eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Robert Paull

Available Survey Results

TPSS470, Spring 2013
BOT470L, TPSS470L, Spring 2011

Robert Paull: TPSS470, Spring 2013

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Tropical Plant & Soil Science
Course: TPSS 470 - Plant Physiology Crn (Section): 88695 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
4.56 9 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%) 1 (11%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.44 9 0.53 Freq(%) 5 (56%) 4 (44%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 1.01 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 9 1.39 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)
6. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 9 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
7. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)
8. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)
9. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 1.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 0 (0%) 6 (67%)
10. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
11. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
12. Assistance from the instructor outside the class was readily available.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
13. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 6 (67%)
14. Assignments are graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
15. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 9 1.54 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 6 (67%)
16. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 1.09 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)
17. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
18. Other comments:
Dr. Paull starts the class with some jokes or facts which creates environment for learning.
We seemed to rush through the material. I believe it would have been beneficial to have more class time to discuss the materials. Perhaps less slides and more conversation.
Class covers advanced concept in biochemistry that is way above the prerequisites of general chemistry and biology. Also the text book should be required since it really helps in understanding the concepts.
Dr. Paull is a wealth of physiological knowledge and experience. The course covers a lot of material but, that is the nature of the subject. More specific study questions would be helpful or perhaps just less...
Dr.Robert Paull is a great teacher and very humble person. I like his class very much and learnt lot of things in crop physiology.

Robert Paull: BOT470L, TPSS470L, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 470L - Plant Physiology Laboratory Crn (Section): 88741 (001)    
Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Tropical Plant & Soil Science
Course: TPSS 470L - Plant Physiology Laboratory Crn (Section): 88900 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
4.4 5 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 1 (20%) 10 (77%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.23 13 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 6 (46%) 5 (38%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.15 13 1.07 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 3 (60%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.08 13 0.95 Freq(%) 3 (23%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 3 (60%)
6. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.62 13 1.26 Freq(%) 3 (23%) 3 (23%) 4 (31%) 2 (15%) 1 (8%)
7. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 5 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 4 (31%)
8. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
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%)
9. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 5 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%)
10. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 5 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 1 (20%) 4 (31%) 3 (60%)
11. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.38 13 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
12. Assistance from the instructor outside the class was readily available.
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%)
13. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.4 5 1.67 Freq(%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%)
14. Assignments are graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.69 13 1.25 Freq(%) 2 (15%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 3 (23%) 3 (75%)
15. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.92 13 1.19 Freq(%) 2 (15%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
16. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 4 1.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (15%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
17. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
18. Other comments:
Frustrating to have so many unnecessary study questions pulled straight from the textbook website rather than have questions created by this instructor based on what was covered in lecture material. Very much wasted time trying to find answers to those irrelevant study questions and then studying them.
The prerequisites for this class should include cell and molecular biology, and biochemistry. If I did not take those classes prior to this class, I would be lost. The teaching style between the three instructors was like night and day which made the course even harder. The use of study guides distributed out more than days before the exam would have been nice as well. If a class has only one instructor listed in the class schedule it should be taught by one teacher, otherwise have it so in the class catalog.
Dr. Paull is a terrible lecturer. He digresses CONSTANTLY. He must not listen to people because when they would ask him questions he would not answer the question but talk about something else. This made it hard for me to go see him out of class because I didn't trust that he would listen to me and what I was having trouble understanding. His teaching style consisted of talking. He did not organize the material in any clear way. He did not effectively present the concepts but rather dumped very specific situations on us (versus concisely presenting a concept and then illustrating with examples). He fell asleep during our final presentations which I think is extremely rude. I did not learn half of what I could have from this course had he not been the instructor.
This class is very unorganized. Communication between TA, professors, and students is very poor.
Lectures on the blackboard were more effective than powerpoints.
Dr. Paull is one of the worst instructors I have ever had in college. He zooms through difficult material without understandable explanations. I felt like I was learning another language. The level at which he was teaching the course should have required molecular biology, organic chem, and genetics as pre-reqs. His study guides are not totally relevant to material covered and there is SO much material covered I feel like I didn't learn anything because I'm too busy trying to memorize too much material (pathways etc.) for me to really feel like I have a good understanding of the material that is presented. The class should either be broken up into 2 semesters or taught in a different way. WAY too much material is covered over the semester and WAY too much is expected for one test. Maybe more tests so there isn't so much to know for each exam.
The powerpoints and lectures were a little difficult to follow along with. He also often included cell and molecular biology sort of information but it wasn't a prereq for the the class. Other than those minor complaints, i really enjoy this class and both teachers. Paull was knowledgeable and enthusiastic about his subject matter and drew the students in as well.
Expectations of how labs and write up should be written should be addressed by the teacher BEFORE the assignment is turned in. All assignments were unclear. If all students have a question on the same thing then it should be the responsibility of the teacher to make sure everything is understood. There were too many times when the whole class was left to assume that an assignment was to be done a certain way. Prerequisites for this class do not reflect the material expected. Had I not taken statistics and ecology (both not required prior to taking BOT 470) I would have not been able to fully complete all the assignments. Prerequisites are made so students have an idea of what to expect from a class and what knowledge they should have coming into it. The knowledge required prior to entering BOT 470 lab is a lot more than the prerequisites.
Genetics, organic chemistry, and Cell and molecular biology are not requirements for this course. Despite this, Dr. Paull teaches this course as if we all have a thorough knowledge of these topics and just confuses the hell out of all of the students and makes it insanely hard to know what the heck he wants us to get out of his lectures. His "study questions" do nothing for us and in no way help us to focus our studying on specific important topics. He is completely unnecessary for this course. Dr. Barton is more than knowledgable to teach this course on her own. I dislike his teaching so much that I stopped going to his courses. I began teaching myself out of the book and rarely showing up to his lecture and it is the best thing I ever could have done for my grade in this course. And to let you know, I'm not a slacker who never shows up for class or one of the F students, I expect an A in this course, and I thank the book and Dr. Barton for that, not Dr. Paull. I don't like that he talks down to his students. He treats us like we're idiots, he blatantly hits on female students, his random tangents do not help to give real world examples to enrich the topic. They just waste time. I do not appreciate any of these demeaning or patronizing things in courses that I am spending THOUSANDS of dollars on. Next semester, either get a better co-teacher or let Dr. Barton teach by herself. Sorry to be so mean, but its how I feel. I respect his knowledge and his research credentials. His jokes are sometimes pretty funny and, when relevant, add some humor to a somewhat dry topic, but I don't think he's a good teacher or necessary for this course.
Very good
Just have one project to give students more time to plan. Maybe have more laboratory exercises about plant physiology.
If you're gonna make this class like a capstones class, make it worth more than 1 credit. The final project was way too rushed, the fast plants project took too much of our time. Minilabs were ineffective. Did not connect the machines to plant physiology and what we were learning enough. Class size was too big! Have two sessions. I did not enjoy this class.