eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Raghu Srinivasan

Available Survey Results

Raghu Srinivasan: ME331, Spring 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Mechanical Engineering
Course: ME 331 - Materials Science and Engr Crn (Section): 88608 (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  
3.24 31 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (10%) 20 (65%) 3 (10%) 2 (6%) 1 (3%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.93 31 0.26 Freq(%) 2 (6%) 27 (87%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.81 31 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (19%) 25 (81%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 31 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 (39%) 18 (58%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 31 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (6%) 14 (45%) 15 (48%)
6. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 31 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (29%) 22 (71%)
7. The instructor presented concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 31 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (6%) 13 (42%) 16 (52%)
8. The grading system was clearly explained.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.32 31 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 3 (10%) 12 (39%) 15 (48%)
9. Assignments and assessments in this course were related to course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 31 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (29%) 22 (71%)
10. Assignments were returned in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.74 31 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (26%) 23 (74%)
11. The instructor provided specific meaningful feedback.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 31 0.94 Freq(%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) 4 (13%) 10 (32%) 16 (52%)
12. The instructor was accessible to students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 31 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (6%) 4 (13%) 24 (77%)
13. What did you like best about the course?
Professor Raghu's willingness to help students and being patient. I LOVE how the class is not bassed off of the slides, but there are still slides fhat are helpful. some teachers tend to just read off the slide.
I enjoyed learning how metals behave differently
It was interesting to be able to look into the tiniest structures of a material and see how that effects its properties. Raghu seemed interested and knowledgeable in his subject, which showed in his lectures. This, mixed in with some humor, made for a comfortable and welcoming learning environment.
Homework and tests were related directly to his lectures. We always had a review in the beginning of each lecture. I think the PowerPoint really helped because we would discuss the material twice.
Straightforward teaching & clear expectations
Learning about how materials fail and their stress limits.
I enjoyed learning about the structures and behaviors of metals and materials at different temperatures and compositions.
he is at this time one of the best teachers in the department of engineering.i may not pass due to my own fault but probably the only teacher that truly cares that his students do well in there classes not just the one he is teaching them. would sit down and go through every problem during and even after office hours. deserves a raise!
Learning about the differences in materials
Professor was always readily available and was always willing to help students and answer any and all questions about the course. Willing top explain deeper in detail if students did not understand.
It explained everything you need to know about materials at this level.
Very knowledge instructor. Knows subject matter very well and is still able to communicate main topics and their underlying details very effectively.
The topics covered in this course were very interesting. I especially found the crystal structure and "geometry" useful. I also liked that the exams weren't just the standard "plug-and-chuck" math rigmarole. The exam questions really made you think and apply concepts.
The depth of information is plentiful.
Office hours are right after the class and the office was nearby. Homework coincides with the lecture and textbook. Examples were done in class which also greatly helped in homework when the textbook failed to communicate as effectively on an example.
Very knowledgeable in the subject and gave plenty of examples in class.
Raghu
The lecture presented was concise and directly related to the homework assignments and the examinations. The lecture complimented the textbook by introducing supporting concepts which allowed better understanding of course material. The professor offered concern to students question and clearly explained the question. I liked how this course covers a broad range of topics concerning engineering concepts, ranging from Chemistry and Thermodynamics to Mechanics of Materials
Very interesting and professor was very helpful:)
The class had given me insight into another focus into what i could do for a future career.
What I liked best about the course is that Dr. Srinivasan did many example problems in order to help explain difficult concepts and was always available for help if students had any questions.
14. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
power points be alittle better
Sometimes his handwriting was hard to read, even from the front of the class, which could sometimes add to the confusion of morning grogginess.
It would benefit students if he slowed down when talking/writing/changing slides on PowerPoint.
Improved handwriting
Handwriting got a little hard to read, but he answered if asked about it.
Professor Raghu was very good. However, some small criticisms would be to not speak so quickly/mumble and improve handwriting (e.g. distinguish r from gammas).
Professor Srinivarsan is a very knowledgable professor. Sometimes in class however he spoke relatively soft. I think it would only benefit him if he were to use a microphone. Also, while taking notes to professor erases the board as soon as he writes down material. I know there is a lot of content in the class but I still need time to copy down the material written on the board. Sometimes the professors handwriting is not legible. This makes note taking strenuous and a painful process at times.
Great professor! Maybe give this class a chance at a latter time. 7:30 am was challenging to wake up.
When he he covers material quickly his handwriting becomes illegible.
I did want more in-depth coverage of specific topics but I'm aware this is a 300 level course. The visuals were a good teaching tool for this course. I did think that you babied the students when it came to homework questions. More manipulation of math concepts/equations questions on homeworks would have been appreciated. Instead of straight out of the book questions, more "project"- like questions would have been exciting.
Handwriting was a bit hard to read sometimes and writing near the bottom of board makes it hard to read for people in back which causes them to stand up and then a whole domino effect happens.
Really good professor, maybe just write more clear.
Nothing
You cannot improve on the best!
Write a little bigger and talk a little louder.
For some parts of the class the pacing should be slowed down since it feels like we're rushing it, and were not able to completely take it in before we move onto the next topic.
Dr. Srinivasan can improve the teaching of this course by moving through the material a little slower, if possible. He does move at a very fast pace, but I guess that should be expected in order to cover the material on time. He still does an excellent job.
15. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.52 31 0.57 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 13 (42%) 17 (55%)
16. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.68 31 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (32%) 21 (68%)
17. Why did you choose to take this course? (It fulfilled a focus designation (WI, E, OC, HAP, etc.), POLS major/minor requirement, major/minor requirement for another department, time and day(s) of the week it was offered, instructor, subject matter, etc.)
major requirement
required
It was a requirement for my major.
Required course
Mechanical Engineering requirement
Required for major.
This was a major requirement.
i have to take it to fulfill my engineering requirements
Major requirements
It was required for my major
I wanted to be more familiar with materials and also take an elective which interested me.
Required for Mechanical engineering major.
Fulfills grad credit. :D
It was a required course.
It is a requirement and a prerequisite to my courses that I have to take.
I need it for my degree
Requirement
The course is a Major requirement in the BA in Mechanical Engineering, however; the course offers a broad spectrum of related course material like Chemistry, Thermodynamics and Mechanics of Materials. This approach offers a general and critical introduction to the following 300 level engineering courses to follow.
Major requirement
The class is required to move onto the following courses ME 341, and ME 342.
It was a requirement for my Mechanical Engineering major.
18. Assistance from the instructor outside the class was readily available.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 31 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 7 (23%) 23 (74%)
19. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.52 31 0.68 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (10%) 9 (29%) 19 (61%)
20. The exams cover the lecture material well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.41 31 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 3 (10%) 8 (26%) 17 (55%)
21. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 31 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (3%) 1 (3%) 10 (32%) 18 (58%)
22. Other comments:
Thanks Professor Raghu, I really enjoyed your class. I learned a lot from you. You made the class engaging and very interesting. Best of luck in the future.
Find more teachers like Ragu!!!!!!! seriously no one likes wasting there money taking classes with teachers that only talk and don't actually teach. find more teachers that are TEACHERS not talkers.
Great professor. Makes me wish there was a chemical engineering branch at this school or that the professor taught more classes. Very good professor. Would recommend to everyone
Excellent professor, very understanding and available for his students !
Whoever you have grading your home works should be fired for not being able to think outside of the answer key. Thank you Raghu!!
Really good professor and explained things after class if you needed more clarification. Was willing to help with subject matter even if not during office hours.
Really fun and interesting class as well as professor was very well:)