eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Diane Desierto

Available Survey Results

LAW520B, Fall 2014
LWPA585, Fall 2014
LAW520J, Spring 2014
LWJT536J, Spring 2014
LAW531, Fall 2013

Diane Desierto: LAW520B, Fall 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 520B - Adv L Studies: Business Law Crn (Section): 78317 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.14 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (86%) 1 (14%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
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 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
This course is great for its first time offered. It may be better to slowly have students work on each section of their arbitration as the class progresses so they have a firm grasp on the subject prior to finals period. Also, there was a concern that the class may be hard to follow if the student did not take international economics law prior to this class. Perhaps making an international economics course as a pre-requisite may not be a bad idea. However, it then falls under the issues whether students will be able to take it with only two years to choose which courses they want to take.
excellent.
Professor Desierto is the best teacher at Richardson. Whatever you're paying her, double it, maybe triple it, as she's the only one on the faculty who is consistently improving Richardson's profile in the highest-status areas of law. International Commercial Arbitration is a field of law that Richardson students, and Hawaii lawyers at large, have a chance to excel in. We could take a global lead in this area because of preference for American jurisdictions and our relative proximity to Asia. She should be resourced better. My opinion is that she's an all-star and a potentially globally recognized name in her field. Do WHATEVER YOU CAN TO KEEP HER. I WANT MY DEGREE TO BE WORTH MORE THAN IT CURRENTLY IS.
Professor Desierto is one of the most effective instructors I have ever taken a course from. She is able to make difficult concepts understandable both at a theoretical and a practical level.
Aloha, This class was one of the most practical classes that I have taken at Richardson. Not only did we learn theory of international arbitration of various types, we actively engaged with relevant international case law and we were encouraged to practice the writing and presentation techniques of international arbiters and lawyers. The Prof. is extremely knowledgeable and always comes to class prepared. The powerpoints are impactful and not very wordy. She encouraged student participation about each topic and strove to not only instill the principles of the law but also the ideas and philosophies behind the law. Her teaching method required students to think for themselves and draw from their knowledge of other classes in beneficial ways. Finally, the evaluation method of the course was unique, but also uniquely valuable. Working through both the written and oral portions of an international arbitration problem allowed us students to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of how the law is lived out in practice. I would take this course again if I could. Thank you.
19. Other comments:
Help her bring profitable areas of law to Hawaii. She is the best. She is the best. She is the best.

Diane Desierto: LWPA585, Fall 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LWPA 585 - International Law Crn (Section): 74800 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.17 12 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (83%) 2 (17%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 11 (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 12 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 12 0.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (92%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 12 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 10 (83%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 12 0.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (92%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 12 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 12 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 9 (75%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 12 0.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (92%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 12 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 10 (83%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 12 0.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (92%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 12 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 9 (75%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.92 12 0.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (92%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.92 12 1.31 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 4 (33%) 5 (42%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 12 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 3 (25%) 7 (58%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 12 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 10 (83%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.36 11 1.03 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 7 (64%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
I thought International Law was the most challenging yet most rewarding course that I've taken since coming to law school. Professor Desierto is extremely knowledgeable and it is obvious that she is passionate about the subject of International Law. I highly recommend that people take this course, and take any course taught by her.
I didn't like the co-teaching thing, getting two voices during the semester made the course feel a little bit disjointed.
Wish I could write more, but I really have to get back to work studying for the final exam in this course. In short, Professor Desierto is incredibly knowledgeable and supportive in the learning process. This course was co-taught by two professors and I find it quite helpful and accommodating.
The class was overall well done. It helped that there were two teachers we could ask and that both of you agreed with the other on the answers as well as the grading. My one concern however is that the level of reading expected was very high considering the amount of time students must commit to other courses. Please bear this in mind for future classes. Also, please try to make this course a pre-requisite course and further try to make it 4 credits rather than 3 if you intend to maintain this amount of reading.
I will include this same critique in both professors' evaluations. I feel that the co-teaching process requires a lot of work to bring it on par with individual teaching. I liked the fact that students gained perspectives from both teachers with different areas of specificity. The beginning of the course was, however, a mess. As the course progressed, especially after the professors were able to evaluate student performance on the midterm, the course gained more clarity and the discrepancies between the teachers' styles and content evened out. I feel like co-teaching can work in the future, and is beneficial to this course, but requires more cohesion between the professors involved, especially as the course is in its infancy.
wonderful.
The overall appraisal of the course is poor for three reasons. First, the course was very disjointed. This can be attributed to several factors including the team teaching approach (co-professors with individual agendas), the weak organization of course material over in relation to each other, and the emphasis on personal interests of the instructors (Hong Kong, Human Rights, Presenting Progressive Development as substance rather than a concept/method for future legal substance, etc.). Second, the course did not live up to expectations. International Law is pitched as a gateway course that introduces the fundamental principles of international law. It is not a conglomeration of every international legal concept. As an example, course readings averaged over 200 required pages with an additional 100 pages of supplemental reading per lesson (twice a week). Only a small share of the material was ever covered in class and often the instructors focused on fringe issues that, while passively referenced in the reading assignments, are entirely apart from the core concepts discussed. Often the classes felt more like a topical class on either Hong Kong, Human Rights, or Comparative International Law - all uniquely different than a threshold course in International Law. Third, the course will likely prove of little use apart from the fact of having had done the assigned readings. It is true that the fundamentals one would expect to find in an International Law course were contained in the reading assignments. However, what makes the enrollment in the course value-added is the the notion that the instructor(s) will help to develop student understanding regardless of their personal views of right and wrong and individual loyalties to particular schools of thought. While I cannot say that the instructors did not develop understanding of fundamental concepts, I will say that very till time and effort was made to develop understanding of those concepts while a disproportionate amount of time and effort was dedicated to undermining accepted principles of international law and unhinging future conceptions of law from their basic underpinnings. This is problematic for a number of reasons. Finally, I think the presentation of the course entirely disregarded the fact that it was offered in an American law school. There was little if any effort to teach international law in such a manner as it could be used by lawyers practicing in a U.S. jurisdiction.
The course is excellent as a whole, but the team teaching is still a bit bumpy.
19. Other comments:
I loved Prof. Desierto. Please make her stay at Richardson forever.
Professor Desierto is the most competent, intelligent, and knowledgable professor that I have had the pleasure of learning from in my entire life. She is a walking encyclopedia of international law. She is supremely professional but yet down to earth and approachable. She has gone above and beyond to assist me with not only this class, but with career goals, strategy, and other international law papers and projects. In every speaking circumstance she is incredibly eloquent, precise, logical, and adds to the depth of analysis and reasoning that most people do not. Her depth of understanding, analysis, and reasoning is brilliant and far exceeds the current overall caliber of this school.

Diane Desierto: LAW520J, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 520J - Advanced Legal Studies:Topic 9 Crn (Section): 87365 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
4.82 11 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (82%) 1 (9%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 10 (91%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of 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%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the 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%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 11 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 11 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 8 (73%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
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%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Prof. Desierto is one of the greatest teachers I've ever experienced. She is absolutely brilliant. She knows, seemingly, everything about an area of the law that is booming and offering myriad rewards to lawyers who dare endeavor into it. I've had some excellent teachers at Richardson, but Desierto is head and shoulders above most, if not all, of them in terms of passion, organization, knowledgeability, and communication. Do whatever it takes to keep her. She's your Hank Aaron, Michael Jordan, etc. She's a STAR. Keep her. At all costs. She only adds value to all of our experiences and degrees.
I very much enjoyed taking this class. Professor Desierto is an excellent professor; she can break down complex array of law and policy and translate it to a comprehensive summary of the fundamental values underneath state and private actors. She is engaging, knowledgeable, and particularly keen on giving us cutting-edge perspective. She was able to make the class relevant to the times, and had some great tips on career directions. This course exposed me to areas of law that I had no seen or heard of, and it has prepared me to focus more on international private law in hopes of continuing with Professor Desierto's efforts to mend the private/public international law fields.
Having not taken any economic courses nor good international law courses, this class really pushed me. I felt that the work load was heavier than average for law classes at this school, but I learned a lot very quickly. Professor Desierto is incredibly knowledgeable, and I appreciated her approach of having students volunteer to present cases.
Excellent, but possibly the most challenging class I have ever taken.
Prof. Desierto is extremely knowledgeable and has a good and humorous way of teaching. The UNCTAD project required extensively more time than expected and announced at the beginning of the semester. It also did not provide the learning experience I was hoping for. Classes were sometimes very packed with new concepts and knowledge (slides and oral presentations combined) that it was hard for students to follow. I believe it would be helpful to have a handout of the class or limit the content of the slides so we can follow the slides as well as the presentation.
Fantastic. Excellent. Superlative. I have found very few classes in law school that challenged me intellectually and morally at the same level as this class. The intellectual challenges were varied as we walked through both the history and modern application of international trade, investment, monetary, and economic law. I learned to read international cases from a variety of institutions and how to apply their findings to international treaties and agreements between state and non-state actors. The class drew together knowledge learned in a variety of other classes - contracts, international law, international criminal law, comparative law, international labor law, etc... to create a compelling whole that emphasized the importance of international economic law to the future direction of the world - at both the macro and micro level. I especially appreciated the modern interpretation of the law in the context of the recent (as well as historical) financial crises around the world and the application that knowledge of that law might find in both local and international legal practice. Further, I learned tremendous amounts about treaty reading and interpretation via the UNCTAD project, and while mundane in parts, no good education comes without work, and this work was surely worth it. I now feel comfortable, though by no means a world-expert, in reading, understanding, and even commenting on a treaty and its application to my client. This is fantastically important in international practice and in domestic practice where these instruments affect the business of clients throughout Hawaii, e.g. any ex-im business. Near the end of the semester we were given the opportunity to engage in mock-negotiations over real contracts and treaties. This exercise helped me understand the process and preparation involved in identifying the needs and goals of real clients (state and non-state actors, developed and developing, at the domestic and international level) and then working to meet those needs through interpretation of multiple instruments in light of each other and then through negotiation with parties with both opposing and complementary interests. Every step of the class was elucidated by the Professor's encyclopedic knowledge of international law and practice and the powerpoint, lectures, case readings, and textbook readings were all carefully chosen to highlight that day's lesson and bring clarity to a new and vast area of international economic law.
Lots of reading and the UNCTAD assignment really took a lot of time, but it was a great learning experience.
19. Other comments:
I hope this class continues to be taught because Richardson is particularly situated to orient students towards expanding field of international law.
Reducing the amount of United Nations hell in future iterations of the class might be beneficial.
Please do everything you can to keep Professor Desierto at UH law school.
Additionally, this class challenged my moral thinking about the role of international economic law and each of its various subparts and about how I as a future lawyer should integrate a human-focused framework into my practice, whether domestic or international. Throughout the course as we learned of different treaty regimes, arbitration, trade law, economic law, and international monetary policy the Professor took great pains to ensure that at every step we understood not just the academic arguments and skills necessary to operate within each arena, but that we also understood the human consequences of each decision and mechanism. Whether the result of arbitral decisions regarding water rights in Argentina, US compliance with a WTO decision requiring the abolition of job subsidies for Boeing, investment treaties that exploit the recipient country's labor force and environment, or public health crises resulting from state monetary policies, these threads of the human impact of international economic law were tied together neatly at the end of class by a consideration of the duties of states in regards to their other international commitments. No decision is made in a vacuum, and this class challenged me to remember as I practice in the future, that every decision, every clever legal argument that I might create to save my client money, has a human impact. Those human impacts are subject to other international regimes, and the actions of states, non-state actors, and lawyers working for them both should balance these multiple obligations to find solutions that increase development, the standard of living, and my client's best interest. I found this perspective to be a breath of fresh air permeating the class and providing real world import to the activity of reading treaties and learning about the reporting procedures of the IMF. To me, this class's focus on both the intellectual and the moral, the law and the human, the theoretical and the practical, and our role as the arbitrator of the continued tension between them, uphold's Richardson's mission to: Prepare students for excellence in the practice of law and related careers that advance justice and the rule of law; Develop highly qualified, ethical professionals through excellence in teaching, scholarship, and public service; Embrace HawaiĆ¢??iĆ¢??s diversity and values; and to Recognize a special responsibility to our state and the Pacific region.
Hopefully professor Desierto will teach more international law/economics/arbitration related courses in the future. With her background, especially her work experience, she's the most qualified person to teach international law at the law school

Diane Desierto: LWJT536J, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LWJT 536J - Jessup Intl Moot Court Team Crn (Section): 84608 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
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%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
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%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
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%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Being a part of the Jessup Moot Court Team was the most beneficial law school experience. Professor Desierto, as a world renown international lawyer, is an essential asset to the law school, the international field, and the Jessup moot court team. Professor Desierto is an incredible teacher, cultivated my interest in international law, and was the most effective teacher I have had in law school. Jessup was the most valuable writing, research, and oral advocacy experience in law school.
This course was excellent. We did well at the tournament thanks chiefly to the hard work of the Professor's, their thorough knowledge of the subject matter, their experience with the competition, and their selfless willingness to help/travel/be available any time of day or night for two semesters.
19. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Diane Desierto: LAW531, Fall 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 531 - Business Associations Crn (Section): 79660 (002)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.2 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 (80%) 3 (20%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.07 15 0.27 Freq(%) 13 (87%) 1 (7%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 13 (87%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 15 1.1 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.71 15 1.33 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 5 (33%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 15 1.13 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 12 (80%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.87 15 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 14 (93%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 15 1.28 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 5 (33%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.87 15 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 14 (93%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 1.21 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 2 (13%) 9 (60%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 15 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 3 (20%) 9 (60%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 15 1.1 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.07 15 1.28 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 3 (20%) 8 (53%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.8 15 1.15 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 5 (33%) 4 (27%) 5 (33%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 15 1.28 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 5 (33%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 1.13 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 11 (73%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.93 15 1.27 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 6 (40%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
The professor is extremely, extremely knowledgeable. I would have liked to have gone slower and more in depth then breadth.
Professor Desierto is very brilliant and knowledgable about business associations. She is personable and has tried to share her personal experience with the class and how it relates to the course content. However, at times it was difficult for me to understand her lectures because I felt she tended to jump around within the lecture topic. Sometimes it was also very technical and I think she assumed a lot of the students had a deeper grasp of basic business structure, which made it difficult to absorb. I also thought it was very difficult to keep up with the readings in this class because many nights were 60-100 pages. For part-time students, this is very difficult. It is also frustrating when the time is taken to do the reading, but realistically we were unable to cover all the reading in class.
Good
Excellent. The professor covered the entire course in reasonable chunks. Her teaching style is relaxed and empowering. Her expectations are clear throughout the class and in preparation for the final exam. She is available for her students. She works with her students to address issues. She is fantastic both with Socratic teaching and in pure lecturing (which is neither too fast or too slow, not full of rabbit trails, and informative). Her lectures are well structured and she enters each class knowing exactly what she wants here students to leave with. Whether this or any other course, she is an excellent TEACHER, as well as knowledgeable on the subject, professional, cordial, and punctual.
We covered a lot of material in this course (entire textbook). The amount of reading assigned was, at times, overwhelming (50+ pages). Although the class is structured 50% participation and 50% final exam (with students responsible for cases/discussion on specific days), if we wanted to follow along, we still had to read everything for every class. It may be helpful to assign shorter reading assignments/cases, so we can all follow along and discuss them more in depth. Otherwise, Prof. Desierto was great in explaining the legal principles and concepts.
Prof. Desierto is a terrific Professor who is extremely knowledgeable about this topic area.
This Business Associations class was very challenging, but I did learn a lot.
Challenging.
This class was bad. I am finishing the semester and I don't understand the topic and wish I could get my tuition money back so I can take this class from another professor. That being said, this was the hardest evaluation that I have ever had to do. Prof. Desierto is extremely nice and friendly, but this class was a nightmare. It's not the class itself, or the subject. It is the way it was organized and taught.
Excellent course. A lot of reading involved, but interesting nonetheless. Appreciated her candor in talking about her pre-academic life as an attorney for large corporations.
Great!
I know Professor Desierto is an extremely intelligent professor. My only concern was the "ratio" of the quantity of reading assigned to the time allocated for discussion in class. There would be times that we read over 60 pages and we barely put in 5 minutes per case, if not less, for discussion. My suggestion is to cut out some cases in a given topic and really focus on say 3 cases where the class can have an "in depth" discussion where the professor will be able to reinforce an important point during class. I guess a lot our reaction when we learned a particular topic won't be on the exam was we should have spent more time reinforcing what will be covered. Nevertheless, I still have a lot of respect for Prof. Desierto for knowledge and experience.
19. Other comments:
I don't think that it was necessary to read the entire book. I think that picking certain cases that are important would have worked better. To me it was almost an overload of information.
The other frustration with this course were the number of schedule changes. There were numerous class meetings that were cancelled. As a result, we had to attend numerous make-up classes. It wouldn't have been such an issue if we had advance notice about the make-up classes.
My main recommendation is to reduce the number of cases covered in the course. Several cases were assigned that we did not discuss. In addition, at times, the lectures felt very rushed. I found it difficult to take notes on everything Prof. Desierto said. Assigning fewer cases would provide more time to reiterate and review major course concepts. It's a pretty simple fix that would greatly enhance the educational experience.
Professor Desierto is clearly a brilliant individual, however, she was extremely difficult to follow and seemed unable to explain the various concepts to individuals who are not already highly experienced with corporations. The very reason we are taking this course is because we are not knowledgeable about such concepts. Professor Desierto is also a very pleasant person and a quality individual, but for the reasons mentioned above I would not like to take any classes from her in the future.
Professor was away from campus on schedule class days far too often. Having so many Friday make-up classes, that were not video recorded, was horrible. If I knew this was going to happen I would not have taken the class. The Law School should have better policies about professors that do this. What happened to making students the priority? The reading for this class does not make sense. We had to read so many cases that we did not go over, or that the professor would say are not important. I spent so much time writing case briefs and now I really don't know what is good law, what will be on the final exam, or what to study for the bar. Lectures are terribly disorganized. I wish a Dean would come sit in on one of the class sessions to see how it is completely disorganized. Professor needs to improve her attendance. She also needs to focus the class on the more important topics of the subject instead of just making the class, "read the whole book" to get exposure, but no real understanding. Finally, allowing professors to make 50% of the grade "class participation" is unfair. Especially if there are no guidelines disseminated to the class. This and allows the situation that Examsoft was created to avoid.
My only criticism is that Professor Desierto is so intelligent that sometimes it felt like she was teaching at a higher level than the students could comprehend. She is great and very knowledgeable but I felt that she may need to lay more foundation to build on. This comment is suppose to really be a compliment. She is truly knowledgeable of the subject matter but I just felt that some things moved a little quickly and she was teaching at such a celestial level we may not have been able to absorb the info as quickly. One last note is that all the make ups due to being called for meetings out of State was a little brutal and more advance warning would have been appreciated. I totally understand that she may have had these prior arrangements, but long lectures and several Friday make ups caused a lot of conflicts for my schedule.