eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii
eCAFE Home | FAQ | Contact

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Kayleen Sato

Available Survey Results

ESL 11, Fall 2007
ESL 13, Fall 2007

Kayleen Sato: ESL 11, Fall 2007

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: English as a Second Language
Course: ESL 11 - Basic Grammar and Writing Crn (Section): 15121 (0)    
1. Course objectives and procedures (for example, attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
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%)
2. Course objectives were met.
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%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
4. Class activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were helpful and well suited to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
8. Regular attendance or participation was important to student success in the course.
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 was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
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 used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
13. The instructor was willing to help students during office hours and/or via email.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)
17. The instructor made helpful comments on assignments and exams in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: A=Superior; B=Good; C=Average; D=Poor; F=Inferior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   A   B   C   D   F  
4.75 4 0.0 Freq(%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
i will give my life to willing to help students to learn what am teaching...
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
i think is good.
she is a good teacher and I like the way she teach us because i understant it.
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
little
yes
22. Other comments:
well if a teacher wants to teach he or she have to committed his or her self hepling students.

Kayleen Sato: ESL 13, Fall 2007     Back to top

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: English as a Second Language
Course: ESL 13 - Grammar and Writing Crn (Section): 15122 (0)    
1. Course objectives and procedures (for example, attendance, participation, grading, etc.) were clearly explained at the beginning of the term.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
2. Course objectives were met.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
4. Class activities (lectures, group work, student presentations, etc.) were helpful and well suited to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
8. Regular attendance or participation was important to student success in the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
12. The instructor used a variety of instructional techniques and methods to present 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%)
13. The instructor was willing to help students during office hours and/or via email.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
17. The instructor made helpful comments on assignments and exams in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%) 1 (33%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: A=Superior; B=Good; C=Average; D=Poor; F=Inferior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   A   B   C   D   F  
3.33 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 0 (0%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
none
Minimize the total of works.
Time management. I would spend more time to focus on grammer instead of my interests on the subject.
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
she's good
She overloads students with alot of works
She knows a lot of grammer skills, but she needs to give the student to studying more about grammer skills. Sometimes, her time management was not sttisfied.
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
yes
Yes.
She taught us off sbject about her experience of travelling to Japan. It was great for the student to know about the reality.
22. Other comments:
She's a great teacher though.