eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Pradip Pant

Available Survey Results

PLAN601, Spring 2014
PLAN473, Fall 2012

Pradip Pant: PLAN601, Spring 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 601 - Planning Methods Crn (Section): 88215 (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  
5.07 14 0.27 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 13 (93%) 1 (7%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.92 14 0.28 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 12 (86%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 14 0.36 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 12 (86%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 14 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (29%) 10 (71%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 14 0.61 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 8 (57%) 5 (36%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 14 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 7 (50%) 4 (29%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 14 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 8 (57%) 4 (29%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.64 14 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 5 (36%) 6 (43%) 2 (14%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.79 14 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 2 (14%) 7 (50%) 3 (21%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 14 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (29%) 5 (36%) 5 (36%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 14 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 10 (71%) 2 (14%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.21 14 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 9 (64%) 4 (29%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 14 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (36%) 9 (64%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.86 14 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (43%) 4 (29%) 4 (29%)
15. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 14 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (57%) 6 (43%)
16. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 14 0.43 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (21%) 11 (79%)
17. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Application of course concepts through labs. In a three hour course it is improbable to provide three hours of lecture per day and expect students to apply the concepts later, this is why I enjoyed this course. Rather than overwhelm us with lecture Dr. Plant helped us apply the concepts in the lab right after learning them. This is a much more effective form of curriculum and education than I experience in some of my other courses. This course was challenging but beneficial.
The labs and the assignments
I felt the explanation of the different survey techniques in the beginning were vital
The Refresher on Statistics
Examples of the statistical analysis and interpretations
SAS program is more useful for doing research. It is a effective and quicker way for interpretation of different kinds of data. Besides learning about various research methods both qualitative and quantitative research was very useful.
I liked the intro lecture about why to not always trust statistics, and to question the origin of all statistics. Although SAS was very difficult in the beginning, I feel that I have developed the skills that I will need in the future.
Learning statistical analysis software was the most valuable aspect of the course. It also helped to strengthen my data analysis skills, which could be useful for practicing professionals. I had already taken an introductory statistics class, so much of the class was a review, but it was helpful in clarifying some of the concepts that were unclear in the introductory class.
Homework - hands on assignments to apply statistics to a chosen, not given set of data.
Labs and SAS analysis
18. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The aids did not seen to know enough about SAS to be really helpful.
we only briefly used Microsoft access
none.
N/A
non
Quizzes
I think learning ACCESS was the least valuable, because as a new user covering it over one week was not enough to really learn anything and I have already forgotten what I had learned. However, I do appreciate that it was recognized and acknowledged and it was at least discussed in one class.
Repetition of major concepts could help...
MS Access and quizzes
19. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.15 14 0.99 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 4 (29%) 6 (43%)
20. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.21 14 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 7 (50%) 5 (36%)
21. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 14 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 8 (57%) 4 (29%)
22. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 14 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (21%) 6 (43%) 4 (29%)
23. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 14 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (36%) 9 (64%)
24. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 14 0.61 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (14%) 11 (79%)
25. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 14 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (21%) 0 (0%) 11 (79%)
26. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 14 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 4 (29%) 8 (57%)
27. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.93 14 0.27 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 13 (93%)
28. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 14 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (21%) 10 (71%)
29. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
nonee
Food
I like the meticulously designed course which helped me gain new idea on research methodology. It was more practical way of learning. I would like to see demonstration of some examples of research.
Easier quizzes or provide study guides for the quizzes
I think the course material is dry on its own so there is not much that can be done about that. However I think Pradip displayed a thorough understanding of the material and was able to teach it effectively. The lectures were very brief on explaining the concepts, so independent learning should be emphasized, in particular if this is a first time statistics class. Therefore I agree with another statistical class as a prerequisite.
keep up the good work...
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.71 14 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (29%) 10 (71%)
31. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 14 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (29%) 10 (71%)
32. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 14 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (21%) 10 (71%)
33. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 14 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 13 (93%)
34. Laboratory assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 14 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 12 (86%)
35. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 14 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (43%) 7 (50%)
36. Lab assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 14 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (21%) 10 (71%)
37. Assistance was available throughout laboratory sessions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 14 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (14%) 4 (29%) 8 (57%)
38. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 14 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 12 (86%)
39. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.57 14 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (43%) 8 (57%)
40. Other comments:
none
Mahalo!
I like the over all design of the course which was meant to give practical learning of research design and methods.
Good application of concepts as it applies to planning and flexibility to select topics of interest.
Study guide for quizzes please

Pradip Pant: PLAN473, Fall 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Urban & Regional Planning
Course: PLAN 473 - GIS for Community Planning Crn (Section): 77945 (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  
4.94 16 0.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 15 (94%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.19 16 0.4 Freq(%) 13 (81%) 3 (19%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.81 16 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 13 (81%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 16 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (31%) 11 (69%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.31 16 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 5 (31%) 8 (50%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 16 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 5 (31%) 10 (63%)
7. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 16 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 4 (25%) 10 (63%)
8. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 16 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 0 (0%) 8 (50%) 6 (38%)
9. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 16 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 8 (50%) 7 (44%)
10. I learned to value new viewpoints.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 16 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 4 (25%) 8 (50%)
11. I developed more confidence in myself.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 16 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 9 (56%) 6 (38%)
12. I developed skills needed by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 16 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (44%) 8 (50%)
13. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 16 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 6 (38%) 9 (56%)
14. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.06 16 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (25%) 7 (44%) 5 (31%)
15. I learned more in this course than I expected to learn.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.94 16 0.93 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 4 (25%) 6 (38%) 5 (31%)
16. The course made me think hard and carefully.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.27 16 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 7 (44%) 6 (38%)
17. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
understanding the scope of GIS in Planning field.
The labs were obviously valuable. I liked the readings too, however, it brought the course together into a well rounded humanities/tech course.
some of the readings, the data cleaning (or how not to enter it the first time)
I know how to use the GIS in analysis and decision making
hands on GIS work
Working with GIS in the lab and the project.
The group project.
Learning new applications in GIS
The labs.
Lab time is wonderful, and Jiwnath & Pradip were ALWAYS available for assistance, which was so appreciated!!!
18. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
none.
The discussions were less than ono. Perhaps there is a way in which to enrich them in the future?
some of the class discussion about the readings was very slow
Analysis and decision making
n/a
The discussion of the readings.
The teachers should be more direct and clear about assignments and the goals of the labs. Most DURP students are not going to figure out GIS, as it is different from most other software programs used in the program, so there should be less mystery and problem solving in the labs and more explanation as to what each tool does. For example, give a list of definitions and applications of arc toolbox functions and what they are used for.
Some of the class discussions and readings (Week 5).
The more technical readings were too overwhelming. The amount of time spent discussing the readings was too much!!! I would try to keep it to 30 mins tops because we are grad students and it is our responsibility to read the readings and be prepared for class, so spending over an hour on discussing the readings is about as much time as it took to read them!!! Less discussion and more practice is preferable!!
19. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 16 0.68 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 8 (50%) 6 (38%)
20. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 16 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (13%) 7 (44%) 6 (38%)
21. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 16 0.62 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 8 (50%) 7 (44%)
22. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 16 1.09 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 4 (25%) 8 (50%)
23. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 16 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (38%) 10 (63%)
24. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 16 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (38%) 10 (63%)
25. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 16 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (44%) 9 (56%)
26. The instructor suggests specific ways students can improve.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.19 16 0.91 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (13%) 6 (38%) 7 (44%)
27. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 16 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (44%) 9 (56%)
28. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 16 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 6 (38%) 8 (50%)
29. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
none
No suggestions...
additional lab time with other students and teacher would be useful to complete labs
It was great
Reviewing GIS steps after lab work the next week would be very helpful.
I think talking about the lab after completing it would be great.
I would prefer a course that was less community oriented, and more practical in nature.
Thank you for all of your help Jiwnath & Pradip! My main suggestion is to spend less time talking about the readings and more time in the lab. This shortening of the readings discussion would allow for more time to go over what the expected results of the weekly lab module are. For instance, if the end result is a map, so a map that is similar to what the students are supposed to produce and outline what makes it good, etc.
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.44 16 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 7 (44%) 8 (50%)
31. Assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 16 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (38%) 10 (63%)
32. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 16 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (50%) 8 (50%)
33. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 16 0.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 14 (88%)
34. Laboratory assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.81 16 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 13 (81%)
35. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 16 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 4 (25%) 9 (56%)
36. Lab assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 16 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 5 (31%) 10 (63%)
37. Assistance was available throughout laboratory sessions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 16 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (31%) 11 (69%)
38. The projects were valuable in understanding the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 16 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (38%) 10 (63%)
39. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.5 16 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 6 (38%) 9 (56%)
40. Other comments:
none
Sometimes it was difficult to get the concepts of what we were doing exactly during the modules. For example, what exactly does the model we run do? What does the analysis mean? What does the overlay do? It was valuable in gaining insight to how gis can help with planning cities, etc, but without the basic gis background of what the tools we use in gis do, the skills can easily be lost.
Great job
This was an excellent course for students to gain actual hands-on GIS work.
I had a hard time understanding what the professor was saying a lot of the time because of his accent.
I spent hours, and hours and HOURS working on the lab modules, and I was able to finish much quicker than a lot of my classmates. I could not imagine spending over 10 HOURS ON ONE ASSIGNMENT!!! I personally did not do that, but I feel like the amount of time that it took to complete the labs was a bit excessive. I consistently spent at least 5 hours on each lab module. I think that is a little much especially considering the time spent doing readings and other assignments for the class.