University of Hawai'i eCAFE

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations

Instructor: Seio Nakajima

Available Survey Results

SOC 356, Fall 2012
SOC 723, Fall 2012
SOC 612, Spring 2012
SOC 706, Fall 2011
SOC 356, Spring 2011
SOC 723, Spring 2011
SOC 419, Fall 2010
SOC 706, Fall 2010
SOC 356, Spring 2010
SOC 723, Spring 2010
SOC 413, Fall 2009
SOC 495, Fall 2009
SOC 706, Fall 2009

Seio Nakajima: SOC 356, Fall 2012

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 356 - Sociology of China	Crn (Section):	78644 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
3.73	15	0.46	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (27%)	11 (73%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.33	15	0.49	Freq(%)	10 (67%)	5 (33%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	16	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	4 (25%)	11 (69%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.31	16	0.87	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	1 (6%)	6 (38%)	8 (50%)

6. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.19	16	1.05	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	4 (25%)	2 (13%)	9 (56%)

7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.31	16	0.95	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	2 (13%)	4 (25%)	9 (56%)

8. I was stimulated to discuss related topics outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.25	16	1.06	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	2 (13%)	1 (6%)	4 (25%)	9 (56%)

9. I reconsidered many of my former attitudes.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.38	16	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	1 (6%)	5 (31%)	9 (56%)

10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

Professor Seio Nakajima has shown be this beautiful country of China and its resources their economic growth of this world. this has come with a price of environmental problem with their air and water pollution that need some strong rule or there is no way of turn back on their people health.

his movies and powerpoints were interesting

I loved the use of film....nothing is better than seeing with my own eyes

the videos we watched

lectures and media

The videos were very interesting to watch

Watching the videos because it clearly illustrated the materials effectively.

The different approach taken in this class allowed me to think about certain topics in different ways.

Learned a lot about China through many interesting topics.

the videos were a powerful way to learn about chinese culture and society.

11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

I see none

I felt the readings were a bit too much

none

Some of the content I knew from other classes.

the powerpoints. they were rushed and contained what i thought was useless information. too broad.

12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	16	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	4 (25%)	11 (69%)

13. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.38	16	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	1 (6%)	5 (31%)	9 (56%)

14. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	15	0.63	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	4 (27%)	10 (67%)

15. The instructor treated students fairly.

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%)

16. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
3.69	16	1.14	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	2 (13%)	7 (44%)	1 (6%)	6 (38%)

17. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	16	0.45	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (25%)	12 (75%)

18. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	15	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	3 (20%)	11 (73%)

19. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

I felt he did a good job and I would reccommend his class to future students

he cant

Make sure some of the videos and outside material is up to date.

Less Videos

better powerpoints with in-depth information

20. Assignments make students think.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	16	0.73	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (13%)	4 (25%)	10 (63%)

21. Audiovisual materials (or computers) used in this course were well integrated with course topics.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.69	16	0.6	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	3 (19%)	12 (75%)

22. Exams are reasonable in length and difficulty.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	15	0.62	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	3 (20%)	11 (73%)

23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.5	14	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	5 (36%)	8 (57%)

24. My overall evaluation of this course is...

good experience and great instructor

good class

excellent

It is a good course that helps people understand china better.

its a fun class and he makes the material easy to understand.

I really liked this class. Even though I did know some of the earlier content, I learned more in detail about it. I was also introduced to some aspects of China I didn't know about which was very interesting.

It was a good course.

good.

This has been my favorite class thus far in my entire college education. Although Seio has a very heavy accent, it does not matter. He focuses on actually teaching us information. Rather than what most teachers do and make you memorize information and trick you on tests. He is extremely interesting and taught me so much about China, prior to this class I had no idea what China was like and now I feel very informed. The best part is, it was not just words his visual aids brought China to life for me. It was effortless to remember things about CHina because Seio does not put pressure on you and just lets you enjoy the visual aids. His papers are hard and so are his tests. I highly recommend this course, for anyone who would like to know more about China. (Even other Professors)

25. Other comments:

none

Seio Nakajima: SOC 723, Fall 2012 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 723 - Seminar Modern Chinese Society	Crn (Section):	78652 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
5.0	3	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (100%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

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
4.67	3	0.58	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (33%)	2 (67%)

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. I learned to apply principles from this course to new situations.

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. I learned to identify main points and central issues in this field.

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. 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	3	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (100%)

9. I was stimulated to discuss related topics outside of 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%)

10. I reconsidered many of my former attitudes.

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. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

the introduction/explanation of theories

12. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

how to critically read artciles

13. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.

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%)

14. 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%)

15. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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%)

16. The instructor treated students fairly.

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. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.

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%)

18. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.

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%)

19. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

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%)

20. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?

It's a very informative class. The teacher is very knowledgeable.

21. Assignments make students think.

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%)

22. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.

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%)

23. Exams are reasonable in length and difficulty.

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%)

24. 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%)

25. My overall evaluation of this course is...

very good class

26. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 612, Spring 2012 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 612 - Contmporary Sociologicl Theory	Crn (Section):	85244 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.82	11	0.4	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (18%)	9 (82%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.55	11	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (45%)	6 (55%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.36	11	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	7 (64%)	4 (36%)

4. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.36	11	0.67	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (9%)	5 (45%)	5 (45%)

5. The course made me think hard and carefully.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.73	11	0.47	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (27%)	8 (73%)

6. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.82	11	0.4	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (18%)	9 (82%)

7. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.91	11	0.3	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (9%)	10 (91%)

8. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	10	0.7	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (10%)	2 (20%)	7 (70%)

9. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.55	11	0.82	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (18%)	1 (9%)	8 (73%)

10. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

The discussion and the analytic papers. Even though writing the analytic paper is very challenging for me, it's very important and make me to understand more about the articles that I am more interested in.

Luhmann was amazing! Also, the rational choice reading was very interesting.

Learning about the different and varying perspectives.

Dr. Nakajima's selection of literature was very broad and unique in comparison to contemporary theory classes offered at other universities. The class naturally started with the typical cannon of theory, but quickly moved to very cutting edge concepts.

I liked the reading.

The course was really interesting and the assigned readings prompted interesting class discussions. The instructions for the papers were vague; however, I feel that it pushed us to read between the lines and think critically to ensure we understood the content.

Breadth of theoretical choices Interest in covering as much material as possible Challenge of engaging with theoretical concepts

I liked the lectures that the professor gave, which helped clarify the readings. The professor's honesty about the difficulty of the readings and his own understanding of the readings was very refreshing and encouraging.

I really like the lectures instead of the class discussions.

11. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

Sometimes he has too many agendas and he doesn't have enough time to finish those agendas, then we don't have time to discuss the readings.

I wish we could have spent more time on each theorist.

Honestly, the class was fine as it is. However, there was a bit of a disjoint in the flow of the course. It always felt like it should have either been more discussion based or more lecture based. At times it felt like there was either not enough lecturing to cover the material or not enough chance for discussion to go over the concepts.

I wish I could do my own research and had more time to do research for a final paper. There is too much reading.

I felt that class discussions could have been more worthwhile if more people participated, but because not everyone contributed maybe make it a requirement to participate or employ a different method that will facilitate discussions better. Sometimes there were too many readings. I feel that all of the readings were important and relevant to the course; however, we were unable to really grasp their overall meaning because there was too much that needed to be discussed.

If my arm were twisted, I'd say that there wasn't enough practical examples of theory application; but really I don't think that's specifically necessary in this course.

Sometimes class discussions would go off course from students' questions. It's important to answer questions from students but there were times when we didn't even go over the readings because we ran out of time talking about something else.

The classroom itself.

12. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.64	11	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (36%)	7 (64%)

13. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

Either more time to have a conversation on the concepts, or more time to have Dr. Nakajima explain the material.

Less reading and more time to do research

Employ a different method to facilitate class discussions better and either assign less readings or manage class time differently so all material can be covered.

(1) Assign readings to students to lead discussion with questions and moderation. (2) Change the classroom.

14. Other comments:

I found it's quite distracting to study in the graduate lounge because sometimes people are coming to take their food or drinks in the fridge. I wish we could have a better and more convenient classroom.

This entire program gives too much reading assignments to students. There is not enough time for research or potential research.

Overall good first run at this course.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 706, Fall 2011 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 706 - Cultural Analysis	Crn (Section):	76789 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

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

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.17	6	0.41	Freq(%)	5 (83%)	1 (17%)

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
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (67%)	2 (33%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

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	6	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (100%)

8. I felt 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%)

9. 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	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

10. The instructor was 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%)

11. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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%)

12. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

13. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

14. The instructor sets high standards for students.

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%)

15. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.

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%)

16. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

I mostly enjoyed the range of topics which the class was able to cover in a short amount of time. I felt that there were several different things which the class discussed, but it remained key to the topic of culture

I liked the readings. They were challenging, stimulating, coherent. I am going over the readings for my final paper and find them more interesting and helpful than the first time I read them. I admit I haven't been able to read every reading prior to class discussions, but I will complete whatever I've left out.

Excellent selection of readings. The most productive in class discussion I have been a part of. Very clear expectations. Seio is extremely supportive and engaged. He is extremely prepared for class and provides substantial background information to all of the readings.

I enjoyed the readings and found this course very challenging intellectually. Thank you.

18. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

There was nothing of importance which I liked the least of this class.

Class discussion sometimes felt awkward. I know the topic is very challenging and none of us was very confident in discussing theories, but it is a learning environment, so I thought the discussions could've been more open-minded and friendly.

There wasn't anything I didn't like about the class.

I didn't like the way some students went off on tangents and were allowed to discuss things completely irrelevant to the coursework. Seio did a good job for the most part of reining these people in.

19. 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%)

20. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

The class could have either a clearer objective to the class or less desirable goals. I always feel like in courses with Dr. Nakajima, he wants to go over so many different things, but we never have enough time to do them. Which is a shame being that I would have liked to have done a few of these things.

He could spend some time lecturing on the subjects, theories, and topics.

It would be helpful if there is more assertive guidance. Again, the topic is a challenging one and many times I felt lost in the multitude of concepts and debates.

I don't think the class could be improved.

21. Other comments:

Dr. Nakajima by far tries to be very reasonable with students and is flexible to what students experience.

It was the most challenging yet most interesting class I've taken so far.

This is the best class I have taken at UH MÄ?noa and I really enjoyed it. Not only was the subject interesting and the readings well selected but it gave me considerable help on preparing and executing my own research.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 356, Spring 2011 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 356 - Sociology of China	Crn (Section):	88951 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

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%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

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. 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	9	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	9 (100%)

6. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

I liked the films that he had shown very much!

the videos

The aspects that were most valuable to me were the history and culture of China. It challenged me to apply myself and helped me to understand China better. I also enjoyed watching the selected videos in class. It exposed China from a different dimension. It allowed us to visualize China since we're unable to physically travel there.

I enjoyed the lesson plan and the way that Seio conducted and utilized class time.

The videos during the most of the classes.

Videos to illustrate the concepts covered in text were invaluable.

7. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

I thought everything was relevant.

lectures

N/A

probably, the handicap for American students who don't have any back ground knowledge about Chinese and Asian cultures.

N/A

8. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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%)

9. The instructor was enthusiastic about the course material.

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%)

10. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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. 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%)

12. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

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%)

13. In general, the course was well organized.

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%)

14. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

15. The instructor sets high standards for students.

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%)

16. Audiovisual materials (or computers) used in this course were well chosen.

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%)

17. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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%)

18. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.89	9	0.33	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (11%)	8 (89%)

19. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 723, Spring 2011 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 723 - Seminar Modern Chinese Society	Crn (Section):	85972 (001)

1. 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%)

2. 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%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

4. I learned a good deal of factual material in this 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%)

5. 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	4	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (100%)

6. I learned to identify main points and central issues in this field.

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. 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	4	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (100%)

8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?

I think the aspect of environmental issues as well as different methods of research. There were different perspectives on China as well as different areas that were covered.

I found that this course was able to for fill much of the pertinant literature on Chinese Society

Professor Nakajima is very knowledgeable about the subject matter, and his interest in it showed through. He also did a good job couching the subject matter in a "sociological" way that was useful for pursuing research.

9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?

I think that any aspects that were difficult had to do with qualitative research.

The requirement of leading discussion could have been better structured.

I cannot think of anything that was not particularly valuable.

10. 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%)

11. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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 maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

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 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%)

14. The instructor was willing to help.

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 was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.25	4	0.96	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (25%)	1 (25%)	2 (50%)

16. In general, the course was well organized.

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%)

17. 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	0.58	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (50%)	2 (50%)

18. The instructor sets high standards for students.

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%)

19. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to 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%)

20. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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%)

21. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

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%)

22. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

I would have liked to have spent more time on my research proposal. I also would have liked not to find articles and print them. I felt that the reading materials should already be there.

Mostly, I feel that the goal of teaching a general overview of Chinese literature was the only goal of the course then this would be good enough. However, the course was not able to provide enough time to go over research methods for China in a structured way. This portion either needs to be left out or given enough time to focus on it.

I cannot think of anything at present. The workload was sometimes a bit heavy, but not overly so.

23. Other comments:

Over all the course was quite good and provided a good wealth of material which I wanted from the class.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 419, Fall 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 419 - Analy in Formal Organizations	Crn (Section):	76549 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Freshman	Sophomore	Junior	Senior	Grad	Other
4.0	5	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)

2. Course

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.4	5	0.55	Freq(%)	3 (60%)	2 (40%)

3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (40%)	3 (60%)

4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (40%)	3 (60%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.8	5	0.45	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	4 (80%)

7. I try to relate what I learn in this course to my own experience.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	0 (0%)	4 (80%)

8. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

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%)

9. The instructor explained the writing requirements clearly.

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%)

10. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (40%)	3 (60%)

11. The instructor stimulated me to think about the subject matter.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (40%)	3 (60%)

12. The instructor treated students with respect.

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%)

13. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

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%)

14. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

15. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

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%)

16. The writing assignments helped me understand the 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%)

17. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were adequate and used appropriately.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.6	5	0.89	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	0 (0%)	4 (80%)

18. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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%)

19. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?

I enjoyed the video's that Professor Seio was able to bring and show the class to help us understand the topics better and relate to the topics covered in the textbook.

The writting assignments

Nakajima's lectures & films.

The video's shown during class were fun to watch. They also helped us to better understand the material.

The research question papers.

20. Which aspects of the course did you like least?

n/a - I enjoyed this course overall.

N/A

The book itself wasn't very interesting and hard to grasp at times.

The weekly quizzes.

21. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.8	5	0.45	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (20%)	4 (80%)

22. Other comments:

the reasons why we saw a certain film was sometimes unclear

Too bad the class is only once a week =\

Awesome teacher, good class. The teacher is very easy to work with and talk to. The teacher made the course a lot more enjoyable. Good job. Thank you.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 706, Fall 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 706 - Cultural Analysis	Crn (Section):	77736 (001)

1. Class Level (pick one)

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

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Elective	Required
1.0	6	0.0	Freq(%)	6 (100%)	0 (0%)

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
4.83	6	0.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	5 (83%)

5. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (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	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	6	0.82	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (17%)	2 (33%)	3 (50%)

8. I learned a lot in this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

9. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.

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%)

10. 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%)

11. The instructor seems knowledgeable in many areas.

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%)

12. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

13. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

14. The instructor acknowledges all questions insofar as possible.

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%)

15. 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%)

16. The instructor was accessible to students outside of 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%)

17. 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%)

18. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

19. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.

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%)

20. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	6	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (33%)	4 (67%)

21. 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%)

22. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

This is an excellent courses but sometimes the readings are so long and dense, not even 2.5 hours is enough to discuss one. I understand why there needs to be so many readings though but sometimes there isn't enough time to understand the longer articles.

Perhaps ditch the section on economics and focus instead on popular culture?

i think it would help if 611 and 612 were prerequisites. or at least recommended.

This course should be a year long course.

I appreciated the professor being very nice to every comments that are presented in discussion, but also thought that students can learn a lot from what the professor had to offer. Also he could give us more guidance on what to look for in the readings for the same reason so that students can learn from his knowledge of what's important.

23. Other comments:

Thank you for being a very kind and understanding professor to students of all backgrounds!!

Really enjoyed this course Seio. Thanks so much.

good professor

i enjoyed this course very much. i now feel pretty good about my ability to read and engage with literature in this field; this was not as true when i completed other substantive courses here. this is attributable to both my personal growth in the program and the high quality of the course.

This course is very attractive. The only issue is that this is the ONLY culture class in the department. We should have another culture course in this department.

This class is a significant contribution to the department's graduate program, not only because there are few graduate seminar available in the department, but also because the couse teaches students how to read and evaluate sociological studies. Students get to read a lot, and although not all of them might not be directly related to our interests, still it is important to get this ground work done before embarking on our own studies. I wish there are more courses like this on different fields so that students with different interests would benefit equally!

Seio Nakajima: SOC 356, Spring 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 356 - Sociology of China	Crn (Section):	89135 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.44	9	0.53	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (56%)	4 (44%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

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%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.44	9	0.53	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (56%)	4 (44%)

5. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.56	9	0.53	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (44%)	5 (56%)

6. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

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%)

7. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.33	9	0.5	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	6 (67%)	3 (33%)

8. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

9. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.44	9	0.53	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5 (56%)	4 (44%)

10. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.

Maybe less videos and more lecture.

The presentation of the class can be less information on it. I would like to listen and hear professor's opinions and thoughts a little bit more because if the presentation is too wordy, I think it's very boring because students can just read the presentation in order to listen to what the teacher says.

good in general.

I liked the way Seio taught the class. I don't have any suggestions because I really learned a lot. It changed my original thoughts on China.

11. Audiovisual materials (or computers) used in this course were well integrated with course topics.

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%)

12. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

13. 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%)

14. Other comments:

films used in class were relevant to class material and it greatly increased my understanding of the issues which China faces.

I love the videos! Many professors that teach about other countries usually just talk, but Seio showed many videos. I could see what China was really like and how they lived. Visual aid is always better!!! The fact that he lived there also made it interesting because he had knowledge of the area and cool items, such as a weird looking thing made out of deer feet.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 723, Spring 2010 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 723 - Seminar Modern Chinese Society	Crn (Section):	86629 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of 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%)

2. 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%)

3. 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%)

4. 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	4	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (100%)

5. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.0	4	1.41	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	1 (25%)	0 (0%)	1 (25%)	2 (50%)

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 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%)

8. The instructor was accessible to students outside of 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%)

9. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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 amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.

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. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.

Some times hard to understand his English.

12. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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 COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.67	3	0.58	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (33%)	2 (67%)

14. Other comments:

No survey responses were found.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 413, Fall 2009 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 413 - Analysis in Economy & Society	Crn (Section):	75866 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

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%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

5. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

6. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.52	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (38%)	5 (63%)

7. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

8. The instructor sets high standards for students.

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%)

9. Audiovisual materials (or computers) helped to clarify difficult concepts.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.63	8	0.74	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (13%)	1 (13%)	6 (75%)

10. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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%)

11. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.5	8	0.53	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (50%)	4 (50%)

12. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

maybe an easier to understand textbook.

it couldnt. it was great!

Can't be improved, the films and powerpoints were extremely helpful as well as the extra credits and take-home quizzes.

It does not need improving. The class was very organized and interesting. The books were easy to read, but posed enough of a challenge for critical thinking. I like it the way it is. Good use of media, chalk and powerpoint for lectures. Expectations were made clear, and instructor executed his goals well.

Seio Nakajima: SOC 495, Fall 2009 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 495 - Topics in Sociology	Crn (Section):	79151 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

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%)

3. The instructor communicated 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%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

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%)

5. 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%)

6. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

7. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

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%)

8. The instructor sets high standards for students.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

9. Audiovisual materials (or computers) used in this course were well chosen.

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. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

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%)

11. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.5	6	0.55	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (50%)	3 (50%)

12. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

I felt that the class and course content was well-structured throughout the semester and the movies that we had watched in class were very helpful. They really helped me in understanding the main points of the chapters in the text. In other words, I don't have any suggestions of how this class could be improved.

This class was perfect. No improvements needed. Using media, chalk and powerpoint for lectures kept things interesting. Class activities fun. He executed the class goals well. Very organized.

Seio is extremely helpful in or out of class. very interesting class, good teacher makes the subject matter more attractive.

I am not sure...the instructor gets his points across pretty well and is very patient with students. His lectures were very engaging and kept me interested in the subject. Job Well Done!

Seio Nakajima: SOC 706, Fall 2009 Back to top

Campus:	University of Hawaii at Manoa	Department:	Sociology
Course:	SOC 706 - Cultural Analysis	Crn (Section):	79150 (001)

1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.83	12	0.39	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (17%)	10 (83%)

2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	12	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	12 (100%)

3. The instructor communicated effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.92	12	0.29	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	11 (92%)

4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (67%)

5. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.92	12	0.29	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	11 (92%)

6. The instructor was accessible to students outside of class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	12	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	12 (100%)

7. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
5.0	12	0.0	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	12 (100%)

8. The instructor sets high standards for students.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.49	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4 (33%)	8 (67%)

9. I feel that this course challenged me intellectually.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.75	12	0.45	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	3 (25%)	9 (75%)

10. Grades are assigned fairly and impartially.

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.67	12	0.65	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	2 (17%)	9 (75%)

11. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean	N-Size	Std Dev		Very Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
4.92	12	0.29	Freq(%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	1 (8%)	11 (92%)

12. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.

I think the course provides an excellent learning opportunity and is very thought provoking. I do not have much to say on how to improve the course as I find the structure, material and design of the course very good. The only thing I want to add is, sometimes the readings become too tough to understand and this were the course instructors explanations in the class helps a lot.

Thank you!!!

1. the mapping of the basic concepts and arguments at the beginning would be helpful. 2. the summarize after every class by diagrams would be great for better understanding.

The instructor knows his material well, but as with most younger professors, can be more confident in his delivery. Additionally, the reading response activity can be improved by asking students to comment on each other's responses more expressly to stimulate the discussion further. There are also those who rarely contribute to discussion sessions and I hope that in the future these students will receive attention from the professor so that they at least try to engage more as the semester progresses. This is just to help make discussions maintain a freshness (instead of the same group of students making comments). Overall, this was a great way for me to prepare for my MA thesis proposal.

9 on Monday is not good for studetn to manage.

Provide more than one type of weekly assignments. The assignment could be interchangeable between a reading response and a guided question list from instructor. A question list may be helpful especially when dealing with the more difficult articles. Students then know what key points to look out for when reading the articles. All in all this was a great class!

The instructor should push students to work harder.

I really like the way the instructor handled the course so much so I don't have any comments on how the course can be improved. The content of the course was very challenging but since the instructor was very accessible outside the class and offers students guidance that they needed, so I really appreciate his efforts and skills.