eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Harvey Motomura

Available Survey Results

ETRO161, Fall 2008
ETRO20, Fall 2008
ETRO20L, Fall 2008
ETRO23, Fall 2008
ETRO23L, Fall 2008

Harvey Motomura: ETRO161, Fall 2008

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Electronics
Course: ETRO 161 - Intro to Optics and Photonics Crn (Section): 17662 (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  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
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%)
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  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
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%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
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 total course workload was fair and appropriate.
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%)
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  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
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%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
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%)
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 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (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  
4.75 4 0.5 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  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
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%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
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. 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  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   F   D   C   B   A  
5.0 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
If we had regular class work on the subjects, we might remember more quickly where to find information in the texts. That is we'd be a little more confident in our answers.
Change the time from late to earlier times.
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
Very enjoyable class time. Perhaps a little more drill time.
Nothing.
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
Yes I have now been introduced to several types of fiber optics hardware, and have a better understanding of the work involved in starting, maintaining and or repairing fiber networks.
Yes
22. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Harvey Motomura: ETRO20, Fall 2008     Back to top

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Electronics
Course: ETRO 20 - Fundamentals of Electronics Crn (Section): 17170 (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  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
2. Course objectives were met.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%) 2 (29%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
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%)
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  
4.43 7 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%) 5 (71%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
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%)
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  
4.71 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 6 (86%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.57 7 1.27 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.29 7 1.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
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%)
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  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
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  
3.29 7 1.5 Freq(%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.14 7 1.35 Freq(%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
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 7 1.41 Freq(%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   F   D   C   B   A  
4.0 5 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 3 (60%) 1 (20%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
I would ensure that my students comprehend subject matter, before moving on to another subject. Give homework assignments, so students work out problems to understand theories and analysis of electronics.
Spend more time with and open mind with students
more hands on and up to date materials
give more morning breaks because class tends to doze off on notes.
update some material. Some projects and tools were obviously outdated
more hands on activities and upgraded technology
I would try to keep the students motivation up by showing them cool projects that they could do with the knowledge they get from the class.
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
It's o.k, good enough for government work.
good
great
i was able to clearly understand class content and he presented it in a fashion that made it easier for me to learn
its all right
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
Yes and no
yes
somewhat
soon ill be able to apply what i learned in this class
yes
Yes
22. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Harvey Motomura: ETRO20L, Fall 2008     Back to top

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Electronics
Course: ETRO 20L - Fund of ETRON Lab Crn (Section): 17171 (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  
4.43 7 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)
2. Course objectives were met.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%) 1 (14%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
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  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
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%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)
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 7 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.86 7 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 2 (29%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.29 7 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%) 0 (0%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
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  
3.86 7 1.07 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 3 (43%) 2 (29%)
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  
3.67 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%) 0 (0%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%) 1 (14%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
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 7 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%) 2 (29%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   F   D   C   B   A  
4.17 6 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 3 (50%) 2 (33%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
nothing
more time in the lab and more time to utilize the instruments
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
good enough for gumment work
great job. i can clearly understand what he is trying to accomplish
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
yes
22. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Harvey Motomura: ETRO23, Fall 2008     Back to top

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Electronics
Course: ETRO 23 - Fabrication Crn (Section): 17274 (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  
4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)
2. Course objectives were met.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.63 8 1.51 Freq(%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 3 (38%)
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  
4.44 9 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 6 (67%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
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%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
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%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 7 (78%)
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  
4.22 9 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 9 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 9 1.12 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 2 (22%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)
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  
4.11 9 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 5 (56%) 3 (33%)
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  
3.89 9 1.36 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.11 9 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%) 3 (33%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 8 1.16 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 5 (63%)
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  
3.78 9 1.3 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   F   D   C   B   A  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
Good as is.
No comment
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
Well suited to class.
Good instructor - very knowledgeable about industry and industry practices
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
Yes
Absolutely
22. Other comments:
No comment

Harvey Motomura: ETRO23L, Fall 2008     Back to top

Campus: Hawaii Community College Department: Electronics
Course: ETRO 23L - Fabrication Lab Crn (Section): 17275 (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  
4.67 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (33%) 6 (67%)
2. Course objectives were met.
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%)
3. The text(s) and class materials were helpful.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 9 1.41 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 5 (56%)
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  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
5. Assignments were clear and helpful in mastering course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 9 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)
6. Assignment and exams were fair and appropriate.
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%)
7. The total course workload was fair and appropriate.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 9 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 7 (78%)
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  
4.22 9 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 4 (44%)
9. The instructor was always prepared.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 9 1.12 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 2 (22%) 4 (44%)
10. The instructor presented difficult concepts clearly and understandably.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 9 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 4 (44%) 3 (33%)
11. The instructor knew the subject matter well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 9 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 7 (78%)
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  
4.13 8 1.13 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%)
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  
4.0 9 1.41 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 1 (11%) 5 (56%)
14. The instructor clearly motivated the students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (22%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
15. The instructor encouraged critical thinking.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.44 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 5 (56%)
16. The instructor graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 9 1.09 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 5 (56%)
17. 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 9 1.32 Freq(%) 1 (11%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 4 (44%)
18. I would rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor: F=Inferior; D=Poor; C=Average; B=Good; A=Superior.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   F   D   C   B   A  
4.56 9 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 2 (22%) 6 (67%)
19. If you were teaching this course: a. What would you do to improve it? b. What would you change?
Good as is.
20. What do you think of the teacher and his/her teaching methods?
Effective teaching.
21. Has he/she contributed to your general knowledge or to learning job skills?
Yes
22. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.