eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Makenakauhaneol Coffman

Available Survey Results

PLAN603, Fall 2013
PLAN625, Fall 2013
PLAN751, Spring 2013
PLAN601, Fall 2012
PLAN625, Fall 2012
PLAN601, Spring 2012
PLAN620, Spring 2012
PLAN625, Fall 2011
PLAN601, Spring 2011
PLAN620, Spring 2011

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN603, Fall 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 603 - Econ Analy/Urban Plan & Policy Crn (Section): 79788 (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 24 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 24 (100%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.96 24 0.21 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 22 (92%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 24 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (21%) 19 (79%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 24 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (33%) 16 (67%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 3 (13%) 18 (75%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 24 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 8 (33%) 15 (63%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 24 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 9 (38%) 14 (58%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 24 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 10 (42%) 10 (42%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 5 (21%) 17 (71%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 24 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 9 (38%) 14 (58%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 24 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 6 (25%) 9 (38%) 8 (33%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 24 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 11 (46%) 11 (46%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 7 (29%) 16 (67%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 24 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 8 (33%) 12 (50%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 24 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (33%) 16 (67%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
I found that writing the short essays was the most valuable part of the course because I learned a lot. The class discussions were also useful.
The class discussions and presentations
I learned the most through the readings, guest lectures, and from classes where Dr. Coffman discussed course topics and her own work. I enjoyed the variety of readings and the applicability of course topics to my professional work and everyday experiences.
Readings = well organized and compiled papers = topics were conducive to learning strong lectures Makena answered students' questions thoroughly
- Papers - Discussions - Presentations
The readings and research I had to do for papers and discussions were most valuable.
I really enjoyed this class. The material presented was interesting and valuable to my learning. Makena Coffman was well prepared and motivating in her presentations.
Makena's teaching is top notch, I couldnt have asked for a more engaged and caring instructor that knew the material inside and out. Furthermore I have always had problems standing up in front of people and presenting, I finally broke through that barrier in her class, great job!
Market Failure Essay.
The opportunity to discuss the topics and issues in class. Although I would have preferred exams rather than essays, the essays challenged us to think more deeply about and apply the economic principles learned in class. The seminar format was also helpful. Moretti book was excellent! "Urban Economics" textbook was interesting (although the writing style was a bit dry).
I found the Mankiw textbook very valuable and I appreciated the professor's commitment to keeping the students engaged. I also appreciated the professor and teaching assistant's efforts to be in communication with the students and their willingness to meet with the students outside of class.
Because I do not come from a planning or economics background, all of the material was new to me and most was quite enlightening and stimulating. There was a good emphasis on applying current topics into the academic framework, so we could think more critically about issues, in a more structured way. Prof. Coffman fosters an engaging, collaborative classroom atmosphere that encourages students to participate. People feel at ease and there are occasional laughs, which helps a lot. Good guest speakers (but not too many of them; some teachers use them as a crutch).
The guest speakers were very beneficial, providing real world applications of the course topics. The essays, although time consuming, helped solidify the material covered.
reviews on each reading
The readings, lectures, and group discussions
The essays really helped me to develop a deeper understanding of economic forces and apply these to planning issues.
Requiring students to present and, essentially, "teach their peers" keeps students responsible for keeping up with the course. Presenting is a daily fact of life in the professional world, so I appreciate that Makena always weaves in presentations throughout the semester in her courses.
Being an economics course, the subject matter can get a little bit complicated so I thought the presented summaries of the readings really helped me to develop a better understanding of the readings. The small group discussions were also very helpful, since it was such a large class. The assignments helped to reinforce the lessons. The relevance and application in the real world is clearly evident.
The first two essays were the most valuable for me. At first they seemed impossible, but as my understanding grew the more I researched and got into the topic. Out of everything else we did in the course, this is what really helped attain a grasp over the material.
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The weekly presentations were too long. I think there should be a stricter time limit because it got boring after a certain amount of time.
The three assignments paper
The majority of class time was taken up by presentations from my peers. While I learned from some of these presentations, others were difficult to understand, very basic, and/or confusing (which is understandable as many of us were learning the material for the first time and have no prior experience teaching). It was difficult to sit through student lectures each class without knowing what I would be able to learn from them. Often, the time in class was not helpful for learning class material and instead consisted only a brief repetition of the readings.
class size too large
n/a
Some of the student presentations were just ok...
Every aspect of the information was valuable, this is the stuff you need to know in order to do well in the field of urban and regional planning.
Too many readings. Also, having to rush order the textbooks at the beginning of the semester was stressful and made it feel as though we were having to catch up from the very beginning. Too many essays.
I found the three writing assignments unnecessarily cumbersome and lengthy. I think the class content could have been better integrated into the student's learning with shorter but more frequent assignments. I also found quite a few of the student presentations un-engaging and uninformative. I think the information may have been more personally engaging if I'd had to write short summaries of all of the chapters and readings myself. I felt that most of the course content I learned on my own, independent of the professor's teaching and class activities.
Can't think of any at this time.
Not much of the course was invaluable, however the first presentations are probably the least valuable. For how time consuming it is to put together a presentation to present one topic, it doesn't seem like you are learning any more about it then if you were to read the material.
student presentations every single day
Group presentations were frequently difficult to hear
Some of the weekly student presentations were a little dry or repetitive.
Although the presented summaries helped me to understand the subject matter better, it also took up a lot of time. It could be shortened, or the time limit should be more strictly enforced.
Student presentations... I'd rather hear Makena give a lecture on the material. I understand the value of developing our skills to summarize and present. But I think the class would have been more progressive without the student presentations.
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 24 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 12 (50%) 11 (46%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 24 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (42%) 14 (58%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 7 (29%) 16 (67%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 24 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 5 (21%) 18 (75%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 24 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 19 (79%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 5 (21%) 17 (71%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 24 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 19 (79%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 24 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 8 (33%) 14 (58%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 24 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 8 (33%) 14 (58%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 24 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 9 (38%) 12 (50%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I think relating the material to current events, along with discussions about those current events would help make the class more interesting.
She did very well in leading the class
I would have strongly preferred more direct teaching and discussion on the part of the instructor and TA, and I feel that I would have gotten a lot more out of the class if this was the case. This is a suggestion only for improving the course structure, because I think very highly of Dr. Coffman's teaching style and methods. I was only disappointed and how infrequently she lead lectures and discussion.
the directions for the essays were sometimes unclear, but thank you for your willingness to take time to clarify in person
None, great class, great instructor!
I cant think of any way the course can be improved upon, the class size was large and yet we were all able to engage.
Perhaps more guidance with the essays, particularly the first essay. Models would have been helpful from the beginning. Two (instead of three) essays would have been more manageable. Perhaps having the guest speakers connect more clearly to the topics and concepts from class. More specific local examples?
I found the continual updates of the syllabus somewhat difficult to manage, and I found some of the journal readings somewhat irrelevant and difficult to digest. Suggestions could be to have students suggest readings for topics and to encourage more group work and fewer student led content presentations. I would also suggest that the three "short essays" be re-considered as 10-12 pages with a minimum of 6 peer-reviewed articles is not short nor has the course work required in this class been comparable to the course work required in any of the three other classes I am taking. I would suggest smaller and more frequent assignments, and I would suggest a greater emphasis on content learning rather than content presentation.
It is the student's responsibility to get the most they can out of the course. I would have liked a few more written comments on my essays, particularly re areas that were strong and those that needed improvement. It was hard for me to assess if I was "getting" it.
Not much needed for improvement - see above.
Did not appreciate the due dates for the 3 long paper assignments to be so close together
Less time on class presentations, more lecture and class discussions. Presentation practice is valuable, but I honestly learned more from Makena's lectures than I did from the the group presentations that I frequently could not hear or follow very well.
I have had Makena as an instructor for a few classes. She is one of DURP's best professors. She communicates in a very clear manner so that expectations of the course are understood. She is extremely organized and well prepared for every class. Its obvious that Makena is very intelligent and an expert in economic issues.
I've said it before and I will say it again: Makena is one of the best professors in this department. She is a complete asset and I hope she's in line to be the next Department Chair. Here's why Makena's great: First, she is known for being a "rigorous" professor, which I think is great. I've taken too many classes in DURP that I did not feel were rigorous at all. I like that Makena asks more of her students. Second, Makena structures her classes (I've been in 3 now) to include guest speakers, small group discussion, and peer presentations throughout the term. This really keeps the energy up everyday and gets people interacting--which is key as a professional urban planner. Third, for a professor, she has a lot of real world experience that she draws on for discussion. She is incredibly active outside the classroom on local policy and is able to bring that to the discussion. I find that other professors in DURP as so removed from what's happening on the ground. I also like that she relates a lot of conversations to Hawaii. Whereas other professors talk about S.E. Asia, etc, this is an urban planning program in Hawaii and we should talk about local issues even if students are from S.E. Asia and abroad. Makena is one of those professors that I feel is actually worth the money I pay in tuition. And this is in no way to put down any of the other professors. I just feel like she rises to the occasion everyday, is engaged with students, pushes the rigor. I appreciate it.
Makena is extremely knowledgeable on the subject and is able to communicate effectively. For the presented summaries of the readings, I think the time limit should be more strictly enforced, or an emphasis should be placed on a BRIEF summary of the readings. Some presentations would take up a large part of the class. Some of the time could also be spent reinforcing the topics with other activities or case studies outside of the readings.
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.61 24 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (38%) 14 (58%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 24 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 12 (50%) 12 (50%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 24 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (42%) 14 (58%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 24 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 10 (42%) 12 (50%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.5 24 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 10 (42%) 13 (54%)
34. Other comments:
This is an interesting course to learn about urban economics
Although I wasn't completely satisfied with the class structure, I think very highly of Dr. Coffman -she is intelligent, kind, understanding, friendly, and an asset to students. I would take a class from her in the future.
I feel that writing essays facilitates much greater learning than tests.
- Texts were great - Really liked the student summaries - Approachable, responsive, clear direction - great. - Class size could have been a detriment but actually helped facilitate participation via small group discussions. - Same goes for Brian -great TA!
3 papers is a little much. Perhaps it would be better to start with a quiz/exam on the basics then have 1 or 2 papers...
Class size was too large, but was well managed in spite of this fact. As a required class, it should be offered more often.
Well done Makena.
It would be great to learn more about the recent development in natural capital, ecosystem services, and biodiversity valuation processes and systems, and other alternative economic paradigm, such as ecological economic.
This class was very useful and intellectually stimulating! I really appreciate the skills and knowledge this class has given me. Thank you!
I registered for this class with the assumption it was an economic policy analysis class, but I feel that a much greater emphasis was put on the principles of microeconomics rather than policy or analysis.
none
This course should be offered more frequently since it is a core requirement. Because it won't be offered again until Spring 2015, the class size this semester was significant, the room was crowded, and presentations were unwieldy.
I was really not looking forward to taking this course and had little interest in economics. However, I'm actually very glad that I completed this course and expanded my understanding of economic issues. I can see how it will help me as a planner. It is great to have a new appreciation of the topic.
Excessive reading, otherwise spectacular.
It was a challenge! But I learned a lot.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN625, Fall 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 625 - Climate, Energy & Food Crn (Section): 79478 (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 10 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (90%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.2 10 0.42 Freq(%) 8 (80%) 2 (20%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 5 (50%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 1.06 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 6 (60%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 10 1.1 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 10 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 10 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.9 10 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 3 (30%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 10 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 10 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 1 (10%) 6 (60%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Sharing the knowledge and experience from different Universities.
Guest speakers and their topics (which were very current with the best available science)
Guest speakers from UHM and Sea Grant.
The lectures were great. The moodle discussions were also a great way to keep the conversation going outside of the classroom and with other students at the other universities abroad.
A lot of expert presenters.
The ability to use teleconferencing and gain an understanding of what other colleges were thinking relating to global issues and the lineup of guest lecturers was fantastic/
The web conference where students from all around are able to communicate
loved the format, we had some great presentations and speakers this semester and it was great to have so many international perspectives join us.
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The length of the course can be very draining and the post-lecture discussions were very interesting, but difficult to get a word in. I had a hard time contributing to discussions because I felt intimidated by the assertiveness and experience of the other students. Maybe small group discussions would have eased the conversations for me and other quieter students.
Some of the presentations due to technical difficulties.
Topics did not flow. A lot of the presenters focused on the problems more than evaluating their solutions.
All were valuable.
I felt the moodle blog forum didnt really create the best platform for students to engage with other universities. I would have loved to have some small group discussions with both the students in my class and the students at the other universities. Maybe try a chatroom platform instead?
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 10 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 5 (50%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 5 (50%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 6 (60%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 10 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 5 (50%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
No
Use of small group discussions in the post-lecture time Maybe an off-campus excursion to change up the routine (may be difficult with the video conferencing, but could be interesting) Readings about the places where the other universities are located- local issues that may be affecting them
The only thing that made some of the lectures hard to hear were some audio problems from the live feed. Nothing could be done about this on our end however.
Maybe have more smaller assignments so that the grading can be divided and not let for the final assignment..
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.5 10 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 10 1.1 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.2 10 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%)
34. Other comments:
Thanks Makena for hard efforts
I have really enjoyed being part of a "global" course. The broad range of topics made me feel much more in-tune with current events. Mahalo!
More focus on positive future vision(s) and narratives, example of change process/how to build a social movement, alternative economic systems/ideas (steady-state economy), more highlight of global grassroots initiatives tackling energy and climate challenge (i.e. Transition Town movement)â?¦ etc. Overall very innovative class format.
Thank you!
A very interesting semester.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN751, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 751 - Planning Practicum Crn (Section): 83547 (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 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 1 (20%) 3 (60%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The field of transportation planning now fascinates me with its many facets and angles. This course helped develop that fascination.
Thinking hard and carefully
Makena's feedback
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Group work was frustrating but necessary.
No
Working with International students can really slow down the entire class. I'm not sure how this is dealt with across the campus, but I feel their level of language and subject matter comprehension really put other students at a disadvantage. Seems like professors need to spend more time with international students or more tutoring should be offered?
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 1.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 5 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 3 (60%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 5 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 3 (60%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 5 1.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Makena is a great professor and a real asset to UHM. Her teaching style fits a practicum perfectly.
None
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.6 5 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 4 (80%)
34. Other comments:
Great course! Now I just hope we deliver a similarly great product.
Perfect performance.
Makena is one of the best professors in the department and, I believe, it's because she asks a lot of the students and really "ups" the rigor. Which I think is needed at DURP. She asks the hard questions all professors should be asking.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN601, Fall 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 601 - Planning Methods Crn (Section): 78609 (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 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 6 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%) 2 (33%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 6 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%) 1 (17%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 6 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 6 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%) 1 (17%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%) 2 (33%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
GERMAINE!!! ahhhh thank you for having office hours
developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Writing the notes described by the teacher.
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
No
The midterms, I bombed them.
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 6 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 3 (50%) 2 (33%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 6 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%) 1 (17%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
You did a good job. Keep making it as relevant as possible. more math jokes!
Should change the office hour to another day because after meeting with Makena I need time to revise my paper.
The style is very headstrong and though motivation may be lacking by students to learn the subject matter the work put into the class helped me develop myself.
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.6 6 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)
34. Other comments:
Thank you for a good semester!
Dear Makena Thanks for your help. I really learn a lot from you. This class is very useful for my career. Best regards.
The knowledge crammed into one semester is ridiculous but understandable. It was interesting to be thrown into the deep end and told to sink or swim. I sank.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN625, Fall 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 625 - Climate, Energy & Food Crn (Section): 75133 (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 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%) 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 7 0.0 Freq(%) 6 (86%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%) 2 (29%)
15. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)
16. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
I very much appreciated the opportunity to hear the presentations from faculty members from participating universities in Tokyo, Okinawa, Samoa, Thailand. The presentations were varied, deeply intellectual, of interest, challenging, and consistent with the topic of climate change.
Video conference with several other universities and moodle interaction. Also the discussion afterwards is very interesting and educative.
Everything I learned so far are most valuable. I loved the lecture presented by faculty from Samoa, University of Ryukyu's,UNU and University of Hawaii. Most valuable course was energy consumption from a teacher from Ryuku's, Food security from UH teacher.
The class discussion.
The most valuable and unique part of this course is that we get to learn from other professors (i.e. UN University, Waseda Univ. etc.). This gives us the opportunity to examine and take into consideration other insights. Professor Coffman is also amazing instructor! She's very helpful and always willing to help us out the best she can.
17. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
This may be an irrelevant observation, but I found it to be of a source of annoyance when students brought in laptops and used them for other purposes during class (doing Facebook, checking emails). I observe that, there were times when we would discuss the reading materials assigned the previous week, and that was great, but most of the time, we didn't. I attribute this to the fact that we have much to do in our class time (1 hour for presentation, 30 minutes for Q&A, 30 minutes for updates/discussion). Since there is no final exam, I'm not sure when/how doing these reading assignments would be accounted for.
none.
Difficulty understanding speakers over the conference call system.
18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
19. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
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%)
20. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
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%)
21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
22. The instructor treated students fairly.
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%)
23. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
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%)
24. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
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%)
25. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)
26. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
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%)
27. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
28. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I would like for there to be an increase in the time spent for class discussion (following the presentation or an assignment on Moodle). To accommodate this, perhaps consider shortening the presentation to 30-45 minutes.
more discussions and reading articles.
- To find partnership with Universities from Africa. -We need to learn and share experience all over the world and not only Asia and America.
Listening to speakers over the conference call system was difficult and distracting. More local speakers are desirable.
This class is awesome! I wouldn't change it any other way.
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
30. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
31. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
32. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
33. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.5 7 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
34. Other comments:
I find Makena to be an articulate speaker and a highly competent instructor. The topic of climate change is not easy to disseminate and she has done a great job explaining concepts, introducing relevant reading assignments, and exposing us to different perspectives by way of participating in the Asia Pacific Institute (and this way of participatory learning). This was a great class to be a part of.
none
I love the course.
Dr. Coffman can engage the class and is organized. She is also very nice and approachable to students. She gives constructive criticisms that encourages students to improve without feeling penalized.
I love this call and i will definitely recommend it to another student!

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN601, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 601 - Planning Methods Crn (Section): 86434 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 24 1.07 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 7 (29%) 13 (54%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.92 24 1.38 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 7 (29%) 11 (46%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.71 24 1.4 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 2 (8%) 3 (13%) 7 (29%) 9 (38%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.58 24 1.41 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 3 (13%) 3 (13%) 7 (29%) 8 (33%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.58 24 1.47 Freq(%) 4 (17%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 8 (33%) 8 (33%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.46 24 1.38 Freq(%) 4 (17%) 1 (4%) 5 (21%) 8 (33%) 6 (25%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.63 24 1.47 Freq(%) 4 (17%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 6 (25%) 9 (38%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 24 1.29 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 5 (21%) 6 (25%) 9 (38%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.42 24 1.53 Freq(%) 4 (17%) 4 (17%) 2 (8%) 6 (25%) 8 (33%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.78 23 1.41 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 5 (22%) 10 (43%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 24 1.17 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 8 (33%) 12 (50%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.65 23 1.27 Freq(%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) 5 (22%) 7 (30%) 7 (30%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 24 1.23 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 8 (33%) 12 (50%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Problem sets
Assignments and guidance.
both of the text books were useful, study groups were very useful
Statistical methodology to analysis and interpret data.
Learning how to do quantitative research as oppose to qualitative.
the second half of the course was especially valuable, any application to planning and policy was most valuable
Gaining a basic understanding of statistics.
Learning skills to understand statistics
I think cleaning data and figuring out which variables are most important is probably the most useful skill we learned in the course, however it was also probably the most glossed over by the instructor.
The homework was the most helpful part of the class. WIth a basic explanation of the theory, the equations used in the homework made sense when using real world problems and questions. In order to do well on the exams you must have understood the homework very well.
For sure the analysis of the real world data set provided by our professor was awesome and should definitely be repeated in the future. I think the professor's review session right before the exam helped. Also the problem sets were useful.
No comments.
Experience with the concepts and SPSS.
Practically way in teaching
The homework assignments were critical to re-enforcing class lectures. Also, the mid-term was excellent...the process of studying and taking the exam helped to broaden my understanding of the concepts.
Problem Set..
learning the language of economists..
Dr. Coffman was able to explain highly complex subject matters in the simplest form, which was so helpful for me to understand the materials. She effectively pointed out the most important concepts and explained in non-abstract, practical manner. Many statisticians lack this critical ability as they are just very happy staying in the abstract, esoteric world... Good for their ego but they utterly fail as an educator.
15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Middle and final exam
none.
The final paper is horrific. It seems completely unrelated to the first part of the class, but maybe because I'm not understanding the paper requirements. The review of the problem sets in class seemed a waste of time, as we had just spent the previous week struggling through them.
Knowing which formula to apply was tricky in the problem sets. Moreover, the language of math (in this case statistics) was often difficult to digest and regurgitate.
the format and sequence of the class was hard to follow.
None.
lab class
Learning how to do the problems by hand was not useful in teaching us about concepts, and did not properly prepare us how to work with the data and develop a final paper. Overall this class was a huge disappointment because methods were overshadowed by other aspects.
The theory taught in class, while necessary, took up too much time and was too similar to what was written in the textbook. If you read the book, than nothing was really gained from the class unless you didn't understand something. Most of the class time was just spent copying notes from paper to the board and then to our papers. This class time could have been better spent by using more class time doing problems similar to the homework questions to give people more exposure to setting up the equations that were needed for the exams and homework. Notes could just be put on a a projector or put on a powerpoint slide and then used over and over again rather than writing everything on the board everyday.
Anything not on the final exam was useless. I did not do any of the readings either.
No comments.
The first half of the class was completely divorced from the latter half. I feel like I spent so much time stressing and cramming to learn the statistics concepts for the purpose of completing the homework assignments and the mid term and final, and I don't feel like most of it was helpful in writing the final paper. I feel like I was not prepared for the paper, and if I had known sooner what it would take for me to complete the final paper well, I would have taken my own time to learn the things that I needed to know. For instance, I received no explanation whatsoever about how to complete my literature review for the purpose of my paper. I needed more help and explanation about how to read and pick out variables from the literature that would be helpful for me to use to run my regressions. I also needed more explanation about what was expected from the paper. I needed to know what subjects needed to be covered and how to do so, and what the who point of the paper itself is! I feel like the paper was really treated as an after thought, yet it makes up the bulk of my final grade! Also, less time should be spent working things out by hand. I understand the necessity of knowing what the computer is doing, but the focus of the course should be more about professional development and less about torturing students with skills that are not actually used.
None
too much busy work, not enough emphasis on knowledge transfer.
I cannot think of any.
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.38 24 1.41 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 4 (17%) 5 (21%) 5 (21%) 7 (29%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.38 24 1.56 Freq(%) 5 (21%) 2 (8%) 4 (17%) 5 (21%) 8 (33%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.88 24 1.3 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 9 (38%) 9 (38%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.63 24 1.31 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 6 (25%) 2 (8%) 7 (29%) 8 (33%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 23 1.04 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 9 (39%) 11 (48%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.04 24 1.37 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 3 (13%) 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 13 (54%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 24 1.05 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 9 (38%) 11 (46%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.86 22 1.13 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (9%) 3 (14%) 9 (41%) 7 (32%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.21 24 1.02 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 7 (29%) 12 (50%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 24 1.32 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 8 (33%) 11 (46%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Discuss the concept more clearly and please teach the students how to implement the concept into the real world.
may be speaking little slower.
The teaching style of writing complete "book" definitions on the board left me lost at the actual meaning of many statistical concepts. Most effective classes tended to be when the professor moved past speaking on an elevated level and could distill ideas down with examples. The GA, Germaine, did an outstanding job!
it's not her, it's the course
I think, this course in most interesting and important course for URP.Course material and assignments are alright. but I think for term paper, we get less time as we had to learn SPSS and selecting variables for data analysis together. I think it should be better, if student can learn about to choose variable from the beginning of class. At the same time, before analyzing data for research, some assignment for SPSS class should be taught. at least one problem set with 4 problems should be given to student as they can learn how and why they need to conduct SPSS analysis. Then student can easily applied this knowledge in their own research.
The SPSS program can be just as confusing as well. However, I can see it being a tool that would be useful out in the field. Therefore, investing more time using SPSS will probably be more beneficial for students in the long run.
the course should be two times a week, with fewer students, in a better room. the material should be related to planning issues and there should be more time for discussion and reviewing material in class to make sure everyone is on the same page and understands. there should also be guidelines for the final paper with a list of what all should be included in terms of lit review and tables and discussion. the class felt awkward with timing before and after spring break...problem sets should not be due on same day as draft, and there should be more review time for final. may want to consider only having final paper and not final exam. extra credit would be nice too. the book (stats textbook) is not very good.
Suggest youtube videos or websites where students can review class material. Some are very interesting!
I's better to make lab assignmnets for learning skills to deal with SPSS
This course seems like it would be better suited to be taught in two segments. One dealing with statistics, and the other dealing with multivariate regressions and modeling. Of these, the second seems to provide more useful skills and could incorporate current research and articles as cases to discuss. If the course cannot be split it could at least benefit from having all hand work completed (including the final) before jumping into the lit review, data cleaning and paper. It would also be quite useful to go over how to do a lit review, process, and determining variables as a content component of the class rather than just having the expectation that people know how to do it.
More class time should be spent doing problems on the board, possibly giving students some time (5 mins) to think critically about the question being asked and then going over the setup and math with the class as a whole. Setting up the equation to use for each question is the hardest part and only doing one of each type of question on the homework is not enough to get people comfortable setting up the problems. I don't really want to advocate for more homework problems because I felt the length was sufficient for each problem set but students more practice with homework questions to give people more exposure to setting up the equations that was needed for the exams and homework. Sometimes it was very tedious to go through the entirety of the homework by writing everything on the board. An answer sheet on a projector would have been sufficient and the people could ask specific questions about problems they had trouble with. Since Germaine helped many students through the homework's she probably had a good idea of where students were having trouble and could direct the homework answer sessions more pointedly.
The professor simply needs to be more available. There were multiple times throughout the year I tried to reach her and she was in meetings. She has no office hours also. This would be fine if she responded promptly to emails, but if her meetings are getting in the way of her teaching she should stop having so many meetings. Also, she shoved all the work on the problem sets onto her TA which resulted in it being really hard to get help on the problem set as only one of our two teachers could answer any questions. She needs to be more involved with the problem sets and the class.
No comments.
Makena, I really like you as a person. I just feel like this course missed its mark. I think some serious revision to the course is necessary. I understand that you do enjoy this subject matter and as enjoy teaching this course, however you must find more approaches for teaching 601. I think you must understand that this information is not easy for everyone to understand and retain. Please try to make this course and the course content more accessible to everyone. I really want to be able to learn this information, and have a strong understanding of it, and I just was not able to achieve that with the course as it was. Please find a way to teach to a broader audience, and try to accommodate the learning capacity of people who are not familiar with this information and those, like myself, that do not have a knack for it either!
Makena is an excellent instructor that knows the subject matter very well. She is clear about expectations and assignments. Little things like ensuring all students can view the board and hear her are really important. Changing the classroom to better fit the lecture style was helpful. Also, she communicates the subject matter very well and in different ways. She is open and patient to questions.
Please describe briefly about the application of statistics in the field of planning. Please raise various cases and circumstances in implying planning mthod and statistics. Please give introduction in how to understand other method / advanced technique of statistics, or introduction for another software, etc...
the teacher is passionate about the subjects and seems to meaningfully want to support her students as much as she can. while everyone agrees she is a brilliant mind and researcher, it is clear she has no training in teaching nor developed the capacity to transfer ideas to her students. her heart is in the right place but teaching is much more than being smart. it requires meaningfully understanding the perspectives of those that don't understand the subject area, giving examples upon examples that help to interest people and make the subject area memorable. conveying to students how smart she is, is not enough and rather, people find it condescending. I truly respect her drive and her devotion to the subject area. if she could learn to connect with her students by connecting intellectually and as a mentor figure, she would be on her way to a tremendous career. overall DURP should understand how to turn brilliant researchers into inspiring educators. this is a key missing link across all the new incoming faculty.
Maybe a little more time on explaining the statistical analysis process would be helpful.
27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.92 24 1.1 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 3 (13%) 8 (33%) 9 (38%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.04 24 1.27 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 2 (8%) 0 (0%) 9 (38%) 11 (46%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 23 1.04 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 6 (26%) 12 (52%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.04 24 1.23 Freq(%) 2 (8%) 1 (4%) 2 (8%) 8 (33%) 11 (46%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.67 24 1.31 Freq(%) 3 (13%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) 9 (38%) 7 (29%)
32. Other comments:
very useful and knowledgeable course.
really need further explanation of the final paper- a mention of it in class isn't enough. A break down of what we're doing and why, how we should approach it, how to best tackle a lit review, etc. Having the class twice a week might help too.
N/A
makena is very giving of her time in and out of class. the TA was also helpful. wording on problem sets and final should be carefully considered to not cause confusion that leads to point deduction when the concept is generally understood. also, the mid term should not cover things that were only taught during the class before and the answers to the PS on that topic (pooled and two treatments) were sent the night before the test.
Thanks
The class might be better suited to two 1.5 hour sessions a week rather than one 3 hour block of time.
No comments.
Though I rated the instructor as "poor", that is only for my experience in this class, and not in any way reflective of her as a person or as an instructor for other courses. To the Department: Please make a effort to revise this class in any way you think might be most successful! The point of the course is for the students to gain an understanding of the material and content for professional development, please find a way to accomplish this!
an helpful course
I think a homework assignment on using SPSS (maybe a sample data set) would have been helpful... to better prepare fot the term project.
I would like to take note on our TA, Germaine. She was the most excellent TA I have ever had in my life... She was ALWAYS available for us and was immensely helpful every single time we approached her. Given the workload she has, I don't know how she manages to keep smiling all the time... Germaine is so highly professional and a wonderful person. She deserves more TA appointments.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN620, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 620 - Environmental Policies/Program Crn (Section): 86436 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 6 (75%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 8 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 8 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 5 (63%) 2 (25%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.63 8 1.19 Freq(%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 5 (63%) 1 (13%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.88 8 1.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Various topics are discussed in the class. I have chances to write and understand more about the fields that we are interested in. Presentations in the certain time give me experience to interpret my understanding and knowledge about the topic.
I feel the presentation portion of the class to be the most valuable. By this I mean both the guest presenters and the personal presentations.
Guest speakers exemplified variation in subject matter and experiences.
Expanding my knowledge on environmental issues related to politics helped me understand the political system a little bit better.
It covered a lot of topics relevant to environmental planning/policies, which broadened my understanding on these areas. I also liked the economic analysis of environmental policies, which makes me more rational when thinking about a policy. The presentations given by the professors were amazing. I enjoyed the policy briefs as well.
I loved the broad range of environmental topics covered. The speakers were awesome and it was great to meet people who are actually in the field doing the work, besides academics which only give the theory behind it with no application.
Very good incorporation of working professional experiences in topic presentations
The readings
15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
No
There was nothing about this class that seemed to be less than valuable. Of the components I would say the readings were not always of such great importance because the presenters were good at introducing us to their topic of interest. I don't mean to say that the readings were not good only that they were not one hundred percent necessary to absorb the true value of the course.
Jumping from topic to topic made the class seem disjointed at times. The summary of the environmental planning process given on the last day of class would have been useful to have and discuss each class. It would have created a "road map" for students.
All aspects of this course were valuable.
Nothing
Evan though topics were of great interest, the content presented did not provide a very good base line overview of foundational environmental policy before moving into the favored topics of the Professor. Student topic presentations provided hit or miss insight. For a "environmental" distribution course it had somewhat limited focus (slanted to energy policy & methods)
The lectures
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 8 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 6 (75%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 8 1.13 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
No
The room we were in did not lend itself so well to discussion as the table was long and rectangular - potentially find a room with a more circular table so as to encourage more crossfire. Makena did a good job getting students to enter into the conversation even if she had to work harder at it than she should have to in a graduate level course. It seems people didn't always want to participate and she remained patient and effectively probed the class so as to draw out a variety of responses. All this in the rectangular setup proves that in a better setting she might truly shine as the quality professor she obviously is.
I appreciated the thorough remarks and editing comments on the papers I wrote. This helped me gain confidence and support to improve my writing skills. All of the topics were interesting; however, it may have been better if the topic choices were not so broad. I found it difficult to choose topics for the papers. Also, not having much of a back round in politics, maybe getting a better understanding of politics in general would have been helpful. Sometimes, I felt like I was in law school.
If you can collect these topics to the situation in Asia-Pacific, not only in the context of U.S., that would be great!
Everything was great. Again, it was great to see speakers who do the work, but at the same time the class didn't teach us much about doing the work either. I feel that I won't ever get a chance to learn how to do environmental planning until I get a job doing it.
A lot of good case study but had hoped for more emphasis on the big policy foundations - more comprehensive overview of Key environmental policy acts - not hit or miss discovery.
27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 8 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (75%) 2 (25%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 8 1.06 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.25 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (75%) 2 (25%)
32. Other comments:
No
Thanks for putting up with me - I took on too many classes this semester and feel I was unable to pay as close attention to the class as I would have liked. Any shortcomings are solely attributable to myself - you are an understanding and highly intelligent individual and your viewpoints almost always settled deep to the root of the issues at hand. I thank you for allowing me to be a part of your class and I wish you the best of luck in all of your future endeavors.
Policy briefs and elevator speeches were a great exercise. Forcing students to practice being succinct, yet informative, was very much worthwhile.
Makena is a very good professor; and was very helpful and supportive during and outside of class.
It was one of the best classes I have taken from DURP. We got a lot of chances to discuss with different knowledgeable professors, which expanded our understanding greatly.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN625, Fall 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 625 - Environmental Planning Crn (Section): 75656 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%) 9 (69%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 12 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 4 (33%) 6 (50%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 13 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%) 4 (31%) 5 (38%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.08 13 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 5 (38%) 5 (38%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 6 (46%) 6 (46%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.08 13 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 4 (31%) 5 (38%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.15 13 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 6 (46%) 5 (38%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.85 13 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 4 (31%) 4 (31%) 4 (31%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.69 13 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 2 (15%) 7 (54%) 2 (15%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 6 (46%) 6 (46%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
I really liked the telecommunication aspect that comprised most of this class. It gave us a first hand experience with learning from other perspectives and cultures. This course was definitely unique to any I've taken before. The Moodle forum and page was also very helpful in allowing us to "converse" between our peers and access previous lectures/material; a great piece of technology application.
topics of food security and climate change, as well as the case studies. the video-cofference style is interesting and useful for knowledge and experience sharing
All contents and topic are very interesting. The most favorite for me is the "no impact week". I think it can effectively influence people to concern about how much their behavior impact the environment, and seriously try to change those behavior.
Opportunity to learn from various professors and experts from different universities.
practical contribution and being part of the course by actually being able to be an example of the Environmental issues like No impact week, Getting to know many audience from different parts of the world, at the same time, is an effective and most valuable asset of the course. It made me aware and confident in addressing and communicating cross country solutions for the any common and shared problems of my world among others. Getting lectures from diverse professors and speakers, including participating students makes this course a practical platform for academic and more of a medium to be ready for real professional world . issues brought into classes has actually given depth and extent in the subject matter.
I enjoy the vast array of topics covered in this class though it is hard to get an in-depth discussions or into details about policy regarding these topics.
Discussions and lectures from renowned scholars.
The teleconference format that includes multiple universities participating
The applicability of the theories and practices provided in the course to my future study and research.
Many presentation provided by well-known professors were extremely interesting. Class discussion was very successful too.
The class discussions following the lecture were very valuable.
different aspect of climate change
15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
NONE
Technical limitations at certain point.
With the presentation style of the class it is hard to see different sides to some of the topics that we are introduced to. It is great to hear presentations from some very knowledgeable professionals in the field but it seems that most of the presenters are coming from UH and it would be possible to just record the presentations from other universities and just watch them in class. I haven't found the question and answer portion of the class very helpful at all. Usually it is just one person asking an extremely complicated three phase question that gets a generic answer. I doesn't seem worth all the technical coordination to get such little interaction. I would rather just watch the presentation on youtube the day prior to class and then use class time to discuss different perspectives and get guidance from the professor.
N/A
the assignments, they are too broad and generalized, so are the discussions. They don't challenge students to be thorough
None
The internet system was little bit complicated and took some time to figure them out. But I guess it could not avoid.
Principles, models and practices of climate change are not covered in this course.
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 5 (38%) 7 (54%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 8 (62%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 13 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 7 (54%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 8 (62%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.31 13 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 6 (46%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 3 (23%) 8 (62%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 5 (38%) 7 (54%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 8 (62%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 2 (15%) 8 (62%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Due to some unexpected and uncontrollable circumstances, we weren't able to cover some of the topics that I was really interested in which was kind of disappointing. Perhaps if the material for the missed lectures could be provided regardless of whether we had the presentation or not?
Nothing need to be improve.
I believe participating students in this course will somehow contribute to the field in near future, and as this class mostly theory and academic exercise, for me I see more of practical solutions like 'No impact week' as a very simple but very meaningful step that hits the core of the subject matter. So i would love see more of these kind of activities (In impact month or weeks) as a landmark of true environmental people who will definitely bring some change in future. There are some students who are taking disaster DMHA certificate, who also would like to have more of cross related classes between disaster and climate, as seemed to be very much related. Our professor is precise, effective and efficient. She should be taking more classes, as lectures from the other side of universities are sometime not clear or not much participating.
N/A
I satisfy with the lecture and material delivered by Dr. Makena.
Nothing that I can think of.
It will be great if there will be case studies of climate change mitigation and adaptation from different cities of the world because the greatest challenge for future urban planning is not only the understanding about the climate change and food security but also to develop effective adaptation to address challenges. Therefore, it will be great if instructor will include case studies of adaptation models and approaches from different cities of the world.
27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 13 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 4 (31%) 8 (62%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.54 13 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 7 (54%)
32. Other comments:
very great course and I learned a lot from the course.
I like this course. It influence me in many way to behave environmentally friendly ^__^.
None
Excellent, well-rounded course and instructor! Loved everything about it.

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN601, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 601 - Planning Methods Crn (Section): 87284 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 22 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (18%) 18 (82%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 22 0.8 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 6 (27%) 14 (64%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.09 22 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 5 (23%) 7 (32%) 9 (41%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.64 22 1.05 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (9%) 5 (23%) 10 (45%) 4 (18%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 22 1.03 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (9%) 3 (14%) 12 (55%) 4 (18%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.32 22 0.95 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (9%) 10 (45%) 7 (32%) 2 (9%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.18 22 1.22 Freq(%) 3 (14%) 3 (14%) 5 (23%) 9 (41%) 2 (9%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.52 21 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (10%) 10 (48%) 5 (24%) 4 (19%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.48 21 0.98 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 9 (43%) 7 (33%) 3 (14%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.71 21 1.1 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (10%) 4 (19%) 9 (43%) 5 (24%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 22 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) 6 (27%) 12 (55%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.24 21 1.0 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (10%) 12 (57%) 3 (14%) 3 (14%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.48 21 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 9 (43%) 11 (52%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Learning SPSS is the most valuable thing I take from this course. At the same time I feel like our time learning SPSS was limited and chaotic and I wish that I felt more confident with this type of analysis.
Term paper and hypothesis test
For me, exposure to the SPSS was the most valuable component of the course. I also liked the problem sets, but I feel that knowledge of the statistics program is relevant for employment and life.
The problem sets were valuable, since it allowed us to apply concepts from the class to problems. The final paper was also valuable, since these writing and analytical skills can be used in our professional careers.
Becoming familiar with SPSS allowed students to widen their professional skill sets. Also, the research design principles that were stressed in this class will definitely be valuable skills to have during the rest of my university career. Last, this class challenged and improved my critical thinking skills.
the mathematics aspect of it
Problem sets assigned immediately following lectures included questions that applied concepts we had just learned. Applying concepts while they were fresh helped to learn them faster.
Professor's enthusiasm about course material.
I like the concepts and the theories of statistics.
15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The course felt chaotic and disconnected. Maybe it is important to learn the math behind the regression models yet I do not see the connection between the math that we learned and our SPSS experience. The information all seems disconnected.
Too much focused on manual computations when we could make it in the program. We could have spent more time understanding or interpreting the results fromt the program rather than on the manual computation.
The course material itself is not applicable to the field of planning. The first portion of class focusing on learning the fundamentals did not translate into understanding of what any of those fundamentals meant in application during the project. I am unsure how any of the material covered is relevant to the practice of planning.
The math and statistical analysis were difficult to make sense of, or conceptualize.
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 22 0.94 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 7 (32%) 10 (45%) 4 (18%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 22 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 6 (27%) 7 (32%) 8 (36%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.05 22 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) 11 (50%) 7 (32%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.71 21 1.15 Freq(%) 1 (5%) 2 (10%) 5 (24%) 7 (33%) 6 (29%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 22 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (14%) 6 (27%) 13 (59%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 20 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (15%) 1 (5%) 7 (35%) 9 (45%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.15 20 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (20%) 9 (45%) 7 (35%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 21 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 12 (57%) 8 (38%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 22 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 19 (86%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.32 22 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 2 (9%) 8 (36%) 11 (50%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
This course felt like two different courses crammed in to one. I would rethink the goals of the course and focus on teaching that. Makena has a tendency to think that she is always clear and that by saying something once the class should just get it when this is not always the case. Sometimes Makena comes across as condescending. Maybe she believes she is being patient but is unaware of how she is coming across.
Shift focus from manual computation to the computer program, and build on students understanding of the concepts from there.
If this course could take more time to study SPSS, that would be great and very useful.
I would have liked maybe more time spent using/ learning SPSS, and less time spent doing the introductory statistics part of the class. I realise that this is difficult for class members who might have not done statistics before. But it would be really great if there was a class that was heavy-SPSS content. Maybe there should be a pre-requirement in some basic statistics for the class
Best professor in the department. Extremely helpful and really cares about her students. True asset to DURP.
I would suggest dropping the final, since the final paper allows us to apply skills we learned from class.
Integrating research design skills into the course earlier on may allow for students to better structure their final papers.
Makena needs to show more patience for students for whom math is a second language. Sometimes she read formulas really fast and in such a way as to be more hypnotic than informative.
Make sure topics are understood in their fundamentals and application within the profession of planning or research. Often it felt like the professor was making great stretches to make material relevant when there were no real ties. This created an environment of skepticism.
Either have a paper or final exam at the end of the semester, not both. The subject was challenging enough as it is.
27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.45 22 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (14%) 6 (27%) 13 (59%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 22 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 4 (18%) 17 (77%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 22 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (14%) 5 (23%) 14 (64%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 22 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 8 (36%) 13 (59%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.0 22 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (9%) 4 (18%) 8 (36%) 8 (36%)
32. Other comments:
I wish that the we spent more time learning the skills that we need out in the field as opposed to confusing things by trying to cram too much in a semester.
The more ending the course, the more interested I am
assignments are relevant to what is presented in class; I would have liked more SPSS assessments (as a proportion of total assessments). not more assessments in general. there are enough assessments.
Thanks, I learned a lot.
Makena is very smart and very motivated.
Spending more time in the lab going through examples would have been helpful. The examples that were conducted were done very hastily and students were rushing to keep up.
I have had 2 classes with Professors Coffman and feel she is one of the better Professors in DURP. She demonstrates enthusiasm for the class, is available during office hours and outside her office hours, has come into the office to assist me when she was not required to be on campus is available and responds via email. Her classes are tough and the content is very difficult and does make it very difficult to balance with other classes in addition she challenges the students and makes them work hard for their grade. Everyone says she is tough and some are intimidated but, I think she adds a level of standards to the department. As far as the class is concerned I am not sure how much information and content will be retained and used in the future due to alot is covered in one semester and most people do not have any statistical background. I am sure it will add familiarity to the subject though and a foundation for those of us who need it more in the future. Mahalo
None

Makenakauhaneol Coffman: PLAN620, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 620 - Environmental Policies/Program Crn (Section): 87286 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.72 18 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (28%) 13 (72%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 4 (22%) 12 (67%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 18 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (33%) 12 (67%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.39 18 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 7 (39%) 9 (50%)
5. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.39 18 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 6 (33%) 10 (56%)
6. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 18 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 3 (17%) 7 (39%) 7 (39%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 18 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 6 (33%) 10 (56%)
8. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.39 18 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 7 (39%) 9 (50%)
9. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 18 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 3 (17%) 5 (28%) 9 (50%)
10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.24 17 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (12%) 6 (35%) 8 (47%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 18 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 4 (22%) 11 (61%)
12. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.18 17 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (24%) 6 (35%) 7 (41%)
13. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 18 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 5 (28%) 11 (61%)
14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The discussion questions at the end of each class.
The feedback on assignments given by the instructor. The presentations by various professionals.
writing short essay policy briefs is the most valuable, I found a lot information to write them and silmutanously I learnt about the policies and issues
I thought learning the policy brief format was useful.
Having speakers come in from industry, public and private sectors was nice to get different viewpoints dealing with legislation.
The guest speakers were great.
Writing the policy briefs very challengig when doing it for the first time, but very valuable and should continue. This exercise deepened my thinking. The different talks by the guest speakers, broadens mind. And style of teaching by involving different speakers is very useful knowing how different institutions environmental issues such as climate change, energy,land etc. It gives students from other states/country a chance to learn directly on how Hawaii is dealing with the issues strenghs/weakeness, and what could be replicated to another state or not. The discussion in the class also very useful as it build-instudents ability to communicate, but boring when students hadnt read the papers and when student because of shyness (language barrier)do not want to speak.
The diverse topic of environmental policies with great insights from different professionals.
Makena can relate to the student and explain difficult subjects in a user friendly way. I enjoyed learning about State policy and the workings therein, something that me other courses have seemed to lack. Great course!
Guest lecturers
Guest speakers were well-informed and prepared. I liked the guest speaker format because each was an expert on the topic. They provided more in-depth information than a single professor may have teaching a broad variety of topics over the course of the term. I liked that all topics were relevant to real work in the field in Hawaii. It was a very practical course compared to some of the other theory-heavy courses in the department.
The array of lecturers that were brought into class allowed us to gain a broad understanding of both the complex nature of environmental problems, and the difficulties that can arise in developing policy solutions.
Policy briefs helped my writing skills. Group discussions (when they were lively). Generally being exposed to lot of different viewpoints from the guest speakers. Really enjoyed the EIS update, Jeff Mikulina, Maria Tome.
guest speakers offered new and interesting perspectives, albeit some presentations were more relevant to broader course goals than others
I really enjoyed the guest lectures. The classes also covered a wide range of related topics, and although we didn't get into too much detail, the class was a good overview.
Makena is an amazing professor! She is so well versed in the many aspect of policy analysis; her participation and involvement in the actual policy making and evaluation process gave great merit to her lessons. Guest speakers were an additional learning tool for students. The presentation of policy oriented projects and organizations proved to be beneficial in accentuating the realities, both good and bad, of policy development and implementation.
15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The student discussion of their policy papers. I would have preferred to use this time for discussion on environmental justice as originally planned.
No idea
The course relied too much on guest speakers and felt really disjointed. It sometimes seemed like the professor just used guest speakers so she wouldn't have to plan a structured course. How good a class was relied entirely on how good the speaker was. IT was basically just a bunch of people coming in to talk about what they were working on, but the course overall was not cohesive an learning goals were unclear.
I believe some of the economics that was taught in the beginning was least valuable. Really getting behind the basics of legislation would have been better in my opinion.
Some of the group discussions were not to useful.
The first part of the lecture - there was no introduction on terms used in the legislatures. It was difficult for me particulary to understand how the legislature worked from introduction of a bill until it becomes a law /not law.
The way for group discussion may be more efficient.
I did not find Gerry Marten's guest lecture to be very pertinent to the topics covered by this course.
group discussions - wasted time, especially when no one in your group did the reading
NA- I thought it was a good course!
The class was rather significant in size.
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (44%) 10 (56%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.61 18 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (39%) 11 (61%)
18. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 4 (22%) 12 (67%)
19. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 18 1.04 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 1 (6%) 2 (11%) 13 (72%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 18 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 17 (94%)
21. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 6 (33%) 11 (61%)
22. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.72 18 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (28%) 13 (72%)
23. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 18 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 4 (22%) 13 (72%)
24. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 18 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 14 (78%)
25. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 18 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 0 (0%) 4 (22%) 12 (67%)
26. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I enjoyed Dr. Coffman's lecture style and would have liked a few more opportunities to listen to her lectures.
I wish the core courses required for this PLANNING degree were actually about PLANNING. why are "policies and programs" distributions required rather than "environmental PLANNING" or "community PLANNING" or PLANNING in asia. Is this a degree in planning or in public policy? Of course, we did touch on planning issues, but it would have been a better class if the different studies that we learned about tied into some overall structure that addressed different strategies or theories of environmental planning. I would have gotten a lot more out it, and more out of the guest speakers that way.
Improving discussions during the class: Could be done by giving students on the first day of instruction, guidelines as what important points one should grab from reading the papers - summary of the paper (objectives, method, findings, conclusion), strenght and weaknesses of the paper. This will help students pay more attention in readings and be ready for discussion. Or, the questions for discussion could be sent together with the papers so that when students are reading will be ready for the discussion too. I think in this way will increase more participation in the class discussions. Introduction of terms used in the legislature: It would be useful to introduce the terms on the first two lectures if one won't be enough just to familiarize students with no background in these areas. However, the Legislature flow chart provided toward the middle of the course was still valuable but should have been provided on the first days.
The final summary of environmental assessment tools is really helpful. It may be more effective if the introduction can be provided at the beginning of the course.
Involve the class more in development of paper topics. Have peer feedback as well as professor feedback on paper drafts.
I felt that it was important for guest lecturers to stick to only an hour and a half presentation so that there was a ample time for student discussion afterward.
course objectives clearly stated, but I'm not sure they were achieved - would like to have seen more "local" examples of policy and programs make sure presentations from guest speakers are relevant to course - some were interesting but the point of having them present was sometimes lost on me less small group discussions - wastes time - discussion better stimulated when entire class able to listen to what other have to say would like to see less readings on the "economic" side of policy and more readings that deal directly with social aspects of planning, policy and environmental programs - I usually didn't pay much attention to the economic analysis portions of readings and as a result became disinterested in what the rest of the paper was about
27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.67 18 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 4 (22%) 13 (72%)
28. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 18 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 4 (22%) 13 (72%)
29. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.61 18 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 1 (6%) 14 (78%)
30. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 6 (33%) 11 (61%)
31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.39 18 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (11%) 4 (22%) 11 (61%)
32. Other comments:
Excellent course. Every class/topic was very interesting. Thank you!
I enjoyed the class very much. I learned important skills for my other papers and for my future carrier. You changed my academic life. Thank you very much and thanks to the little baby who also participated as you were teaching. Congratulations to you and the little one! And please keep up you good heart and love for your students. I like your constructive comments during assigments / papers. Please continue with that good heart.
Makena is an amazing teacher. I really learn a lot with her. She is knowledgeable, well-organized and patient. I want to take more courses with her. She is the best teacher at UH I have ever met.
Makena knows what she's talking about and gives appropriate constructive criticism. All students were encouraged to ask questions in the large group format. Topics were interesting and I like that expert speakers were brought in every week. That really kept a 4:30-7:00pm class awake.
Thank you
Great prof, very engaged and enthusiastic. Very responsive to student questions and requests. Really liked the guest speakers. Learned a lot.
Makena is a very talented instructor. DURP should be proud to have her as an educator.