University of Hawai'i eCAFE

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations

Instructor: Sterling Keeley

Available Survey Results

BOT 399, Fall 2012
BOT 669, Fall 2012
BOT 101, Spring 2011
BOT 600, Spring 2011
BOT 461, Fall 2010
BOT 698, Spring 2010
BOT 461, Fall 2009

Sterling Keeley: BOT 399, Fall 2012

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 399 - Botanical Problems	Crn (Section):	70455 (005)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
4.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
2.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

7. I developed enthusiasm about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

8. I was stimulated to discuss related topics outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

9. I try to relate what I learn in this course to my own experience.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

10. I performed up to my potential in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

11. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

12. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

No survey responses were found.

13. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

14. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

15. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

16. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

17. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

19. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

20. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

21. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?

Daring, careing, and smart.

22. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

23. The TA is effective.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

24. The TA gives clear and understandable explanations.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

25. The TA is enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

26. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

27. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

28. The TA was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

29. The TA was able to explain concepts in terms I could understand.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

30. The TA was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)	0 (0%)

31. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

32. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

33. The field trips were useful learning experiences.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

34. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

35. My grades accurately represent my performance in the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

36. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

No survey responses were found.

37. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

No survey responses were found.

38. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

39. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the TA's teaching style and methods?

No survey responses were found.

40. Global appraisal: considering everything how would you rate the overall effectiveness of this Teaching Assistant?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
5.0	1	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (100%)

41. Additional comments about your Teaching Assistant, please list.

No survey responses were found.

42. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Sterling Keeley: BOT 669, Fall 2012 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 669 - Molecular Phylogenetics & Evol	Crn (Section):	79713 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

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%)	6 (100%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.17	6	1.17	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	3 (50%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.83	6	1.6	Freq(%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	3 (50%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.5	6	1.05	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	2 (33%)	2 (33%)	1 (17%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.67	6	0.82	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	2 (33%)	1 (17%)

7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.5	6	0.84	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (67%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)

8. I was stimulated to discuss related topics outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.83	6	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	5 (83%)	0 (0%)

9. I enjoyed this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.5	6	0.84	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	4 (67%)	0 (0%)

10. I try to relate what I learn in this course to my own experience.

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%)

11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.17	6	1.17	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	3 (50%)

12. The instructor inspired me to be critical of ideas and materials.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.0	6	1.1	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	2 (33%)

13. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

Exposure to lots of good literature and techniques in the field.

The lab - the hardest part about phylogenetics is getting through the programs and understanding what they're doing. Also the guest speakers were wonderful!

The most valuable aspects included the final paper and presentation and reading and discussion of literature. Facilitated discussion led me to think of ideas that I may use to help me develop aspects of my own dissertation.

14. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.5	6	1.64	Freq(%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	2 (33%)

15. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.17	6	1.17	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	3 (50%)

16. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.

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%)

17. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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%)

18. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

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%)

19. Students frequently volunteer their own opinions.

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%)

20. One real strength of this course is the classroom discussion.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.75	4	1.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (25%)	1 (25%)	0 (0%)	2 (50%)

21. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.5	6	1.38	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	2 (33%)

22. The instructor makes the course difficult enough to be stimulating.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.0	6	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	2 (33%)	2 (33%)

23. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?

Energetic, sharp, on-the-go

professional, extremely helpful

24. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
3.8	5	1.3	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	1 (20%)	1 (20%)	2 (40%)

25. The TA is effective.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)	0 (0%)

26. The TA gives clear and understandable explanations.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.33	6	0.82	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	2 (33%)	3 (50%)	0 (0%)

27. The TA is friendly and accessible.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.5	6	0.84	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	4 (67%)	0 (0%)

28. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.83	6	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	5 (83%)	0 (0%)

29. The TA was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.5	6	0.84	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	4 (67%)	0 (0%)

30. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.2	5	1.1	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	3 (60%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)

31. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.17	6	0.98	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	1 (17%)	3 (50%)

32. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.

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%)

33. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

In the end, I liked very much our individual research projects, though they could have been less painful with a greater amount of course time spent in the lab, particularly in a computer lab doing analyses together.

Learning how to use new phylogenetic tools

Literature discussions

34. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
3.67	6	1.03	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	3 (50%)	1 (17%)

35. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the TA's teaching style and methods?

He was very good about being available and helpful if we got lost or anything while working on the labs. He also graded fairly and generally pretty quickly.

In general, the cheat sheets were good, though some of them lacked essential basic information like where to find programs, how to install, which file format to use. He was very enthusiastic about the field and obviously knowledgeable. As probably makes sense as he is a graduate student, he is knowledgeable enough so that sometime he failed to recognize how amateur many of us in the class were, and yet not experienced enough in the field to always be able to clearly explain subtleties.

Having a written step-by-step instruction for difficult analyses and programs.

The TA went through all methods while we watched, then did on our own.

36. Global appraisal: considering everything how would you rate the overall effectiveness of this Teaching Assistant?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.17	6	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (83%)	1 (17%)

37. Additional comments about your Teaching Assistant, please list.

Sometimes willing and able to help, sometimes impatient and not available.

THe lab should be the full three hours of the second weekly session. Also it should be held in a computer lab where everyone has access to all the programs and can be done as a class together.

38. Other comments:

There should be much more time spent in lab in this course. I did not find our discussions of abstracts particularly useful and think that time would be better spent in lab. Reading whole papers was useful and dissecting the methodologies more would have been useful. Reading the abstracts so frequently was not so useful. I would recommend more papers, less abstracts.

Sterling Keeley: BOT 101, Spring 2011 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 101 - General Botany	Crn (Section):	80424 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
2.42	33	1.35	Freq(%)	13 (39%)	4 (12%)	6 (18%)	9 (27%)	1 (3%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.52	33	0.51	Freq(%)	16 (48%)	17 (52%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.58	33	0.56	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (3%)	12 (36%)	20 (61%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.42	33	0.79	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (3%)	3 (9%)	10 (30%)	19 (58%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.85	33	1.25	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	4 (12%)	10 (30%)	13 (39%)

6. I performed up to my potential in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.64	33	1.08	Freq(%)	1 (3%)	3 (9%)	12 (36%)	8 (24%)	9 (27%)

7. I generally understood the material presented in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.67	33	1.19	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	6 (18%)	12 (36%)	9 (27%)

8. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.67	33	1.27	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	9 (27%)	6 (18%)	12 (36%)

9. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

Monocot vs Dicot

I'm a major, so t laid the foundation of my future education.

Understanding plants and their impact on human life and evolution can benefit society is so many ways.

Learning about things like diatemaceuous earth and other plant features really helped me with my own garden. Also gave me some ideas on ways I can better grow my own plants.

Better general understanding of plants, and how they are used in everyday life.

More knowledge of the natural world

a basic understanding of general botany

How to ripen fruits like bananas.

I broadened my perspectives on plants. Now, when I look at a plant, I see it in a scientific way.

Not much.

i have more knowlege of plants and what is inside them, could be beneficial in my art, kind of hoped to learn more about different flowers, the class was difficult, not fond of all the technical terms.

I can see plants in a different way now. I think about plants differently than I used to. I now understand why plants are the way they are.

nothing practical. But I did learn facts about plants and flowers I probably never would have learned if I didn't take this class.

I will never look at a plant the same anymore. Their unique design and structure on this planet amazes me.

Enjoyed learning about plants and their biology.

learn the basic ways plants work.

This botany class made me realize how complexity can be so interesting. I have learned so much about Botany that i never ever thought i would. My dad is also really interested in plants so it also made our relationship stronger which was really nice.

10. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.0	33	1.06	Freq(%)	1 (3%)	2 (6%)	6 (18%)	11 (33%)	13 (39%)

11. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.52	33	1.15	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	9 (27%)	11 (33%)	7 (21%)

12. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.59	32	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	13 (41%)	19 (59%)

13. The instructor has an interesting style of presentation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.45	33	1.3	Freq(%)	3 (9%)	5 (15%)	8 (24%)	8 (24%)	9 (27%)

14. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.97	33	0.88	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	2 (6%)	7 (21%)	14 (42%)	10 (30%)

15. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.06	33	1.22	Freq(%)	3 (9%)	9 (27%)	9 (27%)	7 (21%)	5 (15%)

16. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.67	33	1.22	Freq(%)	3 (9%)	3 (9%)	4 (12%)	15 (45%)	8 (24%)

17. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.7	33	1.21	Freq(%)	3 (9%)	3 (9%)	3 (9%)	16 (48%)	8 (24%)

18. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?

Ms. Frizzle!

This is one tough lady who knows her stuff (about botany).

Very intelligent Botanist. However, I think you sometimes forgot that we are new to botany and may not remember the little details as clearly as you do. When students in class ask questions you almost made them look stupid for not know the answers. A classroom is where people go to learn, so please remember to acknowledge questions, as simple or stupid as you may feel they are, with consideration that the student is new to botany.

Enthusiastic, knowledgeable, intelligent

chalkboards, bright clothing, and clanking jewelery

Straightforward, succinct.

enthusiastic, knowledgealbe

Knowlagable

Passionate, upbeat

Sterling Keeley is very old-school and unorganized. You can't understand her lectures very well when she writes on the board which is basically her own notes of the course material. It was very hard to understand and interpret the subject the way she taught it, and she needs to keep updated with the evolving technologies. Her handwriting and pictures on the board, were extremely difficult to read. Yet, if you questioned her, she gets easily offended. Its a hard course and she should have been more organized to help out her students.

stern unwelcoming impatient

botanist plant lover

vibrant knowledgble

Friendly, humorous.

spunky,charismatic

Energetic, knowledgeable, practical

informative friendly botanist

Amazing, weird, and very intelligent.

Smart but slightly condescending to her BOT 101 students.

condescending, unprofessional, knowledgeable

intelligent, talkative

Smart. Precise. Hard working

19. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
3.88	33	1.05	Freq(%)	1 (3%)	3 (9%)	5 (15%)	14 (42%)	10 (30%)

20. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.94	33	1.0	Freq(%)	1 (3%)	2 (6%)	5 (15%)	15 (45%)	10 (30%)

21. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.94	33	1.14	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	13 (39%)	12 (36%)

22. The course is so conducted that I know on a daily/weekly basis what is expected of me.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.15	33	0.76	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (3%)	4 (12%)	17 (52%)	11 (33%)

23. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.67	33	1.16	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	4 (12%)	5 (15%)	14 (42%)	8 (24%)

24. My grades accurately represent my performance in the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.82	33	0.98	Freq(%)	1 (3%)	2 (6%)	7 (21%)	15 (45%)	8 (24%)

25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
3.84	31	1.07	Freq(%)	2 (6%)	1 (3%)	5 (16%)	15 (48%)	8 (26%)

26. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

Prof. Keeley's lecture would be way better and easier to understand if she uses PowerPoint instead of writing and drawing things in the blackboard. Sometimes it gets blurry and not so easy to read and understand.

Sterling Keeley is a great instructor, but the course would have benefited from a higher expectation from students to attend the class. The class might be too large to enforce attendance, but if the professor and TAs made it known that participation is necessary, maybe we would have had fewer distractions from people walking in and out of class throughout the period.

The TA's should start having review sessions 2 weeks before the test rather than the week before or provide students some way to check their study guide. On both midterms I thought I did excellent on and it turned out to be just ok grades. I was unable to make the study sessions and even though I've read all the material I was still getting parts wrong. At least on the test that is.

Clarify what midterms will be about--there was some initial confusion because we were told there would be short answer questions, and then on the test there were NO short answers (only very tricky multiple choice questions).

during the lecture, use powerpoint. Writing on the board can be a little messy and hard to read her handwriting.

If a student is raising their hand they shouldn't be ignored which is what happened more than often.

- well-prepared power point slides will help the lecture go smoother and the concepts to be easily understood - the homework didn't help out at all, made extensive study guides with reviews of the homework which did not do me justice on the exams - lectures should be referenced to the book, it was an expensive book, and she hardly used it in her lectures

Make the test reflect on what was taught, not on what is expected to be known.

different instructor

The expectations for learning and exams were not clearly given.

This course could be improved if the class was smaller. This was my first time in a large lecture hall, and I donÊ»t learn so well in them.

Better study guides would have helped me prepare for the test. There was a lot of information to retain, so if we were given better ideas of what would be on the test, it would've helped out a lot.

I think that this course is pretty reasonable for an introductory course. However, this class does not teach anything that can't be learned in other classes, so something should be added to it to make it unique.

i think quizzes or section tests would be best. personally, I feel i would be better able to perform on tests if the content was grouped in smaller secions, not just only #1,2 midterms and a final for our entire grade, it doesn't give Any leeway for those who aren't the best test takers. homework may help but probably not that much in the end.

Have midterm exam review sessions at times that I can actually attend. I could never make the review sessions because I either had class or work, but I did okay on the exams anyway.

It was very difficult for an introductory course. Reducing amount of content and updating the lecture style would help students better understand the material.

more emphasis on main points. slightly simpler test questions

Not much of anything she made learning more interesting and fun.

Tests could be worded so that they can be understood, sometimes the questions just didn't make sense. Tests should be screened for typos.

everything was well presented and clear.

Botany can be a very complex subject to begin with, and the only thing we really earned points for was either the tests and the homework. It would help alot if there were more categories to balance out our grade and gain points somehow.

27. Other comments:

The accompanying lab to this course probably would have deepened my knowledge of the subject matter.

Study guides did not help, her lectures don't help and neither does reading because apparently we need to know in depth about the subject, something that we are supposed to automatically grasp.

Sterling Keeley commented in class about a students hairstyle. Saying the hairstyle was incompatible with learning. Very inappropriate and not conducive with a learning environment.

I really am not the best at remembering long scientific names of things, so maybe this wasn't the class for me, but it was still interesting,just not what i had expected

Interesting class to learn about plants and much more.

There were times when our TA would mention that what Mrs. Keeley said in class was incorrect.

Learned many things about plants.

Sterling Keeley: BOT 600, Spring 2011 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 600 - Grant Writing & Your Career	Crn (Section):	88744 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
5.0	8	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	8 (100%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.0	8	0.0	Freq(%)	8 (100%)	0 (0%)

3. 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%)

4. 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%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	8	0.46	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (25%)	6 (75%)

7. I learned to recognize quality work in this field.

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%)

8. I developed a set of overall values in this field.

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%)

9. I developed more confidence in my ability to communicate effectively through writing.

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%)

10. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.

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%)

11. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.

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%)

12. I developed a clearer sense of professional identity.

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%)

13. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	8	0.93	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (25%)	0 (0%)	6 (75%)

14. I performed up to my potential in this course.

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%)

15. The instructor inspired me to be critical of ideas and materials.

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%)

16. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

This was the best course I have had at the University of Hawaii. Dr. Keeley was very helpful in preparing us for submitting grants and our careers in science. Thanks Keeley!

The important components of a proposal that should be addressed and their placement within the proposal. State your significance early!

The chance to actually sit down and write out a significance statement and a teaching statement were great; they both give me a clearer vision of the research I am doing now and the career that I am striving for when I finish my graduate work.

I learned a lot about the process of applying for grants and what consistutes a good application. Dr. Keeley had wonderful comments and as difficult as it was to write each of these assignments I learned a lot in the process!

Lots of information that will help me in my future career as a scientist, which most graduates don't get from any other class.

revise, have my colleagues read my material and follow directions.

17. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

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%)

18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.25	8	1.04	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (13%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	4 (50%)

19. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

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%)

20. 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	0.74	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (13%)	1 (13%)	6 (75%)

21. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.

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. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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%)

23. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

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%)

24. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.

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%)

25. Feedback from other students about my written work was valuable.

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%)

26. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.43	7	0.98	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (29%)	0 (0%)	5 (71%)

27. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.5	6	0.84	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	1 (17%)	4 (67%)

28. The group work contributes significantly to 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%)

29. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

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%)

30. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

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%)

31. The course is highly recommended if it were taught by this instructor.

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%)

32. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.

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%)

33. My overall evaluation of this course is...

I thoroughly enjoyed the class and feel that I am better prepared to take upon submitting a proposal. I gained alot of insight into the overall process for an NSF style proposal and the criteria that needs to be addressed. A net benefit of this course what it required me to critically analyze the path of my graduate research. From this course I was able to identify the intellectual merit and broader impacts of my research in addition to strengthening the overall approach of my research than I originally intended prior to taking this course.

I thought this would have been a more useful class for advanced PhD students who have their research projects a little more solidified. It would have been helpful to discuss in detail the various writing assignments before we had to prepare the assignment, rather than the day we were turning them in. For example, we were told to write a teaching statement and provided with a few samples but not given much guidance beforehand. The day we were supposed to turn in our teaching statement, we had a lecture on the types of things that might go in a teaching statement, which would have been more helpful before doing all the writing. The same applies for several of our assignments, though it was still good to think about research statements, etc. and congeal things into written form.

I gained a lot of knowledge on the elements of a strong grant application through this class. My only recommendation is that more time be spent on the NSF DDIG. I think my DDIG could have greatly benefited from submission and revision of mutiple drafts. Maybe one extra week so we can receive comments from our peers and rework them into the final submission of the DDIG? I thought that the revision process for the GSO application was set up very well- mutiple drafts and a chance to revise writing before submitting the final version.

Great!! I learned a tremendous amount about how science works behind the scenes and feel confident that I could not put together a decent application (although I've changed my topic a couple times through the course already :) Dr. Keeley was great and I would (and have already) recommend this course to anyone interested in improving their writing and understanding of how funding in academia and beyond works!

Excellent course. It prepares you for your career in academia, and gives you a head start on some things that most graduates will not have.

Great course. Not only learned a lot about grant writing and was successful at receiving funding, but also learned about the hoops one has to jump through in order to achieve goals.

34. Other comments:

Dr. Keeley is an all-around very pleasant person, who communicates effectively and gives us current information about the topics she discusses in class. She is also comical, which brings a happy energy to the course. Her experiences that she shares also contains valuable life lessons for us all.

Sterling Keeley: BOT 461, Fall 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 461 - Systematics of Vascular Plants	Crn (Section):	70553 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

5. I developed enthusiasm about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

6. I enjoyed this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

7. I try to relate what I learn in this course to my own experience.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

8. I performed up to my potential in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.1	10	1.29	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	2 (20%)	1 (10%)	1 (10%)	6 (60%)

9. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

10. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

This course gave an outstanding overview of plant taxonomy and identification methods

The ability to identify plants in an everyday setting.

Being able to identify plant families on site; Keeping a good record of plant collections in field notebook; Pressing and drying specimens; Using a dichotomous key; Basic use of a GPS unit; Basically, all the basic botanical practices I will use throughout the rest of my undergraduate studies, graduate studies, and employment thereafter.

On sight Identification, familiarity with plants and morphology.

Just the knowledge of plants that i would never have expected, sure it was hard but it was worth it.

I learned a ton in this class and I use it every day. This is by far the most useful class any botanist can take with one of the best teachers and TAs.

I gained valuable knowledge about plants and identifying them on sight. I am also able to identify plants to the species level and also specific parts/terms related to plants.

The ability to have patience with tiny things. Confidence in my ability to dissect and identify mysterious flowers. Verbage to impress botanists and communicate easily in the field. Traits of plants that are common throughout families and thus knowledge that inspires ideas for research. I feel like a whole world has been opened up to me. Being able to catalog plants like this is like having a ladders in the jungle, turning it into a jungle gym I can climb around on, except in my mind. Before I would try to name trees, but only knew the important Polynesian introduced trees and plants. Now I can not know the exact species but narrow it down and so understand more about the plant without knowing its exact name, or maybe even I know its exact name. The field trips were very helpful and fun. The project gets you out and makes you apply your knowledge, it is really helpful, the whole time you are learning and you dont realize it.

Since I wish to go into ethnobotany, particularly in the tropics, I believe this course will help me identify plants in the field, as well as help me to understand their relationships to each other.

it is rare that i feel that everything i have learned in a class will benefit me in the future and in my desired career. great class!

11. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

12. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

13. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

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%)

14. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

15. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

16. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

17. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

18. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

19. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)	0 (0%)

20. The TA was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)	0 (0%)

21. The TA was able to explain concepts in terms I could understand.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)	0 (0%)

22. The TA was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)	0 (0%)

23. The instructional materials (e.g., texts, handouts, etc.) were relevant to course objectives.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

24. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

25. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	9	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	9 (100%)

26. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

27. My grades accurately represent my performance in the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.9	10	0.32	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	9 (90%)

28. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

Nothing

Its hard to say, it is a challenging course but without such rigorous training I would never feel comfortable calling myself a botanist.

There was a lot of misunderstanding with the final project that needs to be cleared up before next semester. A lot of this was due to phylogenetic revisions so its understandable, but it needs to be more clear next time around.

I felt like there wasn't enough time to complete/prepare. Other classes, work, responsibilities, etc make it difficult to meet deadlines. This course can be overwhelming.

The exams were too rushed. In identifying the plants on sight, I think letting us run through them twice would have been helpful. We needed twice as much time, or at least a third as much. The reason for this because sometimes it takes longer than a couple of minutes to pull the information forward in your mind that helps you to distinguish the plant family, so you will remember it and then if you got a chance to go through a second time, you would have the chance to say oh yes the information i recalled earlier is correctly placed right here with this plant in this answer, and the students' understanding and knowledge and concern would be best reflected in their grades this way. Maybe a little bit longer for people to go back and get a second look at ones they had trouble distinguishing.

Midnight guerrilla gardening.

29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

30. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the TA's teaching style and methods?

The TA was very approachable. She was easy to talk to, and always tried to help in any way possible.

Asking us questions rather than just telling us the answer. Bringing in live samples and encouraging that we examine them thoroughly.

I think that because she was able to take the course, she was able to relate to the student better, to find easier ways to study and sharing knowledge in a way that we could understand more clearly.

Very approachable and able to explain concepts. If she doesn't know the answer, she refers to the text book or other resources and finds them out ASAP. Great TA! A +++++

She made herself available and approachable. She also thoroughly explained concepts and made sense of confusing things. She is also very confident, knowledgeable and dependable. Thank you! :D

She was so patient and willing to walk through the keying process with us. She was non- judgmental, and also never gave the answer away. I liked how she stressed the importance of us going through the process even if we already knew the answer. In this way, we were prepared to do it on our own with mystery material once we were being examined. She also always had plenty of fresh material and good examples, and always seemed to be going through the learning process with us, even though she already knew, making sure to keep us on task. In this way I felt the importance of what we were doing and that our learning in this way was an essential part of becoming knowledgable in the field. I liked her serious attitude concerning plants and assignments, but also that she was kind and patient.

Good example of how to make the flash cards.

she explained material in a way that was easily understood. she was always helpful if you asked her a question.

31. Global appraisal: considering everything how would you rate the overall effectiveness of this Teaching Assistant?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
5.0	10	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (100%)

32. Other comments:

One of the most challenging, yet most rewarding courses I have taken. Gained such a vast amount of knowledge in only less than 4 months!

This was a tough class, but it was worth it. You learn so much from this class that I never even thought of. Professor Keeley is an excellent teacher and is very enthusiastic about the material

Keep on being Awesome Bot 461 team! Great course. Never ever ever get rid of this teacher and TA, they are gems amongst the botany faculty.

The knowledge one can gain in this course is very valuable and applicable to daily life! Definitely a worth while course!

We had fun and learned alot.

i really enjoyed this class. thank you dr. keeley and lara for the great class!

Sterling Keeley: BOT 698, Spring 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 698 - Grant Writing & Your Career	Crn (Section):	88445 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.92	12	0.29	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	11 (92%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (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
4.75	12	0.45	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (25%)	9 (75%)

5. I learned to recognize quality work in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (67%)

6. I developed a set of overall values in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	4 (33%)	7 (58%)

7. I developed more confidence in my ability to communicate effectively through writing.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.42	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	5 (42%)	6 (50%)

8. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.58	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	3 (25%)	8 (67%)

9. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (67%)

10. I developed a clearer sense of professional identity.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	12	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	0 (0%)	5 (42%)	6 (50%)

11. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.55	11	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (45%)	6 (55%)

12. I performed up to my potential in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	12	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	6 (50%)	5 (42%)

13. The instructor inspired me to be critical of ideas and materials.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.58	12	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (42%)	7 (58%)

14. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

Aspects that were beneficial included hands on editing/revising of other's work. This process was helpful as it required one to be critical of the writing structure of another's work. Additionally, the lengthy comments left by Dr. Keeley on all of the NSF style proposal were greatly beneficial to the betterment of my proposal overall. I believe that with these comments/recommendations, I will have a much greater chance at receiving the grant award if I were to correct and submit it to NSF for review. Much appreciation is given for the help!

Writing sections of our proposal then trading and editing others was very helpful in learning how to improve my own. Also, your edits were extremely helpful. The multiple examples of proposals, both successful and not, got me familiar with proposal language and writing styles. The guest speakers also brought great insight into the grants process.

Completing full drafts of various grants, cover letters, and statements was very helpful. I look forward to having a draft of these to revise before i submit them in the future.

Discussions

real world scenarios

I found it most helpful to receive comments back on our assignments, and going through the whole process of grant writing and review. It was also helpful to hear about the possible career paths and hearing from other students and professors.

Knowledge of a career in academics. The NSF-style grant proposal requirements/ procedures.

The course work and the exercises that we did in class were very good practice. But what was most valuable to me were the comments that I got on my work. It was obvious that Dr. Keeley spent a lot of time commenting and reading our work critically. I will really benefit from her input as well as those of my classmates.

I realize that I could understand 'what is the grant proposal?' and 'what I need to do for good proposal?' via this course. During the course, Dr. Keeley had given lots of serious advises and feedbacks for every student. Especially, the writing of NSF style grant proposal was very significant topic on this course so that student can improve skills about writing, submitting and reviewing for grant proposal. In addition, feedbacks of NSF proposal from Panel meeting were so important in order to figure out lacks of the proposal. Therefore, I am able to define and organize the concept for the grant proposal.

I liked that we were basically told the ins and outs of grant writing and the academic profession. It's like all the unwritten rules were laid out for us and that was invaluable.

15. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

Least Valuable- The symposium of professors that have received NSF funding previously. I hate to say that this was not beneficial. It was in many way. But, personally, I felt I did not gain much more out of this as I would have from a regular lecture (as they inevitably cover many points and are thorough).

I did not read through many of the handouts, but I think they will be useful materials to look back on in the future

Lectures

I found the whole class valuable, even if I won't need to use much of it until later!

Discussing ethics in a professional career.

I dont know.

During this course, I had learned lots of materials such as NSF style grant proposal, short intramural grant, short intramural grant, and the peer review system. I could not find out the least value from those materials because all of those were serious and important for me.

None.

16. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

I believe this course has greatly helped my thought process towards grant writing and likely has improved my chances of successfully submitting and receiving grant awards in the future.

It was useful to see all the components that were necessary to complete each assignment in terms of what a potential review panel or employer might be looking at.

Knowledge of real world mechanisms of grant writing and university processes

preparing of potentially usable documents and skills to go with them

I learned a lot that I can apply to grant writing and now have a draft to work with. I also have a better understanding of what it would mean to go into academia, and am considering whether or not I want to go into academia.

Knowledge of jobs in academia, improvement of grant writing, and understanding the process and difficulties associated with writing grants.

I gained a good insight into academia. I also learned a lot about the grant writing process and that I am capable of being successful at it. We were taught the skills and the steps to grant writing that will make us successful in the process. I think I also figured out that I do belong here and that I will make a good PhD. That will stay with me for a while:)

The writing of NSF style grant proposal was the most benefit for me from this course because NSF style grant proposal is required various factors such as intellectual merit, broader impact, management plan, and structure of budget. Those kinds of things were comprehensive requirements for proposal, and I need to figure out those requirements for good proposal. Thus, my skills regarding proposal had been improved via this course.

A better understanding of grant writing and the ins and outs of professional scientists.

17. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.58	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	3 (25%)	8 (67%)

18. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.42	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	5 (42%)	6 (50%)

19. The instructor seems knowledgeable in many areas.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

20. The instructor is sensitive to student difficulty with course work.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	12	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	6 (50%)	5 (42%)

21. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.55	11	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (45%)	6 (55%)

22. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

23. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	1 (8%)	10 (83%)

24. The instructor encourages constructive criticism.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	1 (8%)	10 (83%)

25. The instructor shows appreciation of my efforts to learn.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

26. The instructor encouraged class discussion.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	2 (17%)	9 (75%)

27. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	1 (8%)	10 (83%)

28. Feedback from other students about my written work was valuable.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.64	11	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (9%)	2 (18%)	8 (73%)

29. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (67%)

30. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.

- only something minor: This comment may be picky and just due to the fact that my personal learning style is different from the way that Dr. Keeley gives/organizes information. Occasionally, during a lecture, I feel very lost as to where this particular lecture is going. It is not until many more points are made clear, that I understand what I am supposed to be comprehending on a larger scale (i.e. the lectures give lots of informative details, however, as I have not been shown the larger picture, I have troubles organizing the details into areas that they pertain to). I hope this is clear. The suggestion to remedy this would be to give a brief outline/overview of the topics to be discussed, then start going into the details.

Nothing. Your humor and enthusiasm kept the class interesting!

Break up some of the lecture material in the first hour of class with either group work or a topic to discuss.

More off the cuff,down to earth discussions.

I felt like there was a class or two where the subject was repeated from a previous class. It would also probably be better to have the proposal review over two days instead of one long day (but I'm sure it was a good approximation for an actual review!)

It would be beneficial if there was more emphasis on not continuing with your PhD and instead going into industry and agency jobs. It was interesting to learn the different obstacles that occur within academia, but I wish there was a greater focus on other careers.

Every class, I was receiving lots of class materials by hand out from Dr. Keeley and those were very serious information for my future research. However, I would like to suggest one thing about teaching method. If Dr. Keeley use a PowerPoint projector instead of hand writing on the board for the topics, students can watch and understand every class topics more easier. I think other teaching styles and methods of Dr. Keeley were perfect for students.

Seems pretty good.

31. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.82	11	0.4	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (18%)	9 (82%)

32. Class assignments provided an effective aid for learning the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

33. The assigned reading is well integrated into this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.45	11	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (55%)	5 (45%)

34. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	1 (8%)	10 (83%)

35. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	1 (8%)	10 (83%)

36. The course is highly recommended if it were taught by this instructor.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	2 (17%)	9 (75%)

37. The guest speakers contributed significantly to this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	12	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	4 (33%)	7 (58%)

38. What changes would you make in the writing assignments?

none. I think they all were beneficial.

Nothing, I thought the spacing and difficulty of them were well planned out.

none

Fewer...less extensive

Maybe divide the grant up into a few more assignments before handing in the final, especially so we can get comments on them from each other.

NSF proposal should be due after all aspects of an NSF-style proposal are presented. Also would have been nice to hand in 2 drafts, so improvements could be made. Could have an assignment that focuses on writing a shorter grant (i.e. departmental or society) in place of writing a teaching statement.

I would'nt make any changes. The assignments were all appropriate and I will use what I did for this class to apply for grants.

Actually, I was getting hard to writhing every assignments during the course. Those were big challenges to me so far. However, I understood every assignments were significant and systematic things for writing, submitting and reviewing for a grant proposal. Therefore, I believe my skills regarding writing, submitting and reviewing for a grant proposal had been improved before than this course. In addition, I could receive feedbacks about my assignments from the class via other class mates and Dr. Keeley, and those feedbacks were able to figure out lots of lacks on my assignments.

Feedback on the grant proposals before submitting them.

39. My overall evaluation of this course is...

great/excellent

Great course, very useful to wannabe scientists, which is pretty much all of us. Great for career development.

very worthwhile course for graduate students who anticipate having to write grants or for folks looking to improve their communication skills through writing

great!

Great! It was very helpful and useful since I had no previous knowledge or experience. I also found the additional career information very useful. Lots of things that people just expect you to know, when we as grad students never thought about.

This course is excellent. Probably one of the more valuable courses that I will take in Grad school.

Looking back my state of the skills for grant proposal before this course, I could not realize how can I write and review a grant proposal. However, I believe I have the confidence for the grant proposal even though I need to learn more details and experience about the proposal such as NFS style grant proposal. Therefore, the first of all, I am seriously impressed on this course because my state of the skills for the grant proposal had been improved via this course. During the course, I could get lots of serious feedbacks from the class via other class mates and Dr. Keeley, and those feedbacks were very significant to figure out lacks of my assignments. In addition, I also had knowledge of my career such as planning for the long term, writing job applications, teaching and research statements and scientific jobs via this course. I believe those kinds of knowledge will help for my future in science.

Excellent and definitely what I needed.

40. Other comments:

The drinks and snacks were a great idea, they should do that in all 2hr+ classes!

Thank you so much for teaching this course!

I would like to appreciate to Dr. Keeley because I am able to improved my knowledge of the grand proposal and future career via this course. Also, I realize she put a lot of time and effort into reading each student's papers and giving them feedback. Therefore, I would like to listen her class again if she will teach the similar course. And, I would like to recommend this course to other students who want to learn about grant proposal. Thank you so much.

Sterling Keeley: BOT 461, Fall 2009 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Botany
Course:	BOT 461 - Systematics of Vascular Plants	Crn (Section):	70621 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
4.4	15	0.74	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	8 (53%)	5 (33%)	1 (7%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.79	14	0.43	Freq(%)	3 (21%)	11 (79%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	15	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (40%)	9 (60%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	15	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (33%)	10 (67%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.57	14	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (43%)	8 (57%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	15	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (40%)	9 (60%)

7. I developed enthusiasm about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.64	14	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (36%)	9 (64%)

8. I enjoyed this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.53	15	0.64	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	5 (33%)	9 (60%)

9. I try to relate what I learn in this course to my own experience.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	15	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	3 (20%)	11 (73%)

10. I performed up to my potential in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	15	0.72	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (13%)	6 (40%)	7 (47%)

11. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.53	15	0.64	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	5 (33%)	9 (60%)

12. What things did you get from this course that will benefit you personally?

Everything. Knowing how to Identify plants in the field and being able to distinguish one from another.

i really enjoyed this course, i just wish that i physically had more time to be give to studying. It was a lot of work.

I can look at a plant and say...O thats a malvaceae and sound smart :o)haha i am not really going into the botany field, but i do like it when i go on hikes and trails i can see a plant and know what it is.

Being able to identify plants that are economically useful.

I know Plant Families! and have made new Friends!

everything is of importance to me given my field of study

I can finally identify a lot of the plants I see every day walking to school.

I have learned that when I like something, I can thrive in that learning environment and that it gives me confidence to work harder, in order to attain that feeling of understanding and competence, in situations that do not necessarily have to do with something that I am passionate about.

being able to identify plants in the class room and anywhere in the world, especially Hawaii

I have always enjoyed plants and felt this course was neccessary if I wanted to pursure my love for plants. It was worth it:)

13. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.27	15	0.59	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	9 (60%)	5 (33%)

14. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.53	15	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	7 (47%)	8 (53%)

15. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.13	15	0.74	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (20%)	7 (47%)	5 (33%)

16. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.57	14	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (43%)	8 (57%)

17. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.64	14	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (36%)	9 (64%)

18. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.73	15	0.46	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (27%)	11 (73%)

19. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.73	15	0.46	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (27%)	11 (73%)

20. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.43	14	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	8 (57%)	6 (43%)

21. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.13	15	0.74	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (20%)	7 (47%)	5 (33%)

22. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?

Prepared and Structured

knowledgable, fun, hardworking

AWESOME! Smart cool

Over all friendly and knowledgable.

Awesome

fun, knowledgeable, approachable

knowledgeable

Dr. Keely is a blast. At first, I was worried because how she talks, in her lectures, is not very animated. But I didn't let that deter me from listening to her and I found out that although her voice is not very animated, her face is. This made class fun for me and it ended up not inhibiting my understanding of the material.

Unique, approachable, and patient

23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.38	13	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	8 (62%)	5 (38%)

24. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.6	15	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (40%)	9 (60%)	0 (0%)

25. The TA was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.93	15	0.26	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	14 (93%)	0 (0%)

26. The TA was able to explain concepts in terms I could understand.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.93	15	0.26	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	14 (93%)	0 (0%)

27. The TA was easy to talk with and available for consultation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	N/A
4.87	15	0.35	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (13%)	13 (87%)	0 (0%)

28. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.8	15	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (20%)	12 (80%)

29. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.8	15	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (20%)	12 (80%)

30. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	15	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (33%)	10 (67%)

31. My grades accurately represent my performance in the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.27	15	0.88	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	1 (7%)	6 (40%)	7 (47%)

32. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

The back to back lab and lecture was a real benefit for the class. Having just learned about materials and then go straight into a lab to look at them substantially benefited my learning.

learning about the differeent families

Field trips, fresh specimens

I loved this course, i learned so much, i love being able to identify plants. keying out was hard at first, but now i like it and enjoy it. i also loved the people, and the collection can be a pain in the butt, but it is sooooo fun, but stressful! But i am so gonna miss this course when its over, i wish there was another one to take next semester for the rest of the families

The presentation slides- they kept the lecture organized, and therefore my notes were organized. Also, I enjoyed keying out plants to their families - it made me realize the subtle differences between plant families.

Live specimens! and PPts were good

the exams

Viewing all the live specimens.

I liked how the information was presented to us. It made it very easy for me to organize the material into an accessible format (flash cards!). The literature information was matched up with picture examples and I found this very helpful as well.

thoroughly learned all aspects of the area project was a scavenger hunt around the island for plants, seemed super hard at first then was really fun and greatly contributed to my understanding of the broader field.

Collecting and becoming familiar with plants outside of the classroom.

33. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

The class project was a bear to complete. I don't think I could have done it under normal circumstances and without help from professionals in the field.

the plant collection, its really hard to find many of them since a lot of the common families were off limits this semester

Hm..i thought collecting 50 was a bit much, it could have been a bit lower, but i guess thats the challenge. i didnt like the first test cuz i did bad.:o(

I both loved and hated the 50 families plant collection. The collection was a great way to learn about the plant families we did not cover in class, however, there were so many restrictions and many of us weren't sure about what could and couldn't be used for the plant collection - esecially since we learned mid-semester that certain families had been lumped into other families.

Didnt feel prepared for the exams

the lectures got repetitive in their presentations

The format of the course project. It felt very out of context. Although it exposed me to many new plant families, it was a very shallow understanding. As in knowing that family existed. This was not enough for me and I wish that the project could have pushed us more towards actually learning other families outside of the ones in class. I also felt very disconnected to the specimen I collected. I feel it would have been way more interesting and rewarding to collect plants, keeping in mind their relation to each other. Such as the plants along a hiking trail, or within an ahupua'a division.

Nothing

34. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.42	12	0.51	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	7 (58%)	5 (42%)

35. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the TA's teaching style and methods?

The TA is easy to talk to and very knowledgeable of all the content of the course and could easily explain confusing concepts.

very helpful and easy to talk to

LARA is so smart, and challenges you to figure it out on your own. she seems pretty chill outside of class. i like the scope now. it is my friend, sometimes. but she knows so much about plants, and is always willing to help. thanks

She was very helpful and answered any questions the students had.

Willing to help

i know her personally so i felt comfortable around her and she has a very welcoming personality

She was very knowledgeable and easily approachable. You can tell she put in a lot of effort.

Lara was very organized in her presentation of the lab material. She was honest with us in circumstances of difficult specimen during keying (such as when a plant didn't "read the book"). She is very nice and very approachable which made me very comfortable asking her questions and making mistakes around her.

had great example, spent extra time, did not make me feel stupid when I still couldn't get things

36. Global appraisal: considering everything how would you rate the overall effectiveness of this Teaching Assistant?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.8	15	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (20%)	12 (80%)