eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Thomas Ranker

Available Survey Results

BOT601, Fall 2014
BOT612, Spring 2014
BOT699, Spring 2012
BOT399, Fall 2011
BOT699, Fall 2010
BOT201, Spring 2010

Thomas Ranker: BOT601, Fall 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 601 - Current Botany Foundations I Crn (Section): 77331 (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 10 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (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  
1.9 10 0.32 Freq(%) 1 (10%) 9 (90%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 10 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 6 (60%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
6. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
7. The instructor presented concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 10 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%)
8. The grading system was clearly explained.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.9 10 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 9 (90%)
9. Assignments and assessments in this course were related to course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 9 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (44%) 5 (56%)
10. Assignments were returned in a timely manner.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 10 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%)
11. The instructor provided specific meaningful feedback.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 10 1.06 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 6 (60%)
12. The instructor was accessible to students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.9 10 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 9 (90%)
13. What did you like best about the course?
I liked the variety of topics covered in the course and I liked that we had the ability to choose articles of our own interest.
I thought the course provided an adequate overview of various botanical topics. Many students in the course seemed to be interested in and excited about papers that they chose, which made the course more enjoyable.
I was nice to hear about research that I probably would never look up.
It was great reading about material that we wouldn't read about in any other class
All of the different topics that we covered!
That I was able to learn something new every class period. Enabled me to practice public speaking.
I enjoyed the wide variety of papers discussed in this course. Dr. Ranker is very knowledgeable in many botanical fields.
Facilitated interesting discussion
14. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
The course can be improved by having more discussion of the weekly concept instead of focusing on specific article presentations.
I think the course could have been improved by strict enforcement of the time limit. Overall, student presentations were adequate, but I would not say that most students were truly prepared for the class- myself included. I think that if students knew that they would be cut off at 5 min exactly, students would have been better prepared to present & spent more time focusing on the meat of the paper (botanical concepts, ecological theories, etc., instead of presenting unnecessary detail.
Having a smaller class size would have been better because it was hard to stay focused for such a long period of time.
Depending on number of students, the amount of time to present could be changed
Providing basic information before the topic of the week is presented. Short 5 minute crash-course format.
Assign objectives other than presenting a paper.
I would have appreciated more feedback on my presentations. Also, I think it would have been beneficial if we had required readings for some of the weeks (i.e. plant hormones). I think a five minute break in the middle of the seminar would also be helpful as it is hard to pay attention after an hour of paper presentations.
15. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.0 9 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 7 (78%) 1 (11%)
16. Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Very Good  
4.89 9 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 8 (89%)
17. Why did you choose to take this course? (It fulfilled a focus designation (WI, E, OC, HAP, etc.), POLS major/minor requirement, major/minor requirement for another department, time and day(s) of the week it was offered, instructor, subject matter, etc.)
To fulfill a degree requirement.
Fulfilled a program proficiency.
I took this course to fulfill a degree requirement.
Required to graduate
Fulfilled a graduation requirement.
Mandatory for degree.
It was required.
required
18. I learned a good deal of factual material in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 10 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%)
19. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.9 10 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (50%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%)
20. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 10 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%)
21. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 10 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%)
22. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.67 9 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (11%) 3 (33%) 3 (33%) 2 (22%)
23. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 10 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%) 3 (30%)
24. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
25. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
I liked that we had the ability to learn more about our field of interest, and in much more depth by reading articles that we would not normally have the chance to.
I really enjoyed the concept of each student picking a paper based on a given topic & the theory that we would all leave the class with a better understanding of some general botanical topic. I also liked that we were forced to present material without the aid of power point.
Once again, I like hearing about research that I would never look up.
Learning the technique of saying what you NEED to say was the best
The presentations strengthened my public speaking skills.
Having to summarize a paper in five minutes or less.
lasseiz faire atmosphere in the course. Many interesting topics discussed.
26. Which aspects of the course did you like least?
I did not like the 5 minute presentation system. I don't feel like I learned very much from the other students presentations and with such a large class size it was difficult to concentrate on all of the presentations and understand their articles.
I disliked that there really was not much accountability on the side of the student. Students were not given incentive to perform at a graduate student level. Time limits were not respected and often times students focused on methodological details and not on the key concepts and findings. Students also broke what otherwise seemed like strict class rules, such as "do not pick a review paper". Furthermore, think learning goals could have been better met by having class start with a 10-20 min presentation giving an overview of a topic BEFORE discussing papers. This could have been student ran and really just been a broad summary that may have helped students better follow presentations.
I didn't like having to listen for such a long period of time.
I feel like some people's presentations were flat
None
When my classmates didn't explain the paper clearly.
presenting other peoples work and being asked questions about it when I may not necessarily understand it very well myself...and on a monday made it kind of rough.
27. Other comments:
Overall I liked the variety of course concepts, but feel there could be more focus on the weekly concepts, rather than specific journal articles that may not directly relate to the topic or be too specific to gain conceptual information from. I did learn a lot from my own articles and presentations.
Overall, I liked the idea of the class, but there was something lacking in the overall execution.
For the multiple choice questions above if I indicated "Neutral", it was because I didn't feel that it pertained to this course.
Great "entry" class into the graduate division. Prepares students for what's to come
This is a very interesting course and I enjoyed listening to my classmates and I was able to pick up their interests just by their paper selections.
Although I gained more confidence in my ability to speak in front of peers, I feel that this type of seminar format was not the best for improving my botanical knowledge, because we are rushing to present a full article in five minutes. Perhaps it is just me, but it's hard to learn a lot of information if I can't see it in writing. It would have been helpful to have seen the articles for each week ahead of time. In retrospect, I did learn a lot of information from the papers I presented as several of them covered topics/methodologies that were unfamiliar to me.

Thomas Ranker: BOT612, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 612 - Advanced Botanical Problems Crn (Section): 89217 (002)    
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 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (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 5 0.0 Freq(%) 5 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 5 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20%) 4 (80%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 5 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%)
8. Other comments:
Thank you for a fabulous class filled with laughter, great articles & stimulating conversation!
Awesome course! Had such a great time! Would take it again! And/or a similar course for another science classic :) Mahalo Tom!
I enjoyed the course. It was above my expectations. The group of students was very interested and the discussion always interesting. I am glad I took it.

Thomas Ranker: BOT699, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 699 - Directed Research Crn (Section): 86992 (002)     85638 (021)    
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 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (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 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
6. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Thomas Ranker: BOT399, Fall 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 399 - Botanical Problems Crn (Section): 79501 (021)     76239 (022)    
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  
3.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
6. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Thomas Ranker: BOT699, Fall 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 699 - Directed Research Crn (Section): 70559 (014)     76721 (023)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
4. Other comments:
This wasn't a course, but Tom is the best!

Thomas Ranker: BOT201, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Botany
Course: BOT 201 - Plant Evolutionary Diversity Crn (Section): 80476 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
2. 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%)
3. 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%)
4. I learned a good deal of factual material in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
5. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
6. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
It may sound stupid, but having the powerpoints printed out really helped, especially since I wouldn't have had the inclination to do it myself.
power point slides and images.
Lab demonstrations, 3d imaging videos
The general knowledge of the subject
N/A
Info
I enjoyed the continuity and relationships shown between the different organisms in this course.
7. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The required text book, I could have done the entire course without it and saved myself a lot of money.
emphasis on taxonomic names seemed like busy work
Nothing!
I didn't like how the quizzes were cumulative. I felt that there was an overload of information to be learned within the two class lectures before the quiz and having to study the past material didn't allow me to fully absorb the new material.
I cannot think of anything that was irrelevant or useless about this course
8. The instructor gives clear explanations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%)
9. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
10. The instructor is friendly.
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%)
11. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 8 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%)
12. Overall, the TA is an excellent teacher.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.75 8 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 6 (75%) 0 (0%)
13. The TA is effective.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
5.0 8 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) 0 (0%)
14. Other comments:
I think I preferred the weekly quiz to what I imagine the course would have been like with a midterm and a final. I also enjoyed learning about each "subject" from specialist in that field...all in all, probably one of my favorite classes!
I liked this section best, but it is my main subject area of interest more so than the other two sections even though all contribute to the whole :) he is a good teacher.