eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Andrei Natarov

Available Survey Results

Andrei Natarov: CHEM162, Fall 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Chemistry
Course: CHEM 162 - General Chemistry II Crn (Section): 70551 (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  
2.28 110 0.69 Freq(%) 9 (8%) 67 (61%) 27 (25%) 6 (5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.99 110 0.1 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 106 (96%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 110 0.88 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 3 (3%) 15 (14%) 48 (44%) 42 (38%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.9 110 0.93 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 3 (3%) 23 (21%) 48 (44%) 28 (25%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.25 110 1.12 Freq(%) 10 (9%) 13 (12%) 42 (38%) 30 (27%) 15 (14%)
6. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
3.38 105 0.91 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 12 (11%) 42 (40%) 38 (36%) 10 (10%)
7. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
3.3 105 1.05 Freq(%) 6 (6%) 17 (16%) 33 (31%) 38 (36%) 11 (10%)
8. Textbook andor other reading materials
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.52 105 0.9 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 6 (6%) 43 (41%) 39 (37%) 14 (13%)
9. Sensitivity to student problems and general rapport
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.53 105 0.9 Freq(%) 4 (4%) 4 (4%) 42 (40%) 42 (40%) 13 (12%)
10. Effective use of demonstrations, models, or visual aids
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.28 105 1.08 Freq(%) 8 (8%) 14 (13%) 35 (33%) 35 (33%) 12 (11%)
11. Absence of distracting mannerisms, pauses, etc.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.44 105 1.02 Freq(%) 8 (8%) 4 (4%) 40 (38%) 40 (38%) 13 (12%)
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.59 110 1.03 Freq(%) 5 (5%) 7 (6%) 39 (35%) 36 (33%) 23 (21%)
13. The instructor's voice was clear and understandable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.0 110 1.08 Freq(%) 10 (9%) 23 (21%) 40 (36%) 25 (23%) 9 (8%)
14. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.99 110 1.1 Freq(%) 10 (9%) 25 (23%) 39 (35%) 24 (22%) 10 (9%)
15. The instructor's presentation of abstract ideas and theories was clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.29 110 1.04 Freq(%) 7 (6%) 14 (13%) 40 (36%) 36 (33%) 12 (11%)
16. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.38 110 1.02 Freq(%) 6 (5%) 12 (11%) 38 (35%) 39 (35%) 13 (12%)
17. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 110 0.92 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 3 (3%) 36 (33%) 44 (40%) 24 (22%)
18. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.87 105 0.96 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 5 (5%) 22 (21%) 47 (45%) 27 (26%)
19. Assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.95 110 1.09 Freq(%) 12 (11%) 22 (20%) 43 (39%) 23 (21%) 9 (8%)
20. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.53 110 0.88 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 8 (7%) 40 (36%) 41 (37%) 13 (12%)
21. The course is highly recommended if it were taught by this instructor.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.12 110 1.16 Freq(%) 13 (12%) 13 (12%) 44 (40%) 24 (22%) 14 (13%)
22. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.34 110 0.95 Freq(%) 5 (5%) 10 (9%) 49 (45%) 33 (30%) 12 (11%)
23. The exams gave students an opportunity to demonstrate what they had learned.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.88 105 0.93 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 7 (7%) 25 (24%) 43 (41%) 29 (28%)
24. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.89 105 1.07 Freq(%) 4 (4%) 5 (5%) 26 (25%) 32 (30%) 37 (35%)
25. Other comments:
The classroom we were in physci 217 has very poor sound system. He used the one that was hooked up to the desk that came with the room. I don't know if Andrei could have gotten his own handheld sound system but it is not very fair to the students and the professor to have a shitty microphone provided by the university. Every class period the mic would cut off make a very loud screeching sound which is very distracting. It is not fair that we students pay all the money we do, for this shit. I feel Andrei would have been able to teach us better if students could understand him from time to time.
the students who attend class shouldn't have to suffer for the ones who never show up.
he's a great teacher, but very difficult to understand because of his accent, even when sitting in the very first row.
The changing of the medium for teaching (from lecture slides to using the chalkboard) greatly improved the teaching style. The pace of the lectures also improved (while it may just be due to the shortness of time, the speed is better than what it was at the start of the semester). The only problem that I saw (I did not have a preference for this, but others may have) was that the labs were at times one to two weeks ahead of the lecture. I am not sure where the timing went wrong, as the pace for the lectures were more or less on schedule to that in the syllabus. In any event, I enjoyed the lectures and the teaching style towards the end of the semester. Going though mainly one, but sometime two examples at the end of each topic greatly helped in learning and reinforcing the topic that was just taught. It also helped with the steps that are used to solve the problems for that topic.
For half the semester the professor used the chalkboard to demonstrate the mathematical portions of chemistry along with the vocabulary. The downfall is that Professor Natarov is lagging behind. He is behind on a chapter and is not preparing for those who are interested in furthering their education in chemistry.
Hard to understand when talking. Would be more interesting if there were communication with students throughout the lecture because he doesn't ask students questions to check if they understand. Also doing experiments would be interest students more.
Mastering Chemistry is a horrible program to use for homework. Rather than feeling like I'm applying what I've learned, I tend to just get frustrated when using the program.
Iʻm not very good with chemistry to begin with so no matter what this course will always be hard to me. Slides were helpful for my reviews and study sessions and Professor Natarov was very capable of explain how to get the answers of given problems. Sometimes the mic would be to soft that I couldnʻt hear or his accent was hard to understand sometimes but, other than that it was fine.
The class was alright but could have been a lot better. It's hard to see the board in class and if he uses the powerpoint he goes too fast. The exams are fair because it's similar to the practice exams given. He tries to be as fair as possible and often is available when you need him. Tries to help the students out as much as he can. Overall, he is an okay professor and could be better with practice for lectures.
Practice exams were very useful and helpful. The study sessions are also good. However, I think you should pay attention to the time in order to go through all the questions on the practice exam.
The course became more clear once he ditched the textbook PowerPoint and did chalkboard examples.
The chalkboard problems were the best part they definitely helped understand. This is my second time taking the course because my first teacher did not know how to teach, this teacher made everything very clear and simple instead of making it harder than it was! The exams were over everything covered in depth in class and the practice exams were a huge help! I wish I would have had him in the first place. Excellent teacher! THANK YOU SO MUCH!
Even though there was lots information he did a great job at getting it out to students. The only thing that I thought was somewhat of a problem was that he would start lecture facing the board and hardly ever turn around. Sometimes students had questions and he never noticed. Toward the end of the semester there was a big improvement. Also it would be nice for him to engage students He probably asked the class if there were any questions Maybe 6 times during the whole semester. Many students including myself were too intimidated to ask questions. Maybe if he began each lecture with " does anyone have any questions" I think it would be helpful Lastly a short introduction about himself on the first day of class would be nice since we would be learning from him for a semester. He did very well with preparing the class for each test. I appreciated the reviews and the practice exams, they were very helpful. Overall, I don't like chemistry very much because it's always been a tough subject for me to grasp but I was very suprised at how well I understood everything we learned throughout the semester. I enjoyed the course because I was learning and doing well in my exams.
I recommend that the mastering chemistry requirements be cut in half or the amount of questions be lessened because it was a lot of work to complete for one assignment.
Natarov is a good teacher. He explains concept well and gives examples to help for better understanding. He is sometimes hard to understand during class, but other than that, it's good.
I liked that he went through a step by step process on how to solve the problems.
Very good professor in terms of how much he cares about his students and how committed he is to addressing each question/issue. He is very good about answering questions and doesn't remind reviewing something if a student needs it. A couple things to improve on would be to (if possible) go a little bit slower as it seems that it is hard to keep up with the lectures sometimes. In addition, for the most part, the MasteringChemistry software has been ok, but it would've been nice to have a little less homework and avoid troublesome problems. Other than that, everything else is pretty good. It is sometimes a little hard to understand with the accent, but I can hear him pretty well most of the time and he is more than happy to repeat/clarify something if it doesn't makes sense. All in all, I would recommend this teacher.
The use of powerpoint was very beneficial in the beginning of the course. When you stopped using the slides and went strictly on chalkboard work, much of my attention was diverted to copying everything down. I missed a few important concepts that I needed to learn during class, and had to read the book and get additional help just to understand what you were talking about in the lecture. Taking away our review class at the end of the semester is also a bad idea. I found the classes we used to review before the midterm the most beneficial as it gave me an opportunity to see what I was doing wrong/right.
Natarov demonstrated a level of care for his students that was very commendable. From what I assume were "lower than expected" results for his first midterm, Natarov completely altered his teaching style for the better. While Natarov does have some areas he could improve, the fact that he drastically changed his style in such a short period of time means a lot as a student. :)
It's hard to hear him in the back of class so if he could speak up it would help out students in the back. I sat in the front so it was fine, but just a tip. One thing that was really distracting, was the microphone would always fall of his shirt and would cause a super loud noise. It would help the class if he figured out how to securely attach the microphone
Lazy, uninspired, an overall unpleasant professor. Do not take.
I used to love chemistry in High School but since taking chemistry in college I don't really like it any more. Poor communication during lectures and non interaction has diminished my enthusiasm. Not to mention the accent that is present during lectures makes it a little complicated to learn. Also providing slide shows that are basically copy and past from the book are poor. I am in college and able to read the book.
He tried very hard to teach all of us, even though it's very difficult to teach 200+ students at one time.
After about two weeks of class, I stopped going to lecture and just read the lectures online (which I am greatful that he put his lectures online with much detail) He only read off his slideshows during class and never had any physical, interesting demonstrations. His voice was difficult to understand, both with his accent and he spoke softly, even with the microphone it was a little difficult. His explanations on the chalk board were often hard to read too.
I really LOVED how he taught his lessons. They were "old school" where he lectured and wrote on the chalkboard. It made it a lot more interesting and better to follow along with. Powerpoints can become very boring after a while and I didn't learn as much with the powerpoints since they are readily available on Laulima. Writing on the board allowed me to be more engaged and follow along with the information being presented. A+++ for that teaching style! I wish more professors taught like that, but that's just me.
Not accommodating.
Deffinitely a rough start, but as the course went on, Natarov became a better lecturer. I would take another course taught by him.
I think that if Prof. Natarov made his midterms a little longer in terms of the number of questions on the tests, students would do better overall in his class. Prof. Natarov should also continue to use masteringchemistry.com to assign homework assignments. The homework problems assigned are relevant to the midterms and are an important and useful study tool.
This class taught me how to take a practice test, remember exactly the problem types on it, and regurgitate that information on the exam. I got Aʻs but I didn't learn much Chemistry. I do imagine it is difficult to make a large lecture-hall type class engaging, but I would have hoped for a more interesting experience in CHEM 162.
Talks very softly
Masterchemistry questions are wayyyyy too hard
When Professor Natarov went away from the power point slides and decided to bring the course completely to the black board the class became much more interesting to learn because it kept me on my feet by allowing me to follow along with him as he wrote out his lectures and explanations. When a professor is involved and cares about the subject, the students leave the class with a solid foundation. Handouts with important equations with helpful notes would be great. They dont even have to be handed out.. If he just had a little web page where he had links to helpful sheets like that we could download them ourselves. Ideas like these are simple and need to be taken into account for science related subjects.
He is lacking in the charisma department. He seems very shy.
Never reply my email. No curve.
I want my money back from this course. He did not speak clearly, mumbled, barley used the mic, and talked to the chalk board. I taught myself chemistry more then he did. His accent made it difficult to understand him. Even when using power points the text was over lapping so could not read and when trying to de overlap text it was confusing on what went where for math problems or understand. Seriously thought this was an awful class, while I am learning from the book and google I am able to understand and pass the exam, but the teacher was not helpful at all.
Natarov started off a bit rocky but once he decided to take charge of the course on his own by teaching from his personal journal, the course really took off. His own content was much more organized than the Pearson slides and encouraged students to come to class. I'd definitely recommend him as a professor for other 161/162 classes because he is able to break down a subject into practical components instead of shoving it down student's throats as a technical mass of information. Great guy overall.
N/A
none
Prof. Natarov talks very softly, even when he uses a mic.
I think I started to learn a lot more from the course when he switched from using the slideshows to writing on the chalk board, because I could keep up with my note-taking. I also like that on mastering chemistry, that when I got stuck, there were options to show me how to solve the problem (without losing a lot of points). In terms of the testing, it would be better if it weren't all multiple choice, because I know that a lot of people were only showing up for the review session, and none of the other classes prior to the test.
Chemistry is a struggle for me, and this is the first semester where I UNDERSTAND it. Andrei gives very good tests with no surprises on it. I would highly recommend him for another student.
I really like how this instructor gives us a practice exam and goes over it as a review session during class. It's VERY effective and HELPFUL.
Great course, however I do not like Mastering chemistry
none
didnt go to class