eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Calvin Pang

Available Survey Results

LAW504, Non Traditional Fall 2014
LAW505, Spring 2014
LAW568, Spring 2014
LAW590Q, Spring 2014
LWJT536C, Spring 2014
LAW504, Fall 2013
LAW504, Fall 2013
LAW568, Spring 2013
LAW590Q, Spring 2013
LAW504, Fall 2012

Calvin Pang: LAW504, Non Traditional Fall 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 504 - Legal Practice I Crn (Section): 74479 (005)    
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  
4.13 8 1.96 Freq(%) 2 (25%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (63%) 1 (13%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 8 (89%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
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%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 8 (89%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
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%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
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%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
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%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
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%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 9 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
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%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 8 (89%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.56 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 5 (56%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Great!
Fun course, lots of work, moves quickly (especially in the beginning). I am very appreciative to have had Professor Pang for this course. I think that he is an excellent instructor, and his enthusiasm for the law is contagious.
Professor Pang is very good at teaching something he knows to someone who has no idea of what it is supposed to be. Legal writing is very different from normal writing and it has been a long road. He has been very helpful. I have learned a lot, I hope.
Prof. Pang was amazing! The course itself needs better organization, and the assignments, materials, and topics needs to be balanced, but it appears that the professors are very responsive to student requests.
Having Calvin Pang as a professor really helped me get through the material in this course. Although I found it very challenging, he took steps to ensure that I was understanding the subject matter and helped me in the right direction. I really appreciate his effort. Additionally, he made the classroom environment very comfortable, which made it easy to approach him with any questions.
This course has been one of my favorites! Professor Pang always comes into class with a plan laid out that is designed to help us as much as possible. The way he organizes the class was extremely helpful in writing the first two memos and his attention to detail has set the standard that I want to achieve in all the memos I ever write from this point forward. The course has definitely taken us from essentially having no idea how to write a memo to having a solid basis for the steps that need to be taken in order to formulate a well-thought-out, organized legal document with accurate analysis. Couldn't be happier with the course.

Calvin Pang: LAW505, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 505 - Legal Practice II Crn (Section): 81426 (007)    
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  
4.91 11 1.38 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (64%) 3 (27%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 11 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 1.03 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 7 (64%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 6 (55%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.18 11 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (27%) 3 (27%) 5 (45%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 11 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 7 (64%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 11 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 1 (9%) 7 (64%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.36 11 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 3 (27%) 6 (55%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.45 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 6 (55%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.82 11 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 4 (36%) 3 (27%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.73 11 1.1 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 2 (18%) 4 (36%) 3 (27%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.91 11 1.14 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 4 (36%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.18 11 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 5 (45%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
This was an ok course given that it was a pilot. It would benefit greatly with more direction and planning. This direction includes actually teaching students how to complete the writing that's requested. For example, instead of saying that we have to write a motion and memo in support of summary judgement, it would be fantastic if we were taught how to write them exactly (e.g. layout, specific language, sentence format, analysis structure/organization, etc). In doing so it ensure that the new students know all that they need, even if it seems common sense and obvious to practitioners. It will also greatly reduce the students' stress when we are told things, such as, "write a stipulation of facts," when we never heard of one previously, much less looked at one before. Planning would greatly benefit this course. Plans could include a week by week syllabus of what we're doing, readings due dates, etc, just like the ones we receive in the normal course. That way the teachers and the students know what to expect, and can plan accordingly.
This was a pilot class and I am so thankful I was able to be in it. I learned so much practical application of the law. This class was invaluable and I strongly suggest the school consider continuing and expanding it. There is no way to obtain comparable experience. I truly enjoyed the scope of activities that were included in the program and Professor Pang is such a great teacher. He is very concerned about his students and always strives to make sure we have all the information we need.
Overall this pilot course was a good experience. I especially appreciated the clinic feel the course hand - a real life fact pattern and client interaction. The course however was also often discouraging. Being a legal writing course, it is expected and assumed that the professors would be knowledgable and competent of legal issues and practice. Prof. Pang is a great for overall writing but when it came to nuts and bolts, he seemed to display little knowledge. He seems to only understand a Motion for Summary Judgment (our main assignment) on a very superficial level. Both Dean Soifer's comments and Prof. Pang's re: writing were about grammar, style, and word choice not the inns and outs of an MSJ. Furthermore, the manner in which the class was divided and set up to have opposing MSJ simply did not make sense in the real world. I would prefer to be spending tuition on how to be a good, effective attorney. We should have been thought more conceptually, more how to argue in our writing instead of just get comments on style. Waste of money! Neither professor seemed to know how a MSJ should be written proving very frustrating. It was also unknown throughout the entire course what assignments would be graded, how we would be graded and what percentage of our grade assignments would be. This is wrong. Prof. Pang is extremely nice and as helpful as he can be. He was always willing to try to help and was very quick to respond to emails. As said in the beginning, the clinic aspect was great and I appreciated the practical aspect of it. If the professors could perhaps with a civil procedure professor before assigning motions so that they could better understand practice as well as have an actual syllabus with goals and grading procedures, this has potential to be a great course.
that it is definitely a keeper. I feel that I gained MUCH more from this section than the regular LP II sections. Having read a few of the products from the normal sections, I know I learned more from this section. Guess you could say I won in the lottery. But seriously, the practical lessons and practice techniques I got from this will stick with me longer than anything I would have done in normal LP II. It showed me some areas I need to improve on before I can be an adequate advocate, and gave me some better ideas for the classes I need to take before I graduate.
I really appreciated the opportunity to be part of the pilot program. I know they were trying to figure out the plan for the rest of the semester as they went along, but it did lead to some confusion. But overall it was a great experience!
LP 2 is my favorite class. The concept of it is great. I hope they continue to offer LP 2 the way this class had it. It is unlike the regular LP 2 where they were given a fact pattern and had to write appellate briefs. This class on the other hand taught us practical skills that we would be able to use in the work place. LP 2 should be taught in this way. It taught us many skills such as: interviewing clients, negotiating with the opposing counsel, writing a Motion for Summary Judgment, writing Complaint, writing Demand Letters, Oral Advocacy, and Mediation. What this class offered was revolutionary and I encourage this school to continue offering LP 2 the way this pilot taught LP 2. It was a pilot class so there were some kinks that they will need to work on. There were some organizational issues and sometimes there was a disconnect between pedagogy and practice; however, I would rather have this class than the regular LP 2.
Needs some time with refining, the majority of the class was flying by the seat of our pants. Maybe bringing LL/T court to the law school would help refine it.
The course has potential. It would work better if the execution of the landlord-tenant dispute was handled better. The facts don't have to be given to us and the client interaction was good. However, I think there was some confusion when too many people were interpreting the facts on their own. Further, if the assignments could be addressed and returned at an earlier date, it would be better for the course. Additional writing assignments of 15 page length would serve the class well. Also, it was not a good idea in my opinion to have the students combine the summary judgments and opposition memos. The opposition memo should be after the summary judgment and pushing the deadlines earlier into the semester would solve this problem. Overall, I don't know if I can use what we wrote as a writing sample because it does not fall into standard legal document category. Interacting with the client and doing mediation were very helpful and informative. However, it would be best to keep the mediation as a surprise for the next class. By knowing we would go to mediation, it felt like it defeated the purpose of the summary judgment and took a lot of our enthusiasm for the assignment. By keeping the judgment uncertain, it would keep students focused on the goal. Also, the oral arguments section went better than expected. I thought we would need additional practice time leading to the discussion but I enjoyed talking to the judges and it appears our level of preparation was perfect. The subject was not as confusing as the other Legal Practice sections, which I think helped to ease the oral arguments. The topic was more "down to earth" and required a lot of emotion, which this case contained. If I could tweek one part of the story, it would be to increase the stakes. It seemed implausible and frankly ridiculous to go to court over what seemed to be "pennies and dimes" of actual costs. I don't know if this is relevant because I have not witnessed these courts or cases. However, it felt ridiculous that we were going to trial and had to prepare court documents over such petty amounts when our lawyering fees would bankrupt these clients in a day. However, the heart was there and improving on the problem a little bit would help encourage future students.
While the course was interesting and exciting is wasn't clear and organized. I often didn't have an idea of what I was being graded on and often got no instruction.
GREAT!
19. Other comments:
It was nice to have a people-focused class, and a professor who cared so much about the clients as people, given that law deals with people. If possible, this aspect of the course should be maintained, but with much more guidance and structure for the writing and analysis aspects of the course. That way students will know how exactly they are supposed to write up documents for their clients in the real world
I'm not sure what the future looks like for this LP II pilot, but I'd love to see it continued. I'm not sure what the selection process looks like, but probably the top/best/most proficient writers/researchers from LP I would benefit most from this pilot. At first I didn't like the duplication of the initial writing assignments, but I also feel like I understand that (pretty essential) part of the litigation process. I don't know what else the final writing assignment could be, but I know most of the class was extremely nervous about it. We know enough about civil procedure to be dangerous, and most of us weren't sure how to approach the assignment since it wasn't exactly what we had learned. I know this is supposed to be a writing intensive course, and that writing pleadings probably isn't as difficult as writing a memo in support of/opposition to MSJ, but I would have felt better about my experience if I knew that for sure. I also feel like the point of keeping us with the same partner was to emphasize how important it is to learn your opposing counsel, but I know some people would have benefitted more if they had been forced to argue against more forceful or mediate with less forceful people. All of the guest speakers were super helpful, even for individual guidance and questions. In all, great course. Happy I was part of it and the food was excellent.
I appreciate the time offered by Prof Pang and Dean Soifer, glad to learn at the feet of our school's leadership.
I liked the comments provided by Professor Pang. They addressed what I needed to improve on and how to improve it. Further, he was available when I needed him and this helped solve a lot of my concerns. I also enjoyed how receptive he was to the class's concerns on the assignment.
Besides learning the need for grammar and writing mechanics, I am not sure the objective of this class. I didn't learn anything about legal writing which is what I was solely graded on.
This pilot course was really great and it will only get better as adjustments are made. This class should definitely be offered again. Hopefully there will be enough supervision so we could get real clients. I really enjoyed the client interaction and interaction with opposing counsel. Writing things like demand letters and memorializing agreements were quite useful. Also, the mediation session was really interesting. Suggestions for the future: A syllabus. We all knew what we were signing up for this time around so itâ??s ok that there wasnâ??t one for the pilot. Graded oral arguments. Regular LP IIâ??s are graded and preparation for arguments takes some time away from other things. It also would allow those who argue better than they write to get some points. Make it more difficult to mediate at the end. The final set of facts distributed just before mediation allowed us to tie everything up way too neatly. It wasnâ??t too realistic but it was a happy ending. Suggestion for student selection: It seems like this class had less legal writing than regular LP II. So, it may be a good idea to require a certain grade in LP I in order to take this class. If youâ??ve proved youâ??re a good legal writer in LP I than this class will serve you well. If you still need some extra legal writing help then LP II is probably better. Also, I think it should continue to be in â??opt-inâ?? class.

Calvin Pang: LAW568, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 568 - Family Law Crn (Section): 86228 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.13 19 0.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 14 (74%) 2 (11%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 18 (95%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 (95%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.95 19 0.23 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 18 (95%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
7. 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 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.95 19 0.23 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 18 (95%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 18 (95%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.95 19 0.23 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 18 (95%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 19 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 17 (89%)
15. 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 19 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 19 (100%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 19 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 17 (89%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.89 19 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 16 (84%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Family law is an important bar prep course, but I think the material can get somewhat tedious at times, so the professor teaching it might want to use a bit more of the Socratic method to engage students in the issues.
Excellent. Professor Pang is passionate about the material and knowledgable. He also takes his time to make sure the class understands concepts prior to moving on. One of the best at Richardson!
This is an excellent course. I learned a lot and enjoyed myself. I feel prepared for the bar exam.
Prof Calvin Pang is a brilliant instructor. I had a wonderful learning experience under him. I will take fond memories of his classes back to Singapore with me.
Very good class with great instruction.
Having no interest in family law before this class, I now leave with a deep appreciation for what family law is and what family law attorneys do. Calvin Pang is an excellent professor. Wish we had more like him around.
Loved the professor and this class. Professor Pang has been my favorite teacher in law school up to this point. He made the subject enjoyable and relatable. Family Law was on a short list of classes I never wanted to take and Professor Pang made it one of my favorite classes.
I enjoyed this class. Sometimes there did seem like there was a bias towards mothers in the materials.
I thought Family Law was a clear and engaging course. I learned a great deal in a manner that was organized and easy to follow.
Professor Pang was so awesome! His teaching style is tailored for Hawaii. He is very nurturing and respectful to students. I really enjoyed his teaching style. He was always open to our concerns and questions. He went beyond to be available to us. He is a total asset to the law school.
19. Other comments:
Prof. Pang is and excellent and engagin instructor. His enthusiasm about the subject matter and interest in the people involved is inspiring.
A few small suggestions; class time is very relaxed but students become complicanent. Not sure how students could be "kept on their toes" but I would have been in less of a difficult spot at finals had I been more engaged with assignments or maybe even Socratic "cold calling." (I realize that this is my fault). I also feel that more focus at different times in the course on traditional law school items vice child support and property division could balance out the class a little better.
It was a pleasure to take Family Law from Professor Pang. His enthusiasm for the subject matter is contagious. He makes the cases and concepts "come alive" through his well organized notes and presentations. He is also very patient with those who may no understand a certain concept.

Calvin Pang: LAW590Q, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 590Q - WRKSHP/CLNC: IMMIGRATION Crn (Section): 86983 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 4 (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 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
7. 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 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 1.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
We understand that our class was being used as the testing ground for the use of the Lexisnexis Blackboard for clinical classes. I think that the Blackboard was a failure. The three classes we devoted to getting to know how to use the Blackboard was an unnecessary waste of time, which would have been better spent with Bow Mun Chin conducting regular instruction. Otherwise, I loved the course. I learned quite a bit about the naturalization process, as well as the T-Visa process. Also, the guest speakers were great.I am happy that we were able to help real clients address their real immigration issues. I am hopeful that our work will have a positive result in the lives of our clients. That's what it's all about for me.
19. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Calvin Pang: LWJT536C, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LWJT 536C - Client Counseling Team Crn (Section): 84605 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 3 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
7. 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 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
15. 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 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
The Client Counseling Team has been a great learning experience for me so far, and I am looking forward to another year of learning and growing. Professor Pang, along with the amazing coaches, have made this such a great experience. I feel lucky to be a member of this team.
19. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Calvin Pang: LAW504, Fall 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 504 - Legal Practice I Crn (Section): 74707 (005)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
7. 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 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
15. 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 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
No survey responses were found.
19. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Calvin Pang: LAW504, Fall 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 504 - Legal Practice I Crn (Section): 74711 (009)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 5 (83%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 6 1.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
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%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 6 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Professor Pang is excellent. He is dedicated to the course and his students. He gives very helpful and detailed feedback to his students on all of our work and gives us the tools we need to succeed. I feel that my writing has improved exponentially and I am personally and professionally grateful to him.
Legal Practice with Prof. Pang's small section was very intellectually stimulating and challenging at the same time. I feel that this course has given me a strong foundation to build my legal writing skills upon. Prof. Pang was always very precise and clear with his instructions. Most importantly, he was very approachable and organized, which made all the difference for me when it came to the challenging new topics. The only thing that I would suggest for legal practice is to integrate this course more with the Legal Research more. It was nice to not have to research for the first two problems; however, it would have been helpful to use the same problem set for the materials covered in Legal Research as well. Overall, Legal Practice with Prof. Pang is by far my most favorite course this semester and I have learned a great deal from him. The material (each of the three Problems) were appropriate for skill building for me. It did not find it too easy, nor find it too challenging to achieve my objectives.
The course provided very good skill development. The format of small groups was very good. It was conducive to good discussion to ensure that we were able to absorb the concepts presented. The problem sets and timing of the due dates were appropriate for the course level and the amount of credits. Professor Pang is not only well-versed in the subject matter but more importantly he is an excellent teacher. He was firm in keeping us on track and accountable to learning objectives while maintaining a positive, congenial environment.
I thought that having so many missed classes after papers were due was not very helpful. I would have appreciated more class time and perhaps in-class writing exercises to further learning. Even though I know I have learned more skills in this past semester of legal writing, I still do not feel very prepared for next semester and whatever the future semesters of law school might have in store.
My first and last impression of Professor Pang's course was the same: exceptional. His patience encouraged all to participate but he never compromised quality or took shortcuts in his reasonings. His ability to remember each student's level of engagement and understanding was apparent in his comments and responses, demonstrating a true talent for promoting intellectual growth in an audience as diverse as we were. His syllabus, assignments, and classes were paced perfectly to challenge us firmly without overwhelming. In retrospect, I sense that Professor Pang was able to recognize our growth in understanding every week and adapted accordingly in his instruction. Personally, I was able to question and refine my own thought process vastly in this short semester and I give full credit to Professor Pang in that regard.
I really enjoyed this course, probably even more so because Professor Pang was teaching it. He was always very clear and thoughtful in his teaching and style. He was very kind and generous in class, and was never dismissive of any students' ideas. He also made a point to discuss the assignment problems in class so that all of us had a good starting point for our drafts, and then to hold office hours during evening hours before deadlines so that we could meet with him before finalizing our assignments for any last minute questions we had or major problems we were having difficult resolving. I think that one of the reasons I may have enjoyed this class as well is because in comparison to Civ Pro and Con Law where it all depends upon one final at the end, it was the only other class where you were able to receive constructive criticism and feedback throughout the semester. On another note, while I understand that the textbooks and readings may have served as a jumping off point for class discussion, once you get into the memos and papers, they seemed somewhat pointless for the class. Plenary also did not add much to the small sections as well.
19. Other comments:
Professor Pang was great. Every time I came to class, I felt very welcome and was therefore willing to share my thoughts and ideas even though I could be wrong. I appreciated his thorough feedback on my assignments and in one-on-one conferences. I also dropped by unannounced on a couple of occasions to his office, and he was always very quick to put his work aside to talk to me. Even though I currently do not have much interest in his specialties, I would definitely like taking another class with Professor Pang or at least recommend my classmates and future students to take his classes.

Calvin Pang: LAW568, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 568 - Family Law Crn (Section): 87818 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.0 45 0.96 Freq(%) 2 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 34 (76%) 8 (18%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.16 45 0.37 Freq(%) 37 (82%) 7 (16%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.93 45 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 43 (96%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.96 45 0.21 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (4%) 43 (96%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.98 45 0.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 43 (96%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 45 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 45 (100%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.96 45 0.3 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%) 44 (98%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.98 45 0.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 44 (98%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 45 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 45 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.96 45 0.21 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (4%) 43 (96%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 45 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 3 (7%) 41 (91%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.98 45 0.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 44 (98%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.98 45 0.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 44 (98%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.76 45 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 9 (20%) 35 (78%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 45 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (13%) 38 (84%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 45 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 8 (18%) 33 (73%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.82 45 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (2%) 6 (13%) 38 (84%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Professor Pang is all-inspiring. He instills his students with confidence as well as a drive to do well. I think these are the characteristics of a great professor, and I wish there were more professors like him at our law school.
Professor Pang is extremely accommodating and understanding of students' schedules and just general life issues that happen. He also makes himself available outside of class. He is very patient and eager to help. Excellent Professor!!!
Professor Pang is great professor and this was a great class. I am glad I took this class with Professor Pang. Thank you.
Prof. Pang is an incredible teacher. He was always prepared and willing to take questions. He is clearly passionate about the subject matter as well.
This course was incredibly taught. I loved every minute, and I truly appreciated the kind way in which Professor Pang taught. It really helped me understand the material more and have it relate to me on a more personal level. Thank you Professor Pang!!!!!
Professor Pang obviously cares about his students and whether they are learning. He very meticulously goes through each concept, and provides the students plenty of opportunity to practice each concept. I wouldn't ask him to change the class in any way.
Professor Pang makes family law so understandable and logical through his lectures. Certain concepts can be very difficult to understand, such as UCCJEA or UIFSA, but Professor Pang breaks down the elements that need to be considered in such a way that really makes these topics much more understandable. Professor Pang's lectures are always very interesting and he makes going to class exciting. A wonderful and highly recommended instructor. As for the Family Law class, it was a great class that I think everyone should take if they have a chance. Initially, I was not certain if I would be interested in family law, but soon after the course began I came to realize that this is a field I would really like to practice in. Amazing class. Highly recommended.
This class was awesome. Professor Pang creates a great environment to learn. I feel he went above and beyond his duty to help students learn the material. Handout #2 was so well done, I wonder if the casebook was even needed. I am extremely pleased with this class. Will recommend to those who have not taken it.
Excellent. This was one of my most enjoyable courses in law school. It was not intimidated. The classroom setting was comfortable, even though it was a large class, and yet it was challenging and educational. I appreciated the professor's dedication in helping us learn the material: excellent notes on the board; he did exercises with us to grasp the material and prepare for the exam; he held many review sessions and was available for additional help.
great bar class
Professor Pang is an incredibly enthusiastic teacher. I love his stories, and his ability to relate the course material to real life. He is incredibly passionate about family law, and it shows when he teaches. It was a privilege to learn from him.
Professor Pang is a terrific teacher! He is clear, precise, and compassionate. He is completely respectful of the students and so engaging. I would take any additional classes with him as a professor.
I really appreciate that we get to have experience dealing with the forms involved in practice. I think that it is really beneficial to have some understanding and knowledge of the forms that exist in the practice of family law in Hawaii.
The course was engaging and highly informative.
Professor Pang is an excellent professor and has a mastery of the course material and also a passion for teaching it. I thoroughly enjoyed this class and although many of the topics were very intense, I thought Professor Pang was very compassionate and caring in the way he talked about them. Moreover, I really appreciated that he wrote an outline of the subject on the board before class so that we were about to follow along with the general themes and also fill in specifics during the class. Overall, I loved this course and thought Professor Pang was amazing!
PROFESSOR CALVIN PANG IS VERY VERY EXCELLENT PROFESSOR HE HAS BEEN PREPARED CLASS VERY PERFECTLY AND VERY EXCELLENTLY I AND EVERY STUDENT LIKE AND RESPECT HIM VERY MUCH HE IS A VERY GOOD AND KIND TO LLM ( ICHECKED ABOVE -ALL OF VERY EXCELLENT ) CALVIN PANG IS VERY VERY GOOD PROFESSOR I WILL NEVER FORGET PROFESSOR CALVIN PANG MANY THANKS JAEHO HWANG(2013 LLM ) KOREAN
Is there anyone nicer than Prof. Pang? I think not. I loved the course and the variety he offered us. Guest speaking, group exercises, and hypotheticals made the class well rounded. Prof. Pang worked hard to provide a variety of methods of teaching for students who learn differently. I appreciated his efforts.
Prof. Pang is one of the best professors I have encountered at our Law School. His method of teaching makes the material memorable and anything but dull. His compassion for people and his love of Family Law is evident. Guest speakers were woven into the curriculum, and this was very valuable to the course. The practitioners shared personal knowledge of their respective areas of Family Law and broadened the field of scope for the students. Prof. Pang also seems to make a point of personally reaching out to students. This is just one of his many awesome features as a professor.
Great course. Not only is Professor Pang the nicest guy one will ever meet, but he is truly a great educator. He definitely knows how to connect with his students.
Great professor.
Professor Pang is a knowledgeable and respected member of the legal community and it was an honor to take his class. Terrific Professor!
Both the substantive law classes and guest lectures were valuable; I personally could have used a little more structural definition to the course segments and I felt a little rudderless looking at all the material even though each segment was clear in meantime. Prof. Pang is wonderful in the classroom and makes for an enjoyable and informative class.
Professor Pang is fantastic! I love how he gives visual cues to help us remember important concepts. I also appreciate the problems that we work together in class. This is where I clear up any misconceptions I have and the material really "sinks in." I love the problem solving days. They are the most helpful!!
Had no idea I'd enjoy Family Law course this much. I suspect it is because of Prof. Pang's wonderful teaching style!!! Very engaging and easy to follow.
Excellent. Professor Pang is great with connecting with the students and engaging in meaningful dialogue and instruction.
I had heard so many positive things about Prof. Pang and his family law class, and I was absolutely not disappointed! Prof. Pang is so knowledgable about the subject matter, plus he is engaging, funny, and charming! He gave, what felt to be, a perfect balance of practical, personal, and academic insight into the material. I also greatly appreciated his desire to get to know each of his students on a personal level. I really enjoyed this class, and I only wish I had taken more classes with Prof. Pang over the last three years!
19. Other comments:
I think Prof. Pang is one of the most dedicated and caring teachers we have at this law school (and we have a number of great teachers). The fact that he is willing to host review sessions during spring break as well as before final exams (even on Saturdays) shows the high level of commitment he has towards educating his students. Thank you Prof. Pang.
Your teaching style makes family law easier to learn and really interesting. Also, great guest speakers!
DEAR HOR PROFESSOR CALVIN PANG HONOR CALVIN PANG IS VERY KIND LLM AND ME I WILL NEVER FORGET YOUR WARM HELP AND KINDNESS I CHECKED ABOVE(VERY VERY EXCELLENT) ALTHOUGH I AM LACK IN EVERYSIDE, I WILL DO MY BEST TRY TO BE THE BEST TOP LEADR OF U,S,A LIKE OBAMA PRESIDENT( I WILL TRY TO BE SENATOR, VICE PRESIDENT) I AND WE RESPECT AND LIKE PROFESSOR CALVIN PANG VERY MUCH YOU ARE A VERY VERY GOOD AND EXCELLENT PROFESSOT I WILL NEVER FORGET YOUR WARM FAVOR TO ME JAEHO HWAMG(2013 LLM ) KOREAN
Wonderful class!! The only shortfall may have been the quality of the handout materials as some of the text was difficult to read. Reprinting from west law was much cleaner. Thanks!

Calvin Pang: LAW590Q, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 590Q - WRKSHP/CLNC: IMMIGRATION Crn (Section): 88872 (001)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 4 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)
7. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.25 4 1.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Great teacher, good course. Prof. Pang went above and beyond for the students and the clients. Despite not having a background in this area of the law, Prof. Pang surrounded the students with the best lawyers in Hawaii to help and assist us in this very complex area of the law.
This class was valuable as a learning experience. I feel the shortcomings were inevitable and not the fault of Professor Pang. I feel the workload for this class was far too much for a 2 credit class. In the future the clinic should have each student handle only 1 case per semester. I also feel the subject matter of the cases were too complex and beyond the scope of a clinic, but again that was not the fault of Professor Pang as he did not get to choose the cases. I would recommend scaling back. Although I did learn a lot in this course, the workload was too much. We should somehow get retroactive 3 credits LIKE ALL OTHER CLINICS do.
Challenging yet fulfilling and very interesting
Good. This was my favorite course of the semester but it needs work because the clinical program is being restarted. Professor Pang was able to enlist the help of very knowledgeable practitioners to assist because he does not practice immigration law. However, I feel we relied on the practitioners a lot. The case load might have been a little too much. I believe Professor Pang, the practitioners, and students worked a lot. So it might be better to have each group take on one case instead of multiple ones. Also some classes did, such as the class on direct/cross examination, meeting with a worker from USCIS, did not relate too well with the case work that we were handling. I felt it would have been better to use the class time to discuss the case or meet with the supervising practitioners. Otherwise, I really enjoyed the class and feel that it fulfills a need that this school is sorely missing.
19. Other comments:
Workload is a little too much. Might want to keep to one case per team. Or a research option for two credits and a case option for 3.
I think the professor is fantastic and he should remain involved, however there were times when it was difficult to get in touch with the attorney mentors who were experienced in the field so it would help if there was a professor assigned to teach or assist to teach in this course who had immigration law expertise. Professor Pang is very kind and passionate about helping his students and others. He always went out of his way to help me and the clients.

Calvin Pang: LAW504, Fall 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Law
Course: LAW 504 - Legal Practice I Crn (Section): 75088 (004)    
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  
4.57 7 1.62 Freq(%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (71%) 1 (14%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
6. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
7. 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 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
9. The instructor treated students with respect.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
10. The instructor was thoughtful and precise in response to questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
11. I was able to get individual help when I needed it.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
12. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
13. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
14. I am generally pleased with the materials (texts, handouts) required for this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
15. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)
16. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 6 (86%)
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
18. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Professor Pang was an amazing instructor and I was very lucky to have him my first semester of law school.
The dynamic of my LP section was incredible, but I would have preferred if the research and the papers had been more integrated (maybe build the closed universe for the papers together in the research part of the class)
I found Professor Pang to be well-prepared, thoughtful and clear in his discussions, and extremely knowledgeable on the legal writing process. He engaged the entire class and we, his students, truly respected and admired him. His passion for the law and for his students was conveyed very clearly, and he was genuinely interested in helping us grow as writers.
Professor Pang is an amazing teacher!
Very detaled comments, very helpful instructions.
19. Other comments:
Professor Pang is really invested in his students. He takes a lot of time out of his schedule to meet with us to help us improve. He gives thorough (yet gentle) comments. He really wants to see us succeed and I really appreciated that.
I am really disappointed that we don't get to stay in the same sections with our professors. I look forward to taking other classes with Professor Pang.