|
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.73 |
15 |
1.03 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
0 (0%) |
4 (27%) |
7 (47%) |
3 (20%) |
|
|
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.43 |
14 |
1.02 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
1 (7%) |
4 (29%) |
7 (50%) |
1 (7%) |
|
|
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.27 |
15 |
1.22 |
Freq(%) |
2 (13%) |
1 (7%) |
5 (33%) |
5 (33%) |
2 (13%) |
|
|
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.53 |
15 |
1.19 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
2 (13%) |
3 (20%) |
6 (40%) |
3 (20%) |
|
|
5. I generally understood the material presented in this course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.4 |
15 |
1.24 |
Freq(%) |
2 (13%) |
1 (7%) |
3 (20%) |
7 (47%) |
2 (13%) |
|
|
6. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
|
| It opened up my eyes to how elderly people really are shunned and forgotten and even discriminated against in our society, I think that can help a lot of us to change that and respect them. It also teaches you how to prepare for old age. |
| n/a |
| Doing the readings at home on your own were most valuable. |
| Group discussion handouts. Being able to go over possible questions on the
exam helped a lot. |
| I thought the group work in the later part of the semester was very helpful. Readings weren't bad either. |
| The aging processes and connection to Medical Sociology. |
| I enjoyed the group work :) |
| She was showing the class the power point lecture and she posted it on Laulima so they can read it on their own and on their own time. |
| Nothing |
|
|
7. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
|
| None. |
| n/a |
| The lectures were least valuable. |
| Lectures |
| n/a |
| The long powerpoints |
| Her teaching is hard to explain, but she was trying. |
| Everything |
|
|
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.2 |
15 |
1.15 |
Freq(%) |
2 (13%) |
1 (7%) |
5 (33%) |
6 (40%) |
1 (7%) |
|
|
9. The instructor is permissive and flexible.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.64 |
14 |
1.15 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
1 (7%) |
3 (21%) |
6 (43%) |
3 (21%) |
|
|
10. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.8 |
15 |
0.77 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
6 (40%) |
6 (40%) |
3 (20%) |
|
|
11. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.53 |
15 |
0.92 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
0 (0%) |
5 (33%) |
8 (53%) |
1 (7%) |
|
|
12. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.6 |
15 |
1.12 |
Freq(%) |
1 (7%) |
2 (13%) |
1 (7%) |
9 (60%) |
2 (13%) |
|
|
13. The course materials (texts, handouts) are easy to read and understand.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.4 |
15 |
1.4 |
Freq(%) |
3 (20%) |
0 (0%) |
3 (20%) |
6 (40%) |
3 (20%) |
|
|
14. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.27 |
15 |
1.33 |
Freq(%) |
3 (20%) |
1 (7%) |
1 (7%) |
9 (60%) |
1 (7%) |
|
|
15. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.4 |
15 |
1.35 |
Freq(%) |
3 (20%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (13%) |
8 (53%) |
2 (13%) |
|
|
16. Other comments:
|
| Since she kept changing the way she conducted class (optional presentation, to requirements for attendance) made it very difficult to keep track of grading criteria |
| The midterm was very unclear. She didn't tell us what she expected from us for the exam. I understand the review sheet is optional for the professor to give out, but she only gave us a long list of 50-80 words with no direction on what she wanted. The exam asked us only 5 questions and for definition of 4 words, which may seem easy but to receive a long list of just vocabulary and all the titles of each section does not help us prepare for the exam. I was one of the few students who attended class all the time. It didn't help. Reading on your own was much easier but to come to school to do your exam and not knowing what the professor is expecting to ask us is a lot harder. You're better off with a photographic memory if you had one. |
| Professor Lee made changes to the syllabus mid semester and we did not go over it in class. We received the new copy through laulima but we never went over the revisions in class. |
| Class needs to be more interesting. Hard to understand. |
| Enjoyed the class and Professor Yean-Ju Lee:) |
| No comments. |
| Very boring, redundant work, and exams poorly put together and formatted. |
|
|
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.67 |
9 |
0.5 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
3 (33%) |
6 (67%) |
|
|
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.78 |
9 |
1.39 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
0 (0%) |
3 (33%) |
1 (11%) |
4 (44%) |
|
|
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.22 |
9 |
1.39 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
|
|
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.67 |
9 |
1.41 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
1 (11%) |
1 (11%) |
3 (33%) |
3 (33%) |
|
|
5. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.22 |
9 |
1.39 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
2 (22%) |
|
|
6. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.0 |
9 |
1.22 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
5 (56%) |
3 (33%) |
|
|
7. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 3.78 |
9 |
1.3 |
Freq(%) |
1 (11%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (22%) |
3 (33%) |
3 (33%) |
|
|
8. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.44 |
9 |
0.53 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
5 (56%) |
4 (44%) |
|
|
9. The TA is effective.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 4.75 |
9 |
0.46 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (22%) |
6 (67%) |
1 (11%) |
|
|
10. The TA is friendly and accessible.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
N/A |
| 5.0 |
8 |
0.0 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
7 (88%) |
1 (13%) |
|
|
11. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.44 |
9 |
0.53 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
5 (56%) |
4 (44%) |
|
|
12. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
| 4.44 |
9 |
0.73 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
1 (11%) |
3 (33%) |
5 (56%) |
|
|
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
|
| Mean |
N-Size |
Std Dev |
|
Very Poor |
Poor |
Average |
Good |
Excellent |
| 3.78 |
9 |
1.2 |
Freq(%) |
0 (0%) |
2 (22%) |
1 (11%) |
3 (33%) |
3 (33%) |
|
|
14. Other comments:
|
| class was best when we were looking at examples from your data. looking at
published papers was also instructive.
i think looking at copies of the textbook was not as productive. if you
want students to read the text i think it is better to just assign some
homework problems. the midterm was good for forcing students to think about
the material, but because a lot of students come from a social science
background i think they need repetition to really feel comfortable.
also i think the textbook that was assigned is not adequate for the
material in the class. |
| It is an excellent course. The course covers many aspects of advanced statistics. The course instructor is very knowledgeable about the teaching subject. A minor problem is that the course does not have a lecture note. Students have to read the assigned chapters from the required textbook. While it is good for building reading ability, it requires alot of time. |
| I feel my knowledge of statistics has vastly improved after sitting in this class. It was also useful to become familiar with a new statistical package "STATA".
I also liked the fact that Prof.Lee often discussed statistical methods using examples from research studies and the assigned text book is excellent and a good reference book for future uses as well.
Thanks for a wonderful class. |
| The course did not help me to advance my knowledge about statistics. |
| Dr. Lee explains the concepts in a very clear and unambiguous way. I enjoy her teaching as she gives emphasis to micro details in explaining the statistical findings |
| The instructor is Ok. But more interactions between instructor and students might be better. |
|
