eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations

Instructor: Andrew Taylor

Available Survey Results

ZOOL 632, Spring 2012
ZOOL 631, Fall 2011
BOT 652,ZOOL 652, Spring 2011
ZOOL 691B, Spring 2011
ZOOL 631, Fall 2010
ZOOL 490E, Spring 2010
ZOOL 632, Spring 2010
ZOOL 691B, Spring 2010
ZOOL 631, Fall 2009

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 632, Spring 2012

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 632 - Advanced Biometry	Crn (Section):	89136 (001)     89137 (002)

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   4.87 15 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 13 (87%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.8 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)

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   4.67 15 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (20%) 11 (73%)

6. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

Discussions where we could figure out our software issues and discuss the different ways to approach the problem at hand Discussion was very helpful and also the second half of the course on multiple ANOVA and mixed models I believe the discussion section definitely helps the most in order to grasp the concepts presented in lecture. The use of actual research projects as examples of concepts. Discussion sections. Reading through homework and discussion solutions was very very useful. I will definitely use these solution sets to guide me in my own analyses. I hope that solutions from the midterm and final will also be shared. It's good to understand the mechanisms behind the analyses we need for our research. This is the most valuable aspect of the course. lecture handout and discussions Outside class room support through after class discussion, office hours and e-mail conversations. The discussions were the most valuable because we could apply what we were learning in a group setting. The actual lectures were very helpful, and the discussions were useful because it allowed us to try to use what we'd learned, synthesizing everything from looking at the raw data to answering the question at hand. Multiple Linear Regression. Homework and Discussion Assignments. model selection data transformation The discussion part of the course, where I learned to use the knowledge in real time cases. I learned different study designs as well as statistical methods to analyze them correctly.

7. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

I know it is important to know the background behind the stats, but sometimes I feel like this took away from time to actually apply the stats. But, I don't think this should be changed! Lectures about the Matrices behind the calculations were tough to follow and to link to the actual understanding of the statistics I found the text quite difficult to read - I wonder if there is another book that could have been used. The second half of the semester (after spring break) felt very rushed. Maybe more of this material can be moved to the first half? My grades. Mid term Nothing that I can think of. For the most part, I actually feel like all parts of the course were useful. Homework reinforces what we've gone over in class, and discussion, as I stated earlier, synthesizes everything we've learned. It is quite a lot of work for one class, but all parts are actually helpful and necessary. The specific textbook used was difficult to understand. The long and time taking homeworks (from text book). everything was great

8. The instructor gives clear explanations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.43 14 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (43%) 7 (50%)

9. The instructor is sensitive to student difficulty with course work.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.47 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 2 (13%) 10 (67%)

10. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.6 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 11 (73%)

11. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

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%)

12. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.

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%)

13. The instructor sets high standards for students.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.73 15 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 12 (80%)

14. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.87 15 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 13 (87%)

15. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A   4.67 15 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (33%) 10 (67%) 0 (0%)

16. The TA's comments on written work were helpful.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A   4.53 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 5 (33%) 9 (60%) 0 (0%)

17. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 15 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 1 (7%) 7 (47%) 5 (33%)

18. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 15 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 7 (47%) 7 (47%)

19. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)

20. The exams gave students an opportunity to demonstrate what they had learned.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.27 15 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 3 (20%) 8 (53%)

21. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.53 15 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (47%) 8 (53%)

22. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

Andy is great and he's been doing this for a while, so there's not much room for improvement. Maybe, he could dedicate more time in lecture to actually doing the stats in software. Sometimes it took me a while to figure out how to do the homework because of software issues. This being said, I probably learned more figuring it out myself! Maybe reduce homework load a little, but overall I think the course was good. Would have liked more time for linear mixed models, and it would have been nice to touch on some multivariate statistics. I think it would help a lot more if the discussion section and the homework questions were aligned a little bit more. It seemed as though for some weeks what we were doing in discussion had nothing to do with what we were expected to do on the home works. Perhaps we could spend some time on using different distributions for our models, like a poisson distribution. I understand that this would most likely be towards the end of the course, and need to be based on likelihood as opposed to least squares type stuff, but understanding our options for the analyses we actually are going to do in our research is important. However, there may not be enough time to cover that type of thing through this course. I totally satisfied with the course, no more comments. More frequent discussion sessions, like twice a week instead of once. Nothing really that I can think of. It would have been nice if I could have made it to the help sessions that Matt did but the time schedule didn't work out. I think it would be useful to summarize what we've gone over in discussion at the end of the period. It would helpful to lay out the steps that we've taken just to reinforce what we've done and why. This would be more helpful for some discussions rather than others, though (I'm thinking of discussions were there were multiple ways to evaluate what model to use or other discussions where the question may have been more unclear...sorry I can't think of specifics!). Maybe use a different textbook. 1. to many instructions at different time for exam. trying to help students, it created some confusion. so, for next time provide all the instructions in exam sheet at one time 2. the homeworks are not worthy of what times it takes to do. focus on real questions as in discussion. The course was done excellent. Maybe there were only some issues with using software for mixed models.

23. Other comments:

I may not have a perfect understanding of advance biometry after this class, but I know that Dr. Taylor will always be there to help if I need him in the future. The knowledge that I gained from this class, while maybe not complete knowledge, has greatly improved my understanding of the literature in my field. This course can feel overwhelming, as can the first biometry course, but if we expect to do anything but the simplest statisical analyses in our research we need this and probably much more. Great course, really learned a lot from this course and Andy is a great instructor! I think Matt did a good job TA'ing as well. Overall I think you're a great professor, Andy. I especially appreciate the fact that you realize how much work and effort we put into your class, and yet you also realize that we have other obligations to fulfill at the same time and try to accommodate those. You also explain things well and I understand why you assign the amount of work that you do. Professor Taylor is one of the best, I have studies with

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 631, Fall 2011     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 631 - Biometry	Crn (Section):	76700 (001)     76701 (002)     76702 (003)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.96 24 0.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 23 (96%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.88 24 0.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 21 (88%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.71 24 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 20 (83%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 24 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 7 (29%) 15 (63%)

5. I utilize all the learning opportunities provided in the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.17 24 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 9 (38%) 10 (42%)

6. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

All the different types of statistical tests that can be used. The applicability of the method provided by the course to future study and research. discussion, approachability of the instructor It was nice that Andy followed the textbook because if I didn't understand or missed something in class, I could always look through the textbook to get a better understanding. The regular homework assignments were the best way for me to learn the material and also to keep up with the coursework. I also appreciated most of the discussion sections, as the collaborative atmosphere contributed to understanding of how the different tests could and should be used. Lectures were clear and well taught and the material was presented at a good pace. The discussion section. Listening to how others approached the same problem set improved how I assessed the exercise. Discussions are a great place to practice the theory that we are learning Andy Taylor is thorough and always willing to answer questions students have about the subject material. He has the students apply what they learn (almost too much) in weekly discussions as well as homeworks, which helps us learn. Not having powerpoints. Andy's board skills are above par. It was the proper mix of writing and discussion; I never sat twirling my pen nor was I scribbling furiously trying to keep up. There was enough time to digest the presented material while having acceptable notes for review outside of class ANOVA applies directly to my research. Dr. Taylor is incredibly knowledgable in this field. He's also very easy to talk to and approach with questions. Instead of answering your questions, he'll often give you the tools you need to answer the question yourself. I was unable to attend the course study session because I had another class at the time. The discussions were helpful when we discussed/practiced running tests that we would then do on our homework. The focus on conceptual use of statistical methods I thought the weekly discussions were nice because it covered the material we were learning in class at the time and allowed us to ask any questions at the time. Clear and thorough explanations of complicated concepts. A clear willingness to answer any and all questions. The discussion sessions are definitely very important in helping you wrap your head around the ideas you present in lecture. Also, the most helpful part of the lecture is when you do the recap. at the end of a chapter- just so we hear all the important stuff one more time. The 8 data sets provided useful examples of the material covered in the course. I found the homework and discussions useful although the discussions, at times, tended to be long and sometimes confusing due to meandering topics and digressions. I really like the discussion format. It was very helpful to throw out a bunch of random ideas and hash out what was relevant and useful to use for different data sets. Also, the random tangents were interesting. the practical application of concepts offered by assignments I thought homework was appropriate for applying concepts and discussions were a very valuable learning opportunity. I also found the real life example handouts to be useful. The study sessions helped me a great deal. The discussion section of the course does a wonderful job in bridging the theoretical parts of the course to real world applications of the statistical procedures.

7. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the course?

The study sessions None the difficulty of the tests I felt that a couple of the discussion sections were frustrating in that we didn't seem to come to a definitive conclusion at the end, particularly the discussion about bats. n/a While repetition is great for learning, there was too much homework for a graduate level class where graduate assistant students are usually expected to spend half-time in lab and half in class/doing homework, excess homework takes away time from necessary lab work. I can think of no way to improve my learning experience in biometery. My concern is the exclusive use of minitab. I know that it is used because of its ease, power, and cost but I question how useful it will be beyond the course, many schools and departments use other packages like SciPy or R and I feel that this may put UH students at a disadvantage when moving on beyond the classroom. Nothing. The discussions were not helpful when Andy used them as extra time to lecture. Discussion should be for discussing problems, learning about Minitab, etc. Handouts are very useful but maybe elaborate more on them in class. na The discussion section did provide valuable time to work out problems, my only additional comment on them would be that it took a little bit of time to realize what was really expected in the discussion write ups. I originally believed that most all comments and topics broached in discussion should be included in the write up, as opposed to simply a way one chose to solve the problem. Making that abundantly clear in the beginning would have lessened the stress involved in writing the first few write ups. I don't understand why you go into such detail on the derivatives... We never have to use them and they really just confused me. I am hesitant to state something that has the least value, because everything had value. Just because it had the least value, doesn't mean that it should be omitted. All the material was useful. The explanations of material in lecture. The concepts are very complex and learning in lecture can be confusing due to how the concepts are presented. A bit more clarification as to what we're learning and why would be helpful. The mathematical underpinnings of the concepts that is taught is helpful, but better clarifying the important ideas when presenting all the equations would prevent being overwhelmed, lost and confused. Sometimes its not clear what is to be gained by the equations or how they relate to understanding the application of the methods as there is so much tossed out on the board and we go through the material so quickly that it is difficult to grasp the ideas without more explicit clarification. I was unable to attend the optional review sessions with the TA because I had another class during this time. I would have liked to try them out. Andy's accessibility.

8. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.96 24 0.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 23 (96%)

9. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.57 23 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 6 (26%) 15 (65%)

10. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.83 23 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 19 (83%)

11. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....

Good teacher I satisfy with the course material and lecture delivered by Prof. Andrew Taylor. Andy is one of the best professors I've had at UH. He is a very good lecturer and he explains things in a way that is easy to understand. Andy is an excellent teacher. His lectures make it easy to understand the material and important points are revisited multiple times. Andy expects a reasonable amount of work from the students as well. Great instructor that wants his students to succeed. He demonstrates knowledge on the topic, is happy to help outside the class and is always prompt in responding to questions. Great. I appreciate his knowledge of the subject and enthusiasm for teaching the students how to properly apply statistics to data. Great professor, I never felt that there was any aspect of him/the class that needed improvement. A great, easy to get a hold of teacher. great teacher He is a very great teacher, I think that he makes him self very accessible to students which is very nice and he seems to care about the students. Something that can be hard to find in many universities. A truly excellent teacher. Managed to make topics engaging and understandable. Great ability to communicate with students and clearly willing to address any confusion without prejudice. I look forward to taking my next class with him. Super helpful and genuinely wants students to understand useable application of the concepts he presents. Am I describing my evaluation of Dr. Taylor? In which case, I feel that my evaluation is true and fair. I state nothing disingenuous or false. Great, made sure to present the statistics in a structured format that kept some of the more confusing concepts from being even more confusing. great teacher, very helpful and available for students. It is obvious how much Dr. Taylor puts into the course. He is very accessible to his students and really wants them to learn. He is also very open to feedback and making the class optimally useful for his students. Dr. Taylor is a good instructor. He is helpful with questions students pose and is thorough in answering them. very positive. He understands the material well. He has organized the progression of topics in the course in an ideal way. He is extremely patient.

12. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.25 24 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 3 (13%) 6 (25%) 13 (54%)

13. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.63 24 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (38%) 15 (63%)

14. Other comments:

Sometimes I got a little frustrated that class went over a few minutes because I have a class right after biometry clear across campus but I didn't want to leave biometry until Andy was done because I didn't want to miss anything. This is a minor quibble, but I at times found it frustrating that there were so many emails sent out regarding the course but that the attachments contained in the emails were not included in the subject. For example, if I was looking for homework 5, I'd have to search through my inbox for all emails from Andy and then open them all to see which one contained the proper attachment. This could be easily remedied if the attachments contained in the email were included in the subject line. I also would have appreciated a mid-semester evaluation of participation performance in discussion to gauge whether the amount I was participating was satisfactory. Participation makes up 40% of the grade in the class, so it would good for students to make sure they are on the right track halfway through the semester. I understand the usefulness of a discussion period for this sort of class, but I think it would be less painful if it were not almost 2 hours long. I also think that the current way of post-discussion write ups (instead of pre-discussion write-ups) is useful, but seems redundant if we all are present in the discussion and saw what was done and what worked or didn't work, writing it up afterward just seems un-necessary most of the time. Would you consider no discussion write ups? What if the discussion became more of a session in a computer lab, where every student was expected to individually play with the data during discussion and could ask questions or make comments? and everyone printed their results afterward (so wouldn't have to go home and regurgitate what was done). Otherwise, Thanks for a great semester Andy. Great job Everything was very relavant to the subject. I would have liked Andy to derive some of the formulas. I like the math (i.e. probability) behind the statistics. I think the derivations would have also helped me understand the tests more thoroughly and remember the assumptions better. It's a lot of work writing up the discussion and having homework due every week. Maybe only some of the discussions should be handed in. Maybe more emphasis on refining concepts in discussion

Andrew Taylor: BOT 652,ZOOL 652, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 652 - Population Biology	Crn (Section):	88748 (001)
Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 652 - Population Biology	Crn (Section):	88505 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other   4.56 9 1.33 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (89%) 0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.11 9 0.33 Freq(%) 8 (89%) 1 (11%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 5 (56%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%) 6 (67%)

6. I learned a good deal of factual material in this course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.11 9 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 6 (67%) 2 (22%)

7. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.11 9 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%) 3 (33%)

8. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.78 9 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%) 2 (22%)

9. I utilize all the learning opportunities provided in the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.67 9 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (56%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%)

10. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

I think the course could benefit from a discussion section. This would be time apart from lecture to learn how to use new programs, work through problems from the book, and share approaches. Another idea (that would probably be a lot of work for the professors) would be to send out homework solutions so students could have a document to compare their own work to. I thought Andy's lectures were great. He was flexible if someone had a question and needed further explanation of a concept. His lectures on the chalkboard were generally well organized, though when paired with the notes provided it was sometimes difficult to follow the lecture. This is because Andy's lectures skipped around in the notes, so I was simultaneously trying to listen and also flipping frantically through the notes to try and figure out where we were. I also appreciated the opportunity to get homework help from the Friday study sessions, though I rarely started the homework before the weekend so I didn't often take advantage of them. The broad introduction to a number of useful models, and reading classic papers on each. The papers and reading discussions were actually the most useful part. The lecture provided by Dr. Taylor provided the most insight and greatest understanding. I thought the range of topics covered in the course were useful and made the course worthwhile. I appreciated the handouts provided by Dr. Taylor. The handouts allowed for the professor to cover the topic at a nice pace in class while not going over every detail. I think the handouts will be useful as a reference for future work. This class helped me to learn how to design and to use different models for analyzing populations. Moreover I found that these models also can be applied to different fields of biology including phylogeny that I work with.

11. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the course?

I felt that many of our homework questions had a conceptual approach rather than a mathematical approach. A combination of the two might help to reinforce the concepts covered in class. For example we never used any calculus in our homework assignments. The textbook was very difficult to follow. Is there another text that could be used? I did not care for the textbook. I felt it did not have enough examples of how to solve the types of problems we were asked for homework. In addition, it was hard to follow when trying to read it. I do not think it added to my understanding of the material. HOMEWORK. Doing homework in graduate school. Readings and short essays would have helped me learn the material much better. The book. It was not helpful in explaining material and did not assist in preparing students to address homework problems. My biggest criticism of the logistics of the course was the lack of clear expectations for the students. There was a large amount of variability when it came to grading homework, and what seems to be an arbitrary "attendance and participation" grade. As far as course material, I think that the subject matter is difficult to cover at length due to the wide range of topics. I would suggest (a) using a different book or rely more on handouts (b) cover fewer topics. I think some parts of the course were taught very briefly because of the time limits. And therefore sometimes it was hard to make connections between one idea and another.

12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 1.01 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)

13. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)

14. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

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%) 6 (67%)

15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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%) 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   4.33 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (67%) 3 (33%)

17. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 9 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

18. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (56%) 4 (44%)

19. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%) 2 (22%)

20. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

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%) 6 (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   4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)

22. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

23. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.11 9 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)

24. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 8 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 2 (25%) 3 (38%)

25. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

I think many students were confused by what was expected for the final project. In the future maybe an outline of deadlines and expectations could clarify any confusion. I feel that the weekly homework assignments took longer than they should have. I ended up spending 4 or so hours on each homework assignment, only to receive a 3/5 or 2/5 on them. This was frustrating, especially because Curt said earlier in the semester that he only intended us to spend 1-2 hours outside of class on each homework assignment. I'm not sure if this was also Andy's intention. New textbook. Less HW. More reading. More value placed on analyzing models from papers. Change the book and dedicate the first week providing background info so that the students will be on the same page. I feel that a problem with the course is that half the class had a strong background in the subject matter while for the other half it was a brand new way of thinking. I felt at times that it was difficult for the instructors to teach to both sides without compromises the understanding of the material. I think that course is very intensive (that is very good) with a lot of homework assignments, but the discussions sometimes were poor organized. Sometimes homework questions were very unclear.

26. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)

27. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.89 9 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 5 (56%) 2 (22%)

28. Reading assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)

29. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 9 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

30. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)

31. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 9 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%)

32. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.71 7 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%)

33. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.78 9 1.3 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%)

34. Team teaching provided insights a single instructor could not.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.78 9 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 6 (67%) 1 (11%)

35. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

I liked the in-class discussions of papers. Sometimes I felt that in combination with homework assignments, though, that I was not able to read them as in-depth as I would have liked. I thought lectures were interesting though sometimes they were at a bit of a faster pace than I would have liked. The lectures. Although the material was difficult to follow at times the instructors made general concepts easier to follow compared to the book. The team teaching was probably necessary since this course would be hard for one person to take on, but the two instructors have very different teaching styles. In some ways this can be good, but it made it hard to switch back and forth. I like the handouts that were very helpful to understand the textbook.

36. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.13 8 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 5 (63%) 2 (25%)

37. Other comments:

I gained a lot from this course and am glad that i took it. It seemed like there were students who had prior experience with course material and students who had little to no experience. I wonder if there should be stricter prerequisites in order to take the course? It sounds like the mathematical modelling course provided some students with a good framework to place pop bio concepts into. I was intrigued by this course. I liked to learn about all the different models and what they were originally designed for. However, I felt that this course could be cut in half and explained more completely and clearly to have a more permanent result. If the ultimate goal of this course was to offer the students a sampler of population models, then it was a success, but if the ultimate goal was to give students a complete and lasting knowledge of all the different models presented, then I would say it was not a success. Make two courses: intro to population biology, and advanced population biology. Make three courses: matrix models in population biology, a intro to meta populations, and population genetics. So many subjects we just scratched over, this class could be split into many in depth courses. Good job!!!

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 691B, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 691B - Seminar: General Zoology	Crn (Section):	89483 (002)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other   5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

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%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)

7. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.

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%)

8. I participated actively in class discussion.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%) 2 (33%)

9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.

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. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

It was great that my classmates and I could look at our own datasets/models in class and have helpful discussions with the group. I definitely made progress on my analysis. Dr Taylor goes out of his way to help students to solve their problems. I appreciate that he looks at students' data and brings up alternative ways of looking at the problem. Working with our own data.

11. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the course?

No complaints! Nothing.

12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

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%)

13. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

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 instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)

15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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%)

16. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

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. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)

18. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

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%)

19. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

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%)

20. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

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 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%)

22. The instructor has been helpful whenever I have encountered difficulties.

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. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

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 was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

25. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

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%)

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 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)

27. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

Just keep teaching it, hopefully! Great the way it is.

28. 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 5 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%)

29. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

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%)

30. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.

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%)

31. The course has significantly increased my knowledge and interests.

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%)

32. 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%)

33. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 5 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%)

34. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

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%)

35. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

See above Greatly appreciate Dr Taylor analyzing students' data.

36. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.4 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 2 (40%)

37. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 631, Fall 2010     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 631 - Biometry	Crn (Section):	77544 (001)     77545 (002)     77546 (003)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other   5.0 25 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 25 (100%) 0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.21 24 0.41 Freq(%) 19 (79%) 5 (21%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.8 25 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 22 (88%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 25 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 7 (28%) 16 (64%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.08 25 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 9 (36%) 11 (44%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 25 1.32 Freq(%) 3 (12%) 0 (0%) 3 (12%) 7 (28%) 12 (48%)

7. I utilize all the learning opportunities provided in the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 25 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 5 (20%) 9 (36%) 9 (36%)

8. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

applying statistical techniques to actual data Discussions and discusson asigments. Also the study cases. The discussion session, the use of the software for analysis, and the data sets. Previous courses that were more "survey of statistics" did not allow the opportunities to "play" with the software for the analysis. Also the lectures that focused on the constraints of different tests and the options when assumptions were not met. This is very useful tool as I proceed with my graduate studies. The details and time given to first half of course, such as randomization and experimental design I think the most valuable part of the class was gaining knowledge about when you should and should not use particular tests (ANOVA,regression etc.). I think that it will be very helpful later on in my career to have that basic understanding. Andy Taylor is the best teacher I have had at UH, both in undergrad and grad school. He is smart, effective at communicating, open to questions, good at steering discussions, and all-around awesome! He should get a raise! I still am not great at statistics, and I still don't love it, but he changed my attitude completely, as I HATED stats before taking his class. The course was so intensive that I spent almost all my time outside the class working with Dr. Taylor's assignments. I like that. He taught not only theory of statistical analysis but also how to use it on many good examples. I appreciated the discussion sections because they allowed us to talk about the issues we had and the way we approached each data set without any criticism. We were also able to see other ways we could use the data and were forced to actually think about why we did certain analyses. Talking through the procedures was extremely helpful. Classes. I found that I could get by through interactions in class. Reading the book was helpful, and gave a separate perspective on the analyses, but being in class and participating was by far the most important part of learning. Experimental design. Discussions were good. Solutions provided for all assignments were very helpful Homework and discussion sections. It was helpful to apply the points covered in class through these assignments. learning how to use the statistical software. The help sessions with the TA and discussion sessions. However, I think the discussion sessions were a little drawn out and could have been condensed into a shorter time period. The discussions were very helpful in letting us try different methods and deciding whether or not they were valid. They were also very useful in exposing us to various real-world scenarios, where there is often no single right answer, and we have to decide what works best. TA assistance Dr. Taylor coupled direct instruction and homework well. The discussion sessions were really valuable in understanding the material. The discussion time was valuable in deciding the best ways to analyze data as a class. I generally learn a lot better in a setting where we are allowed to discuss the PROCESS behind some of the overarching concepts and found discussions valuable for that reason. Of course Andy himself was nothing but helpful either after class or though emails. I thought the discussions were a good opportunity to explore the subject and gain a better understanding of the topics. Professor's availability outside of class.

9. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the course?

cd in the text Some parts are not easy to follow, like there is a lack of connection at certain parts. Maybe it'll be interesting to create a tree structure about the logical relation of the topics and distribute it early in the semester so everyone follows. The homework is a waste of time. Better learning in the discussions. The exam should be more predictable. More related with homework or itâ??ll be even better if it is like the discussions Some of the definitions provided during lecture. In the effort to fully explain a specific topic, the definitions often became long and confusing, sometimes appearing to have a circular logic. The definitions would benefit from a more straight forward description with caveats or constraints being provided separately. Nothing I did not find explanations of how to use a program or a statistical test in class very helpful because I didn't have access to the program. I think I really liked the discussion because I could do the tests while we talked about them. Just talking about them in class was not helpful for me when I tried to run the tests later. The midterm, screw (because I don't think they will let me curse in this evaluation) the midterm. Perhaps that is a bit strong, but I do have hard feelings toward that test. Experimental design. Perhaps a little too much emphasis on the details of the equations we were using Handouts (data sets)-I rarely used them. The homework and discussion assignments. All of the distractions in lecture, wasting time going over little details of students' questions that should have been discussed outside of class. Midterm from hell ;) I thought that the book supplemented the lectures, but was not really needed to understand the material. Sometimes Dr. Taylor gets too deep into the theory and loses the listener on the practical applications of the material. I think my only potential gripe would be the amount of homework assigned. I know that i need to know biometry. But for me, the constant assignments given (discussions and homework) were at times a little tedious. I felt the course could have moved at a quicker pace. I feel like the professor could have left out some of the subject in lecture and expected the students to learn them on their own time. This would allow the class to cover more topics. It was hard to stay focused sometimes because the pace was really slow. I would drift off and start to day dream.

10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.28 25 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (16%) 10 (40%) 11 (44%)

11. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.32 25 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 7 (28%) 14 (56%)

12. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.88 25 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (12%) 22 (88%)

13. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.48 25 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 11 (44%) 13 (52%)

14. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.08 25 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (12%) 1 (4%) 12 (48%) 9 (36%)

15. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.3 23 1.02 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 9 (39%) 12 (52%)

16. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.68 25 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (32%) 17 (68%)

17. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.36 25 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 0 (0%) 10 (40%) 13 (52%)

18. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.6 25 1.19 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 6 (24%) 9 (36%) 6 (24%)

19. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.84 25 0.37 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (16%) 21 (84%)

20. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.68 25 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 4 (16%) 19 (76%)

21. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.12 25 1.09 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 10 (40%) 11 (44%)

22. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.54 24 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 5 (21%) 16 (67%)

23. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.83 24 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 20 (83%)

24. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.8 25 1.15 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 4 (16%) 11 (44%) 7 (28%)

25. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.04 25 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (24%) 12 (48%) 7 (28%)

26. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

He could implicitly state the connection between lectures/topics. Some lectures are hard to localize in the general context of the course. It will be a great improvement to find a logical line connecting all the lectures. I would have enjoyed and benefited from some activities that involved research design in addition to analyzing someone else's research design. The class would also benefit from a little more control over questions that may send discussions off track reducing the time available for lectures or discussion. The examples and analogies in the 2nd 1/2 of the course was much clearer than the 1st 1/2 of the course - especially the probability section. The one thing that I think might improve the teaching of the course is to have two slightly longer class periods a week rather than 3 shorter ones. Often it seemed that just as we got into the bulk of the material class ended and then we had to slightly backtrack the next class period. He is so professional. So I think nothing needs to be improved. I think that an in class example of contrast test where we all have calculators and work through the problem would be really helpful, since the majority of us had to do it by hand. Encourage students to interact more (I'm not sure how to do that), but I found that interactive learning was the only way. This class moved so quickly that I had to stop everything, multiple times, and ask for clarification of one thing or another. Andy, when you come to a part of the course that you know will be difficult to understand (contrasts, perhaps the transition to simple linear regression from ANOVA, residual analysis, etc.) make sure the students understand. When they nod their heads, ask them questions to be sure they're not just giving you the automatic response. Experimental design. I think Dr. Taylor can improve teaching by encouraging students to read the textbook beforehand(He told us at the beginning of class it is up to us to decide whether to read the textbook or not, so I did not see the importance first, but after few weeks, I started to read before going to the class, and reading the text book really enhanced my understanding of the lecture, and by very much, so I think he can encourage that at the beginning of class.) I have appreciated all the assignments given in the class, which helped me review concepts taught during the lecture, but I was also taking three other courses this semester, so it was very difficult to balance the amount of time I can spend on other classes. I would have appreciated if assignments are given less often, particularly towards the end of semester when all of us have to spend time on assignments given in other classes as well as on biometry. Less focus on the details and more on application, thus leaving time to cover more material I thought that the jar of numbers was a really great example to illustrate the points that we were covering in class that week. More examples and visuals would be helpful. For example it would be great to see how graphs change as you apply a transformation. Although I did learn a lot in this course, I still feel unable to utilize statistical analysis in practical application. I think more time should be spent on explaining the practical application of statistics in data analysis. While I recognize that the aim of the discussion sections is to accomplish this, I feel like time was wasted on listening to the failed approaches of other students when we all would have benefited more from examples of how to do apply concepts correctly. The lecture material on the theory behind the analyses was not sufficient in explaining how one can apply these theories to real data. I think a little more guidance in the discussion sessions would be helpful. We often went off on a tangent about useless information. Some students would suggest a way to analyze data that was obviously not correct, and they should have been guided in a proper direction. Material covered seemed rushed at the end, especially the chi-square distribution. Some more homework problems (maybe optional problem sets) would be helpful in making sure students understand how to use the different analysis. I disliked the textbook, there were too many examples. * maybe have students who need help with past hw come to discussion early, and shorten required discussion time. I found Andy to be a very knowledgeable instructor for the course! I know he genuinely wanted us to understand the material! I think my lack of understanding of some of the concepts is more a lack of any freetime whatsoever on my part to review notes ect than a lack of teaching ability on the part of Andy! Biometry is just tough and I've never really been (or will be unfortunatley) a math person I think he should try to discourage discussion from students during the lectures and ask students to reserve their questions for the discussion section or after class. I know discussion is a good thing, but too often I felt some of the student's were trying to discuss or even argue a topic that was just introduced. I think it would be more productive for those students to research the topic and then ask questions during the discussion section. This would allow for more topics to be covered over the course. Condense the math manipulation part of the course into a few worksheets and focus more on study design and analysis.

27. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....

Great teacher. Deep knowledge of the course. Great This course was very challenging - allowing me to learn statistics at a much deeper level that previous courses. Often this resulted in points of increased confusion but in the end, it was very beneficial. good! He is the best teacher I have had at UH. I am sad that his class is ending. professional and skilled teacher and scientist. Great! I really found the class helpful in my understanding of the course material and how to start the process of thinking about how to analyze data. I like Andy's teaching style, and his willingness to discuss with students and clarify things during class. Andy is very clear, for the most part, and if he's not somebody usually questioned him. I'm also impressed with Andy's memory for what may seem like trivial information, but I think it means a lot to the individual, about the students in his classes. I can also see that Andy controls himself, and doesn't put himself into dangerous positions, which is certainly a good quality to have (I am not this way). Experimental design. Dr. Taylor knows and understand the subject very well, and at the same time he knows how best to communicate with students. His lecture was very organized and clear, and I was very glad to take this class this semester. Great scientist and person Ive had no prior coursework in statistics and felt that this class prepared me well to use statistical tests and data in the future. Some improvements to course and lecturing style could be achieved. I found the lectures to be painfully slow and could not stay engaged for the entire hour. The course itself could be revised to focus more on application in a real-world sense. Also, the amount of busy work that accompanied the course was unrealistic, and frankly, infuriating. At the graduate level, no one has the time to complete so many mundane and un-helpful homework and discussion assignments. He is a great teacher, but I think the lecture style could be made a little more interactive and entertaining. Discussions were helpful, but I think more of his involvement would benefit the course. Very good, teaching style is engaging and class format especially discussions are very useful. Smart and funny Knowledgeable professor and great course. Highly recommended. A wonderful educator! I think he is a very knowledgeable teacher, and clearly knows the subject matter well. I learned a lot from the course and would recommend it to others. Overall, great instructor who is very knowledgeable and concerned about his students understanding his material. I just don't think his lecture style matches my learning style, but that's no reflection on him since he makes adjustments when we meet one on one. I think he takes the lecture approach that he does to try and meet the needs of as many students as he can in the class. Great job overall, but we could do with a little less assignments. Thanks.

28. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.52 25 1.36 Freq(%) 3 (12%) 3 (12%) 4 (16%) 8 (32%) 7 (28%)

29. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 25 1.29 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 7 (28%) 12 (48%)

30. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.16 25 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 11 (44%) 10 (40%)

31. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.32 25 1.14 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 5 (20%) 16 (64%)

32. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.96 23 1.11 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 5 (22%) 7 (30%) 9 (39%)

33. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.68 25 1.14 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 6 (24%) 10 (40%) 6 (24%)

34. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.12 25 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (24%) 10 (40%) 9 (36%)

35. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

Discussions / discussion asigments I like discussions and homeworks where I could check my knowledge of the course. I really liked the discussion section. Not the midterm. The subject matter, I feel like this has been the most important class I have taken. Experimental design. Andy, emphasize experimental design to the point that students are annoyed with it. Experimental design is definitely the most important part of this course. In case you didn't read every one of these little boxes, I put experimental design in to them all. Learning how to interpret data through minitab I did not enjoy this course, but I do recognize that Andrew Taylor is very capable in the field of statistics. I feel that if I approached AT with questions about my own data analysis he would be very happy to help and a valuable resource. The discussion session and outside help with the TA were very helpful. I really liked the discussions, the study sessions with Megan were also very useful in clarifying what we covered in lecture. HW's helped me understand lecture content I enjoyed the discussion and discussion assignments the most. Discussion section, although they could be shorter. Professor availability

36. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.21 24 1.02 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 8 (33%) 12 (50%)

37. Other comments:

Thank you Andy for being such a great teacher and scientist. I wish there were more Professors like you in this school. Good class. Lots of info. I know that your teaching style doesn't work for everyone (I heard a lot about that). I can only hope that my grade will reflect the amount that I have learned, which is impressive. Experimental design. I think the amount of homework given was excessive and there should not have been three assignments due every single week. We are in graduate school, not undergrad. Maybe more opertunities for reinforcement It was excellent, but I am incredibly grateful that the semester is almost over so I can go to sleep at night without worrying about the next biometry assignment!!!!! I would rate the course between good and excellent, a goocellent. In the areas where it is very effective it's excellent. The areas where I have concerns about the class are not bad, they are good but could be better. Thanks Andy.

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 490E, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 490E - Ecology	Crn (Section):	88812 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

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

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   4.0 3 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)

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 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

6. I learned a good deal of factual material 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%)

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 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)

8. I participated actively in class discussion.

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%)

9. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

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%)

10. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

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%)

11. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

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%)

12. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and 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%)

13. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

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%)

14. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

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%)

15. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

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%)

16. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

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%)

17. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

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%)

18. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

19. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

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%)

20. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.

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 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%)

22. 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 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)

23. 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%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)

24. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

Although I appreciated that we were given the freedom to choose any topic to research relating to climate change and ecology, I would've liked if the topics each person chose were more related. The course could be improved by creating a linking factor, maybe a summary presentation or paper, to tie together everything we learned. I really enjoyed Dr. Taylor and do not have any recommendations for him. The seminar was great. I thought it was excellent to begin with!

25. Reading assignments make students think.

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%)

26. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.

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%)

27. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)

28. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

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%)

29. The course has significantly increased my knowledge and interests.

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%)

30. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

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%)

31. The guest speakers contributed significantly to 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%)

32. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

33. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

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%)

34. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

The casual learning environment allowed me to feel comfortable discussing the topics freely. I really enjoyed the material. The open forum atmosphere.

35. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

The meeting time, but that couldn't be helped. There was a bit of disorganization at the beginning and I feel as though the paper that was required shouldn't have been assigned. None

36. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)

37. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 632, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 632 - Advanced Biometry	Crn (Section):	88796 (001)     88797 (002)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other   5.13 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%) 1 (13%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 7 (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 9 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%) 8 (89%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)

8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

statistical theory combined with practical applications and examples. the discussion sessions were very helpful in learning how to approach and analyze a wide range of data Discussions I think I really learned the most and was able to really put the ideas together in Discussions. learning how to take "textbook statistics" and apply it to real world ecological data sets. practice with data sets when we didn't know the "correct" tools for analysis - having to figure it out ourselves It is all integrated and I needed to be able to hear the material in lecture before understanding what I was reading in the book while trying to do the homework exercises and then apply what we were learning and use our critical thinking skills in the discussions. I needed all aspects together. Practical applicaiton and hands-on data analysis using ecological and biological data examples.

9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

cant think of any I feel like the long discussion write ups were a lot of busy work, particularly since we did not get any feed back on them. Discussions often got very off-track. Would prefer to either do more in these, or make them for less time. None-see above. None

10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

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%) 8 (89%)

11. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)

12. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

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%) 8 (89%)

13. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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%)

14. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp 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 clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

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%) 8 (89%)

16. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

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%)

17. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

18. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

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%) 9 (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 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)

20. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%) 8 (89%)

21. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.11 9 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%) 3 (33%)

22. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)

23. The instructor sets high standards for students.

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%) 8 (89%)

24. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

Encourage even more examples of student's own research for use in discussion sessions Instructor is very effective. Logistically, the instructor should be more scrupulous with time constraints Since students from different departments like the class, it would be nice to include various examples from their area of study for easy understanding. Perhaps, if possible the formulas given in class could be substituted by numbers (or show numbers after the formulas for students to see what it is like). I really appreciated that the instructor was willing to tailor the course to meet the student's needs/interests. I found his teaching style to be very effective. I dont really know its complicated material. I think he does a good job.

25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   5.0 9 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (100%)

26. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A   4.0 9 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 1 (11%)

27. The TA's comments on written work were helpful.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A   3.86 8 1.21 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 1 (13%) 3 (38%) 1 (13%)

28. The recitation section is a valuable part of this course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.33 9 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)

29. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.56 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 5 (56%)

30. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)

31. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

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%) 8 (89%)

32. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)

33. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 6 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)

34. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

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%)

35. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

Discussion sessions Would have been more helpful if the TA knew the material. Grading of Homeworks and Discussions would have been greatly improved by constructive comments I like reading papers and seeing the stats in the methods sections and knowing what the authors did and why. All aspects, i.e. lectures, homeworks, and discussions. I was able to understand concepts and applications of contents better than when I started the course.

36. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)

37. Other comments:

Very well taught course! Also the other students were very knowledgeable and contributed alot to the course. great course, like stated above, instructor just needs to be more aware of time constraints, simply because students have other commitments. class ran over 5 minutes almost each session. discussion was routinely 20 minutes over Responses on #6 & 7 are due to my slow understanding of the contents. Noone to be blamed. Otherwise the program is good and I think for students to understand the stuff more clearly, the program has to be taught at least in two semester. There are so much for students to learn in one semester. If possible separate, Regression and ANOVA each to be taught in different semester. I got more out of this course than I had in the 7 semesters worth of statistics that I'd taken previously. The use of real-world data sets was immensely useful. Instructor was fantastic at explaining material clearly and allowing for lots of questions/discussion. I think Dr. Taylor is an excellent teacher and has a really good grasp on the material and presents a very difficult subject clearly. He also makes himself available to his students whenever he can. He has a really good teaching style, is very patient and tries really hard to explain things in different ways when we dont understand something. He goes way out of his way to help anyone who is struggling with the material. Dr. Taylor is one of the best teachers Ive ever had. He obviosly really cares about his students and the learning process. Very useful and integral part of my research. It was worth spending time and effort.

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 691B, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 691B - Seminar: General Zoology	Crn (Section):	89735 (003)

1. Class Level (pick one)

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%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 2 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

6. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

7. I utilize all the learning opportunities provided in the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.5 2 2.12 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

8. I help classmates learn.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

9. This course was helpful in developing new skills.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

10. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the course?

Small group set-up and discussion-based

11. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

12. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

13. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

14. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

15. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

16. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

17. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

18. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

19. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

20. 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 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)

21. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 2 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

22. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

23. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

24. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

No survey responses were found.

25. 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 2 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

26. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

27. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)

28. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

29. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.0 2 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

30. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

No survey responses were found.

31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   3.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

32. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Andrew Taylor: ZOOL 631, Fall 2009     Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Zoology
Course:	ZOOL 631 - Biometry	Crn (Section):	78908 (001)     78909 (002)     78910 (003)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other   4.96 28 0.19 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 27 (96%) 0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required   1.21 24 0.41 Freq(%) 19 (79%) 5 (21%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.89 28 0.31 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (11%) 25 (89%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.64 28 0.56 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 8 (29%) 19 (68%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.21 28 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (21%) 10 (36%) 12 (43%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.25 28 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (18%) 11 (39%) 12 (43%)

7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.46 28 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 13 (46%) 14 (50%)

8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

Discussion sections -Working with actual datasets and critiquing the design/interpretation of the study. -Discussing with colleagues on the appropriate approaches of performing statistical inference -Utilizing current statistical tools often used in the research settings Discussions were very helpful and using actual data sets with subject interest. The discussion sections where we applied our knowledge of the principles learned was the most valuable to me. Working through the problems helped me learn what processes are needed to analyze data. using real biological datasets to test different analyses, discussion sessions were very useful to learn new tools in software Practise of solving problems and discussions sessions. The discussions. I learned more about statistics than I knew before I took this course. I also know more about the specifics of many statistics than I ever thought it was possible to learn the assumption of the instructor that we had no prior knowledge. this facilitated detailed instruction and the thrashing out of misconceptions. also, access to datasets of previous students' research showed good practical application of the material. Hands-on learning through the discussion assignments Discussions, though painful, were extremely useful. Homework was also well-structured (I liked the combo of made-up vs. book assignments) and discussion homeworks provided an excellent way to think about the material in a question-oriented manner. Anderstanding of data set Although the homeworks were long and time consuming there were the most valuable. Also the discussions. It seems like a thorough presentation of all the material needed to understand biologically applied statistics HW and discussion classes were valuable and greatly helped overall comprehension. Lab discussions. discussions i like the writing notes on the board, it gave students time to take notes. The discussion was also useful in grasping the concepts of the course. I also liked the data sets. The discussion component. Learning to use a statistical software program. Learning the process of experimental design and how to analyze data. Nonparametric methods Experimental design, hypothesis testing. the topics covered HW assignments, Discussions As vague as it sounds, all aspects were valuable. Specific and practical problems through homeworks and labs applying concepts learned.

9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

Some more direction in discussions, to keep on track would have been helpful. As well as using perhaps 30-40 minutes of each discussion for homework questions and to enhance understanding. Sometimes it felt as though there were a few too many homework questions. They were extremely helpful, but when some concepts were repeated too many times, it felt a bit much. lectures - could have been improved by going through examples, such as when introducing new formulas or when choosing types of analyses to use and appropriate decisions to make. Don't have one. The homework. I spent huge amounts of time on it and I am not sure that I learned anything in the end. Hmmm, problem sets 6 and 7. Talk about major pain and minor gain. The instructor failed to adequately utilize audiovisual materials. If it is known ahead of time what the notes are going to be, save everyone time and give them a handout containing such notes. The discussion section couldn't have been a larger waste of time. Either scrap the discussion section or have the instructor lead it, not the students. The instructor needs to do a better job corraling trains of thought that are off task, this happened all too often Too much HW. The mid-term was the least valuable in terms of providing Professor with the information needed to acurately assess the knowledge student's had gained from the course. Instructor seemed to be intentionally tricky (set traps for students to fall through). homeworks learning minitab just for the course. It was useful, but i need to learn and use other software outside the course. Learning how to describe histograms Discussion assignments that were separate from homework assignments were unnecessary. It was unclear how the discussion assignments related to homework assignments. the homework Midterm NA, everything was valuable.

10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.29 28 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 3 (11%) 11 (39%) 13 (46%)

11. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.29 28 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 13 (46%) 12 (43%)

12. The instructor defined new terms, concepts, and principles.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.43 28 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 12 (43%) 14 (50%)

13. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.14 28 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 6 (21%) 9 (32%) 12 (43%)

14. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.59 27 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 7 (26%) 18 (67%)

15. The instructor clearly stated at the beginning of the semester the objectives of the course and requirements.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.5 28 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 10 (36%) 16 (57%)

16. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.39 28 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 10 (36%) 15 (54%)

17. The instructor spoke clearly and audibly.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.46 28 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (11%) 9 (32%) 16 (57%)

18. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.71 28 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 6 (21%) 21 (75%)

19. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.32 28 1.09 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 1 (4%) 7 (25%) 17 (61%)

20. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.82 17 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)

21. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.82 28 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 4 (14%) 4 (14%) 13 (46%) 7 (25%)

22. The instructor sets high standards for students.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.64 28 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 6 (21%) 20 (71%)

23. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

A rudimentary flowchart for decision making (even though each situation is different) just to enhance understanding for course content. The teaching of the course was excellent More instruction/advice on going through different datasets and the choices he would make on going through different tests, assumptions, procedures, etc. have no comments. 1) Pick one type of software and stick to it. With three types of software, it is hard to keep up. 2) Write bigger on the chalkboard, especially for sub-letters and numbers. 3) Explain what the symbols and letters you are using mean. Your students do not always think in equations. 4) Make the linear progression of problem solving more apparent. It is hard to know what the order of steps should be to figure out how to analyze data is. 5) Make sure that you write down the subject of the day is before launching into it. detailed examples of calculationd Provide more datasets as examples He can't! He is amazing! I would like more written assignments that we can edit-- usually we don't actually understand things until we get our homework/discussions back, and it would be nice to get some confirmation on that somehow. Ohhh-- here's one thing. I turned it a totally heinous homework assignment this semester and he got so mad he wrote this extensive outline of the decisions I *should* have been making all along. Andy! Why did you not do this from the outset?? It was so helpful! That midterm was terrible. Don't make it open book or notes next time; it's just confusing. Take-home or super easy in-lecture formats would have been welcome, but that open-everything format was monstrous, and was probably also really annoying to grade. Also just tell everyone they have to use MiniTab or SAS from the outset. They will deal. Realize people are trying to learn the software and biometry at the same time and many of the assignments were difficult and time consuming and sometimes unclear. We covered alot of material, perhaps the course could be over two semesters. Discussion section needs to be fixed. It should be in a computer lab where everyone has the same software and then the instructor should hold the hand of the students and walk them through how to analyze the data. I don't know if you noticed this Andy, but every in discussion was always waiting for you to give your two cents. Give it more often, otherwise, I might accidentally think that an incorrect comment from a student is correct. It wouldn't be the end of the world if you gave the students a week off of homework during Thanksgiving. I know students who want to take your class, but won't because of the relentless homework assignments. Before and after each section show how the material integrates into the course as a whole. Perhaps have the homework due on Monday instead of Friday so we can more efficiently employ the knowledge we gained during the week to the assignment. It was frustrating to try and complete the homework before we had learned the material in class, but waiting to do it at the last minute was not a much better option. I'd like to say assign less homework, but I realize that I learned a lot from both the homework and discussion assignments. The course required a lot of time, but in the end it was worth it. spend less time on the easy topics at the beginning of the semester so we can devote more time to the tougher topics that come later. it felt like the beginning was really slow and then the pace of the course sped up into overdrive and we had to cram a bunch of new, harder to understand material in a short time. Spend more time to critically evaluate actual studies and less time on homework Much of the time in the course was spent with the professor writing on the chalkboard--even a simple bare bones PowerPoint would be more effective in getting through concepts a little more quickly. There was a lack of efficiency with which the professor covered the material. He would sometimes be open to questions in class but other times not allow questions for the sake of time. Instead, if the answer is short then he could cover it in class, and if it is a question that would take longer or that is more individual, then he can refer the student to office hours rather than taking up class time to review what was covered previously. The discussion sections could be run more smoothly. The ability to ask questions from lecture is helpful, but there is no real reason to have separate discussion assignments. Instead, one suggestion would be to use the discussion section to go over students' research projects or to discuss as a class the experimental design of students' ongoing projects (i.e. most students in the course do not care about cowpeas!) tying in concepts with application better. communicating concepts better. Limit time requirement for assignments A little bit more use of visual/graphical examples on the board during lecture would be good. Discussion time might be allocated more officially between conceptual material and software use. If this were a quarter system, the class, as it stands, would certainly be two quarters. I don't think it is so much that it requires two semesters, but this might be considered. He did a great job considering difficulty of accomodating different levels of students.

24. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?

Approachable, understanding, supportive Provided data sets with comprehensive statistical analysis He was readily available for questions and provided detailed answer keys after each homework to correct any mistakes or misunderstandings. He is always available to answer questions, both in person and by e-mail. He is always willing to help with any concepts that are confusing for every student. very helpful during office hours or anytime I had questions regarding material, very approachable and explains concepts well when talking one-on-one. Always open to questions and discussions. He gives lots of examples. You are very helpful one on one. You also are very interested in the subject matter and work very hard on preparing for the class. The discussion topics and data sets are interesting. he has a breadth of knowledge on biostatistics Availability outside of class, and providing solutions to homework and discussion assignments. Also he is excellent at explaining difficult concepts in understandable terms. Andy was a) always available to talk b) willing to have a chat about stats anytime and with anyone, even slackers who failed to do the reading c) sassy and relentless in his questioning of our (and other scientists') statistical choices d) totally awesome, even though he made my life difficult for a few months (and probably will again in the future). I would highly recommend him and this Biometry course to all other grad students. I will miss it next semester. He is very personable and willing to arrange his schedule to meet with student. Quite willing to accomodate students schedules. Very knowledgeable. I enjoyed learning from him. HE was always available if necessary and dedicated a lot of his own time to the course. Very easy to talk to and definitely knew his material! I will hopefully be asking his advice for my future analyses. His passion for the subject. I also appreciated his dry sense of humor. He was always available to answer questions. The professor is approachable and generally available for office hours if extra help is needed. he knows what he is talking about availability for questions Dr. Taylor has been more than happy to help students outside of class. I find it very important for professors to promptly respond to emails, and he has consistently done so. Dr. Taylor knows the material well, knows how it applies on individual bases and is thoughtful about how the course effects the academic life of students. Practical knowledge and techniques in statistics. Making himself available and dedicated to students during and outside of his office hours when needed. Clear and concise explanations for homeworks.

25. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?

Sometimes the language used to phrase questions was a bit confusing. I thought I was answering the correct question, but I was not answering everything that was required. It might be helpful to be a bit clearer about everything that is wanted from the answers and explanations. lecture style Discussions, clear explanations. I don't think that the assignments and exams are clear enough about what type of answers are actually required. I also think that you may underestimate how hard your students are working. Workload was a bit much at times Really nothing. He went above and beyond the call of duty on this course. It is clear that he's enthusiastic and INCREDIBLY wise about the material, and really cares about us as students. It is a wonderful thing to get to learn from someone like that, even when they drown your homework in ink and give you ridiculously long assignments and torture you with software choices (or lack thereof). Love ya, AT. all good Nothing wrong with the instructor, just the class Nothing. The grading tended to be arbitrary. What was marked incorrect on one student's paper could be correct on my paper. It needs to be more clear that either 1) there is no black and white answer and so terminology should be used with extreme caution, or 2) which analyses should be used in that week's homework/discussion. A distribution considered Normal enough for one test one week was not Normal enough for another test another week. Conflicting messages/instructions (graphs/no graphs, statistical assumptions needed to be violated in order to complete homework and discussion assignments, etc.). Cynacism - be careful. Dr. Taylor was great His grading was an enigma--e.g. requirements at the beginning of the semester say to provide 2-3 paragraphs in the discussion write-up assignments, but this was clearly not enough. There were inconsistencies from week to week in grading "strictness" which was very confusing because the requirements were unclear. Much of the homework assignments seemed like busy work--e.g. changing one observation and re-doing a set of analyses several times. There was no effort to make homework assignments relate to the types of research being conducted by students in the course (Zoology, Oceanography, Botany, etc.), and since it's a graduate level course, this would have been more appropriate than learning about how to analyze vitamin C in fresh vs. 3-day old bread. he was kind of unapproachable and if you didn't understand something it was your fault and he judged you for it and wasn't keen to help n/a The first half of the semester consisted of assignments with wording that was occasionally hard to follow. This is partly because of students' lack of understanding as to what the important considerations are in a problem during this early part of their statistics education. The material is difficult to present to adjust for this, but some changes in these assignments might help. Nothing. Everything we covered was valuable in practice.

26. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.48 27 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 10 (37%) 15 (56%)

27. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.22 27 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 5 (19%) 8 (30%) 13 (48%)

28. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   4.52 27 0.8 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 6 (22%) 18 (67%)

29. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.86 28 1.11 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 7 (25%) 8 (29%) 10 (36%)

30. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.93 28 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 2 (7%) 6 (21%) 8 (29%) 11 (39%)

31. The instructor was fair in grading and criteria of grades.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   3.89 28 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (11%) 5 (18%) 12 (43%) 8 (29%)

32. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

Discussion sections I really enjoyed the discussions and realizing how much I will be able to use this information in my own research. getting to know assumptions of different tests and when each procedure was appropriate Discussions. Learning about data analysis. class discussion sessions Learning the concepts through real examples of datasets. Discussion!!!! I loved it, and it was extremely helpful. I also liked having the opportunity to work with real datasets from previous grad students, and heckle my classmates about their choices of analysis. So cool! I also liked the lecture handouts. I referred to them a lot while doing homework and discussion assignments. This course should be available for undergrads too-- they could really use a course like this. learned stuff I should know I learned a great deal That it only took up a finite part of my life I liked learning how to make inferences form data. I definitely learned a lot about biometry and gained skills applicable to my own project. I really enjoyed and got the most out of the discussions. Learning how to critically evaluate and design studies. Discussing experimental design, even if for topics that usually have nothing to do with the research that students are conducting. Understanding hypothesis testing. topics covered examples from graduate level and professional level studies The course (assignments), partly because of the software integration situation, simply takes far too much time for the students. This may be unavoidable. In hind sight, I would not have taken this course in addition to any other courses if it were possible. I'm glad I took it, but it would have been better to have taken no more than 1 other course "on the side." If possible, this should be made clear to students up front. Practical applicaiton and skills using statistics as a reserch tool and well explained concepts behind. The instructor's availability and consultations regarding research designs and analysis for students across disciplines. I appreciated his expertise very much.

33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent   4.22 27 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 4 (15%) 10 (37%) 12 (44%)