eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Kimberly Corbin

Available Survey Results

ED100, Spring 2014
SPED304, Spring 2014

Kimberly Corbin: ED100, Spring 2014

Campus: Leeward Community College Department: Education
Course: ED 100 - Intro to Education & Teaching Crn (Section): 53117 (0)    
1. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
2. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
3. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
2.75 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%)
4. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%)
5. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.
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%)
6. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 4 1.91 Freq(%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%)
7. The instructor is friendly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
8. The instructor is willing to meet and help students outside class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%)
9. The flexibility of this course helps all kinds of students learn.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.75 4 1.71 Freq(%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%)
10. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
11. The guest lecturers addressed issues relevant to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
12. Other comments:
I just really did not learn anything in this class. I was bored and the Professor Corbin got off topic a lot and some of it was not stuff I felt had nothing to do with the subject matter. I would not recommend this course to future students.
This was not a 100 class curriculum at all. There were so many assignments of the same thing. For example we did a multiple intelligence plan outline, do a paper flash card example, then do a powerpoint on the outline we just did. It is the same assignment done three times, waste of time again. Then Corbin tells us to do the modules and forums, mid semester says you do not need to do them so I stopped. After two weeks of saying you DID NOT NEED TO DOD THEM she asks why we haven't done them and that they are due soon. Its unclear now and definitely not a 100 level class.
during the class, I found that the teacher was very knowledgeable in the subject matter. I had witness many times that she helped students that required her help, along with doing a check-in with the students that understood the content. I had also seen the instructor logged on "Laulima" and could be contacted then - if any concerns arose. over all ,the teacher was a great teacher and would be recommended to my peers and future students.

Kimberly Corbin: SPED304, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Special Education
Course: SPED 304 - Fnds Inclusive Schlg Crn (Section): 89846 (005)    
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  
2.88 11 1.55 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 2 (18%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.63 11 0.52 Freq(%) 3 (27%) 5 (45%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 11 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 2 (18%) 7 (64%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 1 (9%) 7 (64%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 11 1.49 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 5 (45%)
6. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 11 1.18 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 5 (45%)
7. The instructor presented concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.18 11 1.08 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 2 (18%) 6 (55%)
8. The grading system was clearly explained.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.18 11 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 5 (45%)
9. Assignments and assessments in this course were related to course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 11 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 0 (0%) 8 (73%)
10. Assignments were returned in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.09 11 1.04 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 3 (27%) 5 (45%)
11. The instructor provided specific meaningful feedback.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.09 11 1.3 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 2 (18%) 0 (0%) 7 (64%)
12. The instructor was accessible to students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 1.03 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 7 (64%)
13. What did you like best about the course?
The material was mapped out nicely and easy to understand.
I liked the course subject. It was very beneficial for me to learn.
That it was online, which gave me the freedom to do this class on my own time and schedule. Not needing to drive into MÄ?noa from WaiÊ»anae and not spending $25 on gas for a roundtrip drive and not spending $5 for parking then another $10 for lunch. This class saved me a lot of money over this semester because it was online. Furthermore, by going over modules instead of lecturers I get to go over the material and information from this class at a pace that helps me to better comprehend. Online courses makes more sense to me than live lecture type classes.
The videos and modules were very interesting and I learned a lot from them
The ease of the online aspect.
14. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Be more clear about assignments and participation. The collaboration sessions were confusing and hard to navigate. Plus it wasnt clear when to go on.
Kumu Kimberly can improve on her grading techniques. She will sometimes grade an assignment or forum without completing it. Example, sheʻll grade it only half way, post that grade today. Then two weeks later, sheʻll grade the rest of that previous assignment and post another grade. Her grading methods is just too confusing for me. I was used to having a grade posted and corrected once. But Iʻm sure she has a reason for doing this.
Communicate more with the class through emails and respond to our forums.
N/A
15. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
3.78 11 1.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%)
16. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.11 11 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 2 (18%) 4 (36%)
17. Sensitivity to student problems and general rapport
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.75 11 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 6 (55%)
18. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 11 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 6 (55%)
19. The instructor is friendly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 11 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 2 (18%) 5 (45%)
20. The instructor is willing to meet and help students outside class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 11 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 6 (55%)
21. Other comments:
I understan Kumu Kimberly wanting to meet with all her students. But for me, I was only on UHM campus on Tuesdays & Thursdays. Kumu Kimberlyʻs office hours at UHM were on Mon. & Wed. I live in Waiʻanae, so traveling to UHM on these days just to meet in person didnʻt seem logical for me to do so. But I did want to meet Kumu Kimberly in person, just that our schedules were different. Other than that I thought this course was very effective in teaching me about students with various types of disabilities and how to be able to recognize and educate these students. Very well put together online course.
N/A