were clear from the beginning.
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%) 1 (25%)
24. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
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. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
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%)
26. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (67%)
27. The instructor makes the course difficult enough to be stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
28. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
She has a background in an area of design the school has been lacking. The landscapes' interaction with the urban world and buildings is a focus I think has been neglected in the mainstream architecture world.
Very approachable and easy to talk to; Gave challenging questions to think about my design scheme and approach. Treats students as adults and expects them to push themselves instead of being motherly (which I also greatly appreciate, sometimes I need a kick to get going)
She understands the class topics and materials and explains them very well to us who were unfamiliar with them.
She was an awesome human being to know and work with. Very good with one on one information.
She gave constructive criticism in a very positive manner
29. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
none
I wasn't too clear about the "finishness" of our designs, meaning that I didn't feel a sense of what was an appropriate level of completeness.
Not knowing what the hell was going on, what was due and when and how grading was structured.
30. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
The downtown studio poses challenges, but I think it would be nice to include a 'successful design in Honolulu' site visit. To be in a space that clearly communicates the design concept is invaluable as a learning aid.
for the class, maybe it would be better to condense the preliminary project researches (site analysis, precedents, other related lectures, etc.) to a shorter period of time so students can have more time to focus on the design phase
A more pragmatic explanation of what drawings and presentation slides were necessary could have been very helpful.
Need more technical and computer exercises taught. Need more information on how to achieve all designs and visual things that she talked about and presented.
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
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%)
32. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 2 (67%)
33. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 3 (100%)
34. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
35. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%)
36. My overall evaluation of this course is...
excellent
Great- I wish there was more time to explore the subject. The subject matter is very relevant and pertinent to all our lives. The course was able to scratch the surface on a problem that someone needs to solve. I am grateful for the perspective.
wonderful! I have learned a lot about urban landscaping and understand that there is so much more to learn.
...that the topics, progression/structure of the course, and the teacher are excellent. Many of the topics were eye-opening. The breadth of new knowledge makes the design process so much more intriguing.
Great but I think more visual examples on what to do and what not to do would have helped. But overall it was a good experience.
I learned a lot about large scale issues that haven't been addressed in my other courses.
37. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
I think site visits to successful designs locally would help. I think to to work in groups may solve some of the volumes of information collection would help.
Shorter research topics. More time for design.
Needs to be more structured and need to know what is the fundamental thing that we need to get out of the course.
Less time devoted to the precedents and more time to the actual designing.
38. Other comments:
The seminar class seems to be valuable, almost necessary, to flesh out the topics in the studio class.
Great gal. Pay her more money. She worth every dime!!!!!

Judith Stilgenbauer: ARCH690, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Architecture
Course: ARCH 690 - Special Topics Seminar Crn (Section): 89755 (005)     3206 (331)    
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  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (89%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (100%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 9 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
8. I developed a greater sense of personal responsibility.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
9. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (78%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Most of the readings, and the order in which we had read them, were very important to me being able to properly digest the topics. The concepts were often above my head and too conceptual. The order of readings helped greatly.
The content of the course was very interesting and insightful. I am glad to have a course offered in landscape architecture that was both thorough and exciting. We discussed several issues in class that were thought-provoking (temporal, resilience, design process, etc.) and could very much be applied to the built world as well.
Her knowledge of landscape design is well beyond any other professor who would talk about landscape design before her.
Class discussions on relevant topics- temporality, resilience, emergent ecologies
The discussions about the given readings elucidated the concepts.
the presentation of the different Urban Landscape projects because a lot can be learned from them
Doing the presentations for case studies were most helpful for me.
Doing the precedent studies helped me to understand the field of landscape architecture.
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Lack of writing. There were times where I thought a short paper would assist discussions in the class.
None
The act of going downtown was a struggle at times for those of us not in her studio, but I can see how it was convenient for her.
Some of the readings were redundant.
14. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
15. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (67%)
16. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
17. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
19. 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 9 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
20. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
21. The instructor was available and willing to help with individual problems outside of class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
22. The instructor uses class time well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
23. Work requirements and grading system were clear from the beginning.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (78%)
24. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
25. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
26. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (100%)
27. The instructor makes the course difficult enough to be stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
28. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
Her organization of the subject matter and its progression were most valuable to my understanding. The material is difficult at first, but then it becomes easier to understand as the course goes on.
I really appreciate how knowledgeable Judith is about her field and how she is able to communicate it to her students in a simple, but intriguing manner.
She is always willing to help us with both inside and outside class material.
Judith's expertise in this field of landscape architecture adds another facet to our current program
She is very knowledgeable and enthusiastic about landscape architecture. She was easy to understand and identify with.
The case studies we had to prepare
29. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
She doesn't want to read our written papers.
None
N/A
30. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Maybe she should have assigned a short writing when a topic in the class became more debatable. Some topics need only to be read. A few need to be digested. Writing would help.
N/A
Maybe a more clear grading policy. I'm not sure how the grading in a seminar class works.
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
32. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.
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%) 2 (100%)
33. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 2 (100%)
34. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
35. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (78%)
36. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Excellent course I have ever studied. a lot of valuable material i really enjoy the class.
... take it. The subject matter and the "way" of thinking is new and so relevant, whether or not landscape is a relevant course to the student.
GREAT CLASS and WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT FOR ANYONE!!!
This class made me wish I took more landscape influenced classes in the past. It made me have a greater appreciation for landscape architecture.
It's a great and enjoyable elective course
As a graduate student it is much more valuable to be able to discuss contents of a seminar course with the instructor and the other students than have to write about them and not really get the same feedback. This course executes this well.
Interesting course. Even helped with my research
The material got me more interested in landscape architecture.
37. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
2 or 3 writting assignments, short 1-2 pages, would be helpful in stimulating class discussion.
N/A
38. Other comments:
This seminar class is very helpful to the studio class.
Thank you Judith for getting me excited again about learning new things within the design environment!
N/A
The instructor is a great asset and addition to the school of architecture because of what she has to offer. Other students should have an idea of the different aspects of landscape and urban design, and her lectures are such eye-openers and provide a fresh take on what we students are taught about design. She knows what is being done out there, and so should we. I highly recommend this class and her.

Judith Stilgenbauer: ARCH341, Fall 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Architecture
Course: ARCH 341 - Int Arch Studio A Crn (Section): 79581 (004)    
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  
3.17 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%) 1 (17%) 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 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
8. I developed a greater sense of personal responsibility.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
9. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Actually having a site with rules and regulations like zoning althoughthat should have had more of an impact on the projects.
I learned a lot about myself, as a student and as a designer. I know this is partial because of experience, but this semester with Judith has been very enlightening. The reviewers she invites to our presentations are enormously helpful. Judith challenged me while allowing me to explore different approach and allowing to figure out what ways were better than others. She began to make us design our projects with realistic restrictions and guidelines, such as being practical and providing ADA accessibility.
The site analysis learning process was most valuable.
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
model should have been due 1 week before presentations
The lack of having a more structured process for the development of the projects.
14. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
15. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
16. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
17. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
19. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
20. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
21. The instructor was available and willing to help with individual problems outside of class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
22. The instructor uses class time well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
23. Work requirements and grading system were clear from the beginning.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
24. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
25. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
26. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%)
27. The instructor makes the course difficult enough to be stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
28. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
-ORGANIZED -TIMELY WITH UPDATES AND DEADLINES -EASY TO TALK TO WHEN DOING ONE ON ONE DESK CRITIQUES -VERY KNOWLEDGABLE ABOUT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE -FIRST PROFESSOR TO TEACH US ABOUT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE/GREEN ROOFS -REALISTIC ABOUT OUR SCHEDULE AND ALWAYS AWARE THAT WE HAVE OTHER CLASSES
she is very passionate about landscape architecture, she brings professional experience, something that the university does not always offer.
She was very knowledgeable about landscape architecture. She knows her stuff
her experience, critical eye, motivation, humor
Her knowledge of the subject, provides many examples of landscape design. Supportive as well as critical during critiques. Challenges students to constantly improve their designs.
29. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
-- snipped --
She could have been a little more firm on grading.
* Showing 1 out of 2 survey responses.

 

30. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
have things due 1 week earlier than they "should" that way students are always ahead of schedule
The course would be more beneficial with more lectures on landscape architecture and green design context.
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
32. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
33. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
34. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
35. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
36. My overall evaluation of this course is...
GOOD STUDIO. I LEARNED A LOT ABOUT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AS WELL AS MORE OF THE SMALL DETAILS THAT AN ARCHITECT IS REQUIRED TO KNOW. PROGRESSED AND DEVELOPED MY SKILLS AS AN ARCHITECTURE STUDENT. GREAT PROFESSOR. HOPE TO HAVE ANOTHER CLASS WITH HER IN THE FUTURE.
Overall good course with a lot of information on site and landscape design
awesome
Allows for a deeper understanding of landscape architecture, "green architecture". Provides a different approach to design.
37. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
see above
Maybe a little too fair in terms of grading. Prior studios have had a much more strict grading curve.
If possible, find sustainable systems which the class can visit and understand how they are applied.
38. Other comments:
one of my favortie studio so far, I think Judith was a really interesting teacher, I would love to take a different class with her.