|
1. 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%) |
|
|
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of 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%) |
|
|
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
|
| 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%) |
|
|
4. I developed the ability to solve real problems 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%) |
|
|
5. I learned a lot 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%) |
|
|
6. I enjoyed this course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
6 |
0.52 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
7. 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%) |
|
|
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
|
| Excellent, 'round table' style of teaching. Made for interesting and thought provoking
class discussions |
| Disease management skills that can be applied in the field as an extension
agent |
| Publication of an extension article |
| Writing extension article was the most valuable thing of this
course.Practical knowledge was also given that will help us in the future. |
| The website was very helpful and valuable source of information. I also
enjoyed utilizing "paperless" technology to turn in assignments. |
|
|
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
|
|
|
|
10. The instructor gives clear explanations.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.5 |
6 |
0.55 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
3 (50%) |
3 (50%) |
|
|
11. The instructor treated students fairly.
|
| 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%) |
|
|
12. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.33 |
6 |
1.03 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
0 (0%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
13. The instructor uses class time well.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
6 |
0.52 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
14. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.33 |
6 |
0.82 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (17%) |
2 (33%) |
3 (50%) |
|
|
15. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
|
| Great teacher. will take another course offered by him in the future if possible. |
| a very knowledgeable professor. He uses effective teaching strategies that
make the course concepts easy to understand. |
| Very knowledgeable professor |
| very good |
| A+ Very good. Dr. Nelson maintained an interest in the course content over
the entire semester. He also utilized class time in an efficient manner by
using multiple instruction techniques during the class. |
|
|
16. Assignments are graded fairly.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
6 |
0.52 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
17. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.5 |
6 |
0.55 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
3 (50%) |
3 (50%) |
|
|
18. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
6 |
0.52 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
19. We encountered a good variety of clinical problems.
|
| 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 amount of work expected outside class was appropriate.
|
| 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 field trips were useful learning experiences.
|
| 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. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
6 |
0.52 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (33%) |
4 (67%) |
|
|
23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
|
| Good course. Should be required for TPSS, PEPS, and NREM majors |
| Very informative course, could be organized more systematically |
| This is very good course for those interested in plant disease management.
It does very well at integrating several pest management strategies and
tactics. |
|
|
24. Other comments:
|
| Strongly advised for plant pathology graduate students to take this course. |
|
