|
1. Course syllabus and procedures (for example, expectations regarding attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
2. Course activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were appropriate to the subject matter.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
3. The reading and course materials were relevant and useful.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
4. Assignments helped me learn about the subject.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
5. The total amount of course work was appropriate.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
6. The instructor was well prepared.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
7. The instructor’s delivery of course content demonstrated his/her knowledge of the subject matter.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
8. The instructor used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present course material.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
9. The instructor was willing to help me during office hours and/or via email.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
10. The instructor motivated me to learn the course material.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
11. The instructor gave me appropriate feedback on my course work
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
12. Overall, the instructor was effective.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
15 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (100%) |
0 (0%) |
|
|
13. What did you like about this course, such as activities, projects, assignments, etc.?
|
| i like the wide variety of task when constructing finish work at the model home. im not just stuck on one thing, i get to learn alot more than just cabinets. thats what i like about this course. |
| Everyone was willing to help out each other if and when needed.
Each person did their part of the assignment,good attitude was shown through communication and, others lending a hand when tasks were completed and free time was at their hand. People weren't left on their own, esp. for tasks that were difficult. |
| all of the hands-on work paired with the lectures & lessons outside of the classroom and are setup on the job site. |
| Everything about this class was amusing and very attention capturing because of the teaching techniques that were presented by Mr. Tanabe. |
| There alot of things i loved about this class, but the most thing i learned was doing our practice project, where we got to learn from our mistakes then doing the final where there was minimun to no mistakes |
| i like getting experience on many different areas.. |
| We dont only learn how to build projects... we learn WHY we build them. |
| Practical assignments preceded actual "hands on" at model home which helped greatly. |
| i learned alot in this class it was fun and i wish it was one semester longer to learn more about carpentery |
|
|
14. Any suggestions to improve this course?
|
| no suggestions |
| none. |
| None |
| NO |
| nothing everything is fine |
| practical mini-size on cabinets |
| N/A |
|
|
15. Other comments:
|
| Keep teaching this program |
| the classroom environment along with the great attitude of the instructors within this program provide a great learning experience for everyone involved. |
| None |
| Thank you Mr.T for all your wisdom, guidance,and your unconditonal love for me. I have learned so much thing in this six months, what to do and what not to do. Pls forgive me for giving you a heart attack, but I love you and always will respect you like my "daddy". You making me cry and also rushing me too so thank you, thank you, my daddy Mr.t for your prays and blessing always love kris |
| Mr. Tanabe knows a lot and he is an excelent teacher. |
| thanks for da great year see you around!! |
| Mahalo nui |
| Mr. Tanabe is an excellent and patient instructor with experience in, not only, carpentry, but in handling students. |
| This class was funn i learned alot thanks for the experince |
|
|
1. Course objectives and procedures (for example, attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
2. Course objectives were met.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
4. Class activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were helpful and well suited to the subject matter.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
8. Regular attendance or participation was important to student success in the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
9. The instructor was always prepared.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
12. The instructor used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present course material.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
13. The instructor was willing to help students during office hours and/or via email.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
11 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (100%) |
|
|
16. The instructor graded fairly.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
17. The instructor made helpful comments on assignments and exams in a timely manner.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.9 |
10 |
0.32 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (10%) |
9 (90%) |
|
|
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
F |
D |
C |
B |
A |
| 4.91 |
11 |
0.3 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (9%) |
10 (91%) |
|
|
19. If you were teaching this course:
a. What would you do to improve it?
b. What would you change?
|
| Nothing really.What it has is going great. |
| nothing he did a good job |
| -- snipped -- |
| nothing |
| Nothing, I think what we have learned in this course are basic things that we need to know
when we go in the field and or when doing projects |
| A) Keep pushing the " Higher Ups" to renovate and upgrade Mr Tanabe's carpentry building, equipment and materials to teach the program. It's tragic because we are rated as one of the top four colleges that actually builds a actual home, yet we work with "flintsones" equipment and in a badly need of renovated building. I was even considering about addressing this issue to the Hawaii Tribune-Herald's "Your Views" about this issue.
B) I wouldn't change Mr. Tanabe as the instructor for this program!!! I would at least try or keep persisting in "changing" the higher ups' minds to improve and enrich this program with better equipment and a total renovation. |
| Every thing is super good. |
* Showing 6 out of 7 survey responses.
|
|
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
|
| Helpful. |
| they where very helpful |
| its great...very professional, knowledgeable, |
| I think that the instructors technique and is good because I am able to understand the
concepts that was being taught |
| Fascinating, excellence at its best, and astounding instructor of unprecidented proportions!!!!!!!!!!!! "Instructor of the Year of 2010!!!" Mr Tanabe deserves a raise and recognition for his excellence as an instuctor the whole Hawaii Community College programs in "2010"....rbc |
| excellent teacher. methods are amazing useful. |
| Practical and simple |
| The teaching methods used challenged students in a positive way, and allowed the students to apply the knowledge they gained in real world applications. |
|
|
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
|
| Absoulutly. |
| yes |
| yes and iam very thankful of people like him, hcc should get more instuctors like joel tanabe:) |
| yes |
| Yes, he has contributed to my knowledge because I have learned alot in this course and
have learned some job skills like different ways of doing things |
| Definately and absolutely!!!!! My grade speaks for itself!!! |
| better understanding of what it takes to be a true carpenter. |
| Yes |
| The instructor greatly contributed to my general knowledge, and re-enforced critical job skills on a daily basis. |
|
|
22. Other comments:
|
| -- snipped -- |
| -- snipped -- |
| This class was great because we got so many hands on activities, although it would have
been good to have some updated tools so that we would know what new tools are out there, |
| Acknowlegde Mr Tanabe for his excellence and tutelage in the program as well as all of the instructors to be the best instructor of "2010". Hawaii needs him and he deserves a raise also!!! Renovate and increase funding towards this program for equipment as well as the materials that we salvage from scraps as well as being termite infested and ancient power tools that are nearly deemed obsolete!!! rbc |
| Mahalo for being my teacher and helping prepare me to be a carpenter. I really apperciate it. |
* Showing 3 out of 5 survey responses.
|
|
1. Course objectives and procedures (for example, attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
2. Course objectives were met.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.88 |
16 |
0.34 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (13%) |
14 (88%) |
|
|
4. Class activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were helpful and well suited to the subject matter.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.94 |
16 |
0.25 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (6%) |
15 (94%) |
|
|
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.94 |
16 |
0.25 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (6%) |
15 (94%) |
|
|
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.88 |
16 |
0.34 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (13%) |
14 (88%) |
|
|
8. Regular attendance or participation was important to student success in the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.94 |
16 |
0.25 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (6%) |
15 (94%) |
|
|
9. The instructor was always prepared.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.94 |
16 |
0.25 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (6%) |
15 (94%) |
|
|
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.88 |
16 |
0.34 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (13%) |
14 (88%) |
|
|
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
12. The instructor used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present course material.
|
| 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 was willing to help students during office hours and/or via email.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.94 |
16 |
0.25 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (6%) |
15 (94%) |
|
|
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
16. The instructor graded fairly.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
17. The instructor made helpful comments on assignments and exams in a timely manner.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
F |
D |
C |
B |
A |
| 5.0 |
16 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
16 (100%) |
|
|
19. If you were teaching this course:
a. What would you do to improve it?
b. What would you change?
|
| would not change anything |
| He is a very good instructor..there id nothing to improve or change in the course. |
| The course as it is right now is excellent, no change is needed. |
| i wouldnt chqnge a thing |
| none |
| N/A |
| I wouldn't change it. |
| more hands on work |
| More study time for exams |
| i wouldnt change that much of the course if i were the teacher. there are no flaws in the course. |
| I would not improve or change anything |
|
|
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
|
| very good methods |
| I think his methods were very understanding and easy to learn. |
| Very clear and organized. |
| i think it was great |
| Excellent. A lay person coming into this environment would greatly benefit from Mr. Tanabe's teaching style and personality. He presents confidence and patience with each student and encourages student advancement in structured levels. |
| good |
| N/A |
| I think he is awesome and that he has good teaching methods. |
| very good |
| The teacher was very specific on instructions and theaching methods were very useful |
| Mr. Tanabe's teaching methods are unique he makes you think about how to solve a problem instead of telling you the answer. He makes YOU make the choice. And if you make a mistake then thats is how you learn. |
| I feel that Mr. Tanabe teaching method was excellent |
|
|
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
|
| yes |
| Yes he has taught me different parts in the carpentry subject. |
| Yes, instructor gave their own personal experiences, and notes. |
| yes |
| Yes. |
| yes |
| N/A |
| He has contributed alot of knowledge. |
| yes very much so |
| Yes, the instructor provided valuable knowledge and insight to the tasks at hand |
| yes he has |
| I feel that I have learned alot and will use my knowledge to better my future career. |
|
|
22. Other comments:
|
| N/A |
| none what so ever |
| Great job Mr. Tanabe. idiots rule always work. |
| Thank you Mr.Tanabe for believing in all of us. |
|
