eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Creighton Litton

Available Survey Results

NREM301, Spring 2014
NREM301L, Spring 2014
NREM680, Spring 2014
NREM682, Fall 2013
NREM301, Spring 2013
NREM301L, Spring 2013
NREM480, Spring 2013
NREM301, Spring 2012
NREM301L, Spring 2012
NREM680, Spring 2012
NREM682, Fall 2011
NREM301, Spring 2011
NREM301L, Spring 2011
NREM480, Spring 2011
NREM301, Spring 2010
NREM301L, Spring 2010
NREM680, Spring 2010
NREM682, Fall 2009

Creighton Litton: NREM301, Spring 2014

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301 - Natural Resources Management Crn (Section): 83797 (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  
3.67 15 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (47%) 7 (47%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.93 15 0.26 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 14 (93%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.93 15 0.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 14 (93%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 11 (73%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 1.06 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
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 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)
7. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (40%) 9 (60%)
8. I learned a lot in this course.
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%)
9. I generally understood the material presented in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.87 15 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 13 (87%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
I thought it was neat how sometimes we would have a guest speaker come in to lecture.
Prof. Littion and Prof. Crow provided pictures and short youtube clips to help clarify certain points that were discussed.
Awesome Professors! Good class, informative, not too difficult.
This class pushed me to think critically and outside of the box, which is a important quality that I should have as an NREM student and future conservationist.
Having opportunities to apply our knowledge to real life situations.
The knowledge of the instructors on most parts of the course & their interest in training students to become natural resource managers. The use of journal articles vs a textbook was very helpful to me as a student, and I enjoyed most of the readings.
The lectures were definitely the most valuable part of the course. Although many people do not acknowledge the basic lecture of professors, both Creighton and Susan are exceptional professors and know how to extend their knowledge onto their students. I am beyond grateful for their enthusiasm while teach, which makes coming to class so easy. I also felt that access to the reading and materials from class through Creighton's website was great and provided convenience for me.
handouts. I loved them! good reference for the future
Very good content, all aspects were invaluable.
Lectures were very interesting and applicable.
The wide variety of topics, which gave a bit of insight into each of the specializations
Broadening my understanding of ecological principles and the dynamics of our planet to develop an appreciation and a sense of stewardship for our natural resources.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Sometimes Prof. Litton and Prof. Crow spoke quickly,briefly about a certain topic/topic example, so it could be a little difficult to write everything down/register the information in my brain.
None
The CO2 concentration lab where we just made graphs and tables in the lab. We already practiced those skills in previous labs. It was still good practice but was a bit tedious. I would have enjoyed learning a new field technique or skill in natural resource management.
The chairs in the classroom. As far as the course content, it was all appropriate and relevant. I wouldn't say anything was "least valuable".
I would not say there were an aspects that were last valuable in the course. I would say that a lot of the printed readings were sometimes more than necessary because a lot of the information that was in the readings were reviewed in class.
cumulative final
n/a
For certain sections it felt like we learned more about what they were rather than how to manage them- again a lot of different topics are covered so it is understandable but it would be nice to learn a little bit about management for certain topics (coastal ecology is one that would be good if we learned a bit more about management)
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.87 15 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 13 (87%)
13. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)
14. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
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%)
15. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 15 1.18 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 10 (67%)
16. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 12 (80%)
17. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 15 1.06 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 11 (73%)
18. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)
19. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
It would be helpful if the most important points were emphasized since he provides immense information on a variety of topics.
Some guest lecturers were boring, not helpful.
Can't think of any!
All good!
In a lecture class as small as this, I think getting the students into smaller groups for discussion/thinking activities would be extremely beneficial. I found the group activities that we did do really helpful, and its always nice to get perspective from other classmates.
One way that this course could be improved would be having an interactive classroom. There are many classrooms that have been renovated on campus that are equipped with whiteboards around the room and interactive smartboards. I feel like Creighton and Susan deserve to teach in a classroom like this because they always advocate for student participation and incorporate activities that make us get our of our seats and write on the board.
Better classroom would facilitate better learning. Whiteboard marginal, florescent lights flicker and buzz, classroom was undersized for number of students enrolled.
Put a little more text information on slides- for the most part it was fine, but sometimes if we were moving quickly or discussing a lot at one time, I wasn't able to get everything written down and often it wouldn't be on the slides
20. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.13 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 10 (67%) 4 (27%)
21. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
22. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 9 (60%)
23. Instruction is well-coordinated among the team teachers.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
24. The teachers were compatible in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 15 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 3 (20%) 10 (67%)
25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.53 15 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 11 (73%)
26. Other comments:
Overall, this class was very interesting. Just a little emphasis on the main points would be helpful. I knew a elementary teacher who would use green markers to highlight important messages/topics- something about the color green helps people to remember/recall information. I really enjoyed learning about ecology and fires. Mahalo!
I learned so much from Susan and Creighton that I can honestly say that I have a much better understanding of natural resource management. Both are very good lecturers. Enjoyed going to class everyday.
One of my favorite classes so far.
A lot of students were coastal and marine NREM students, and yet that subject (other than wildfire) was covered the LEAST in the whole semester. I understand that the instructors expertise was not in this area, but a university in Hawaii of all places should get a little deeper into coastal and marine management in a course like this.
Professor Creighton is by far one of the greatest professors I've had during my college career. Never have I met a professor who is so passionate about what they are teaching. He cares about his students and always ensures that we understand what is being taught. He also always tries to give reasoning behind his lessons, which encourages me to stay focused and listen. Professor Crow is an amazing professor and surely loves her soils. She has a very knowledgeable professor and always ensures that her students are not bored and are engaged in the lecture. I am so thankful for Professor Crow's dedication as a professor and her willingness to speak with us when we are in need of help.
Very impressed by the organization of the course; content flowed well even between two different instructors. Instructors were both very considerate of students' needs, and prompt in returning assignment and responding to emails.

Creighton Litton: NREM301L, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301L - Natural Resources Mgmt Lab Crn (Section): 83799 (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  
3.67 15 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (47%) 7 (47%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
2.0 15 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 15 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.87 15 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 13 (87%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 11 (73%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 1.13 Freq(%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 11 (73%)
6. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (40%) 9 (60%)
7. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
8. This course was helpful in developing new skills.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 12 (80%)
9. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Soil analysis and forest stand metrics were the most instructive in field experiences.
Learned how to write a good hypothesis.
Being able to apply what I learned in class to lab/field trips. Also, the field trips were awesome and educational at the same time!
I appreciated the time and effort that the Prof. and TA put into grading the lab reports. I also enjoyed the hands-on type of labs that were "outside."
Writing the lab reports helped my writing skills. I also liked being able to conduct real field measurements. It allowed me to see what it'd really be like working in the natural resource management field.
In the long run, it is the skills obtained from writing the labs. But, in the process, it was working together with class mates, and most valuable was having a hands on teaching style from both Creighton and Susan, and Marcus. Really made a difference.
Practice on excel was definitely a plus during this lab. I also felt that the exercises that were assigned to us for all the labs was very useful and helped me set a foundation for the basics I need to succeed in my field of study.
Going out, doing field work, and then writing scientific lab reports on what we did was extremely valuable to me. I feel like I got a good foundation to build upon as I continue on in my education and then into resource management afterwards.
I thought the field trips were very helpful and eye opening. I gained new skills in measuring tree dynamics at Wa'ahila ridge. I also learned a lot about the research being done at coconut island which was really cool. Overall I thought this lab conducted a variety of activities that allowed me to develop new skills for my major.
Stimulation of critical thinking.
10. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Good lab. Water treatment plant was my least favorite trip. Felt like I didnt learn a lot.
None
I was confused about certain corrections since they were different teachings than that of my biology, Chemistry, and Physics lab reports.
Some of the labs where we just sat in the computer lab doing excel stuff.
I found all areas of value.
11. The instructor helped me understand how writing is used in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 15 0.76 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 2 (13%) 10 (67%)
12. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Go on more field trips if can
The labs themselves are pretty straight forward.
13. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.0 15 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 4 (27%) 6 (40%) 0 (0%)
14. The TA was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.36 15 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 3 (20%) 8 (53%) 1 (7%)
15. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 15 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (53%) 6 (40%)
16. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 4 (27%) 9 (60%)
17. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 11 (73%)
18. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.92 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 3 (20%) 10 (67%)
19. Laboratory assignments make students think.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 15 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
20. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.47 15 0.64 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 8 (53%)
21. Lab assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 15 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 0 (0%) 12 (80%)
22. Lab reports are graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 15 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 4 (27%) 6 (40%)
23. Lab reports are returned promptly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.93 15 1.33 Freq(%) 2 (13%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 6 (40%) 6 (40%)
24. The field trips were useful learning experiences.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 11 (73%)
25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.33 15 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
26. Other comments:
Susan and Creighton are awesome! Both fantastic professors. They know how to engage students and they both make sure their students really understand the material. Great class, fun lab. Coconut Island lab was my favorite.
Overall, great class. I really enjoyed the Coconut Island Field trip- it was a beautiful location and it was interesting to learn about the different projects that are being conducted there.
It was a great opportunity to have a chance to learn with both Susan & Creighton. I am especially grateful for having Creighton as an instructor, imparting his knowledge of forestry. There was a time not too long ago when you had to travel out of state to another school to learn about forestry. His presence is well appreciated.
Great lab! One of the labs I actually got to go out into the field and learn valuable skills for my field of study!!!
I felt like the grading of the lab reports was inconsistent with all of the different instructors/TAs grading the papers. Also, Marcus was not prompt in returning our lab reports. Between reports 2&3, we only had maybe 2 days between getting lab 2 back, and turning in lab 3. That did not allow students to compare the two labs and maybe fix some things that needed to be fixed before hand, as well as go in and talk to someone about their grade. Maybe work on the schedule so that students have adequate time between receiving a graded lab report and turning one in.

Creighton Litton: NREM680, Spring 2014     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 680 - Ecosystem Ecology Crn (Section): 89323 (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 16 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 16 (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 16 0.0 Freq(%) 16 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 16 0.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 15 (94%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 16 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (44%) 9 (56%)
7. I learned a lot in this 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%)
8. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.06 16 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (31%) 5 (31%) 6 (38%)
9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 16 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (25%) 11 (69%)
10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
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%)
11. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 16 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 16 (100%)
12. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 16 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (13%) 13 (81%)
13. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
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%)
14. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 16 1.15 Freq(%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 0 (0%) 13 (81%)
15. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 16 0.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 15 (94%)
16. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.94 16 1.18 Freq(%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 2 (13%) 6 (38%) 6 (38%)
17. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.81 16 1.11 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (19%) 2 (13%) 6 (38%) 5 (31%)
18. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
- There is a great amount of information presented during each lecture and at times I felt like I was drinking from a fire hose. Perhaps give more time to digest the material and have small assignments to really drive home the concepts you feel are the most important
It's intimidating being in a graduate course with students that are clearly experts in the different subject matters we cover. It's difficult to participate when a lot of times the questions are directed towards the students with the familiarity with the material.
I
This is the class I have enjoyed the most at UH. Creighton is clear, patient, and thorough about answering questions. I do think he is too concerned with class participation; just because people aren't constantly asking many questions or speaking in class, doesn't mean they aren't interested/learning.
His teaching style is great, course structure is great, and I really enjoyed the pace and depth of the class. One thing that confused me a little in the isotope section was his use of "parts per mil" instead of what all the papers used, which was just "permil" (or "parts per thousand").
i felt that even though class participation/discussion was worth 20 percent of our grade we have minimal opportunities to discuss. students would frequently get interrupted by Dr. Litton during discussions which made it difficult to get full participation points.
Some of the graphs on the lecture notes weren't readable, but Creighton did a great job explaining them in class. It was just that when I would go home to try to review the material the graphs were just too light/sometimes to small to understand.
There is a lot of information covered in this class and for the most part Dr Litton is excellent and repeating and reiterating points but at time grading seemed a bit harsh or bias and it should be more consistent.
Thanks for the great lectures and sharing your wealth of knowledge with us. There are a few things that might improve the overall student experience during lectures: (1) Often figures shown on the overhead slide-show are too small to see, even if sitting in the front of the class, and it really limits the effectiveness of presenting the information. Often, it seems this is done so bulleted text can also be shown on the same slide to drive home the points that we can't even see. I think it would be more effective to put the figure on its own slide if the details are too small to see. (2) It seems that despite your assurances that "no question is stupid" some students are intimidated to ask questions because they are afraid of getting called out on their lack of understanding the material.
At least include one off island field trip or several in-island field trips. They have a great potential to contribute significantly to the course experience. Giving the tests in the lab was a good idea, it would have been better to use all of the 3 hour lab period, (for tests made for one hour.
19. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 16 0.8 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 9 (56%) 4 (25%)
20. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 16 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 7 (44%) 7 (44%)
21. Exams are creative and require original thought.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 16 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 7 (44%) 7 (44%)
22. What changes would you make in the lectures?
- At the graduate level, this is my first course with exams. I prefer take home assignments (eg homework) that I have to research and where I have to critically think about the product I turn in for a grade. I prefer this greatly to rogue memorization & regurgitating it back on an exam in class. - I am very shy and have a difficult time speaking up in class- maybe this could be taken into consideration with the participation grade in the future - You could offer something to make this up such as have students give a 5 minute summary of the days reading material at the start of class. This could even be on a volunteer basis or random
More examples/case studies to encourage class discussion.
None! I enjoyed the lectures very much, and found the handouts very helpful. Lectures are structured very well, and the sequence of the material makes sense and builds on previous knowledge learned through the course.
Although the class did not have a lab proponent it would have been great to get outside even to the courtyard at Sherman and incorporate some of the points discussed in lecture.
I liked the lectures alot. They are very interesting.
Having the lectures printed before-hand was very helpful for note-taking. My only change would be to make the font bigger on graphs & tables used in the slides, they were sometimes hard to read even on the handouts.
have three tests instead of 2 and a proposal write up
While having guest lectures was a nice change it was hard to switch between teaching styles.
Change the slides so all the figures and tables can be seen clearly.
Slight increase in pictures.
23. What changes would you make in the readings?
- Very long & although interesting, not enough to eagerly await the next paragraph-not sure how to get around this - Fell asleep with computer on my lap many nights
Make it so that each week has one reading because the way it is set up now, Thursday and then Tuesday have the same readings. It would be easier to remember the lectures and readings if they were all in the same week.
Make the reading better incorporated into the lecture topic for that week. It would be useful if the discussion leaders could get the powerpoints for that week so they can incorporate the important details/figures into their presentations.
I enjoyed the book very much, but I would maybe supplement book readings where the book is too dense/unclear, such as the weather system chapter, with additional, outside reading material.
Rather than purchasing the book, if the readings can be printed and given in the week before the lecture then it would be helpful. Also discussions from the readings should be done too
I really liked the book, it was very easy to read and I foresee myself using it as a resource in the future.
I didn't find the reading on ion that helpful.
None
Reduce the length.
24. What changes would you make in the discussion sections?
- Discuss the questions each group provided - It is difficult to 100% give undivided attention to a 45-50 min non-stop lecture by my peers (or anyone for that matter)- could break it up more where questions are allowed during the presentation or let the presenters pose questions to the class during their talk - Have someone bring snacks and drinks each week to lab
Evaluation of discussion partner participation. It would be useful if the discussion assignments could be split up so each partner get 20 minutes or so and gets an individual grade based on the amount of effort they put in. In discussion it's obvious when one student is more prepared than the other, yet they both receive the same grade for the work.
Make discussions a little shorter
grades for the discussion labs should also factor in feedback and rating from the class itself
The discussion questions that are given with the readings should be discussed during the presentations
Overall I liked the discussion sections and the idea behind it. I think it was a great way to discuss field methods and how these components are actually measured. One part that didn't work well for me was the handout. I don't think people did a good job of referencing the handout during their talk (myself included), and I think the purpose of it was unclear for some people (for some it followed the structure of the talk and summarized info about the topic & papers, for others, it was VERY unintentional text that I will never reference again, except maybe the bibliography). Toward the end of the semester, I feel like the focus has shifted form "becoming a pseudo-expert in your topic" by reading many different papers, to "each person reads one study"...which to me falls short of the original goal of these discussion weeks. This obviously varies based on the individual, but there were some topics where I did not get a sense for the overall literature in those topic areas. Also, I think we should have snacks & coffee at the beginning of the presentation :)
insure organization of time for students is better met. Do not dominate the discussions
what about break up the class in small groups, sometimes big group discussions are intimidating for those who are shy o speak up
Often Dr. Litton dominated discussion. allow the class to speak more!
I would encourage shorter discussion papers so that people actually read them. I would also try to separate the questions after the lecture from the actual discussion, with better time organiation, which seemed to work better when we put all the desks in a circle.
Snacks should be part of the evaluation.
25. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Thank you for your hard work in teaching this class. Your passion for the subject is obvious. It rubs off and at times motivated me to want to learn above and beyond what was presented I also realized that some of the techniques I was thinking of trying for my research are not appropriate and gave me an insight into how to proceed in a new direction
This is an excellent class. This is one of those classes that I felt demanded my full attention as a student and pushed me to actively think about real life applications behind the science that we were learning. So far, I have only take one other class (Biometry) in my graduate studies that was useful and pushed me as a student to think independently about the subject matter.
that is a tough course with lots of information but I was able to learn a lot about a new subject.
Excellent course, covered a lot of important material in such a short amount of time.
I felt this course was overall very challenging but I gained a lot of useful information that I can take away and use in the future. The student led discussion was not very helpful and presentation time could be made shorter. Overall, I thought this course was very interesting and Creighton made the book readings easier to understand through lectures. However, I would not recommend this course to anyone who is not familiar with terrestrial ecology.
Great course. I enjoyed it very much, the instructor is great, and the subject matter was presented in a clear, inspiring way. Best class I've taken at UH.
Its a great and interesting course.
I would definitely recommend this course to my fellow graduate students. I have a much better understanding of ecosystem ecology now, and this will be very beneficial as I complete my graduate studies. A+ for the course!
Dr. Litton seemed extremely grumpy and unhappy throughout the entire semester
great! lots of material, but creighton definitely made it joyable
This class was so hard but really great content. challenging in a good way though at times frustratingly difficult!
I'm glad to learn all about ecosyetem ecology.
Great course! learned a lot and put several situations into an ecological perspective like climate change.
26. Other comments:
Really appreciated taking the midterm during the discussion period. The midterms felt really long and the extra time was a blessing so we didn't need to rush.
Thank you, Creighton!
Creighton was so well versed in every aspect of the course that speaking in class and asking questions was daunting even though it was readily encouraged. However he was very sensitive to not making us feel self concious about inaccurate answers or poor questions. He was readily available and approachable outside of class and for clarification and guidance on course materials and assignments. The guest lectures done by other experts from the department were very beneficial to understanding those study areas.
A few of the exam questions had wording that was confusing, so if there are questions that a lot of people mis-interpreted, maybe consider revising the wording on those to make it more clear. I did appreciate having extra time to complete the 2nd exam. I also like the idea of the proposal as the final exam because it will be beneficial for giving us practice writing proposals and developing our research ideas.
Due to the environmental nature of this course, field trips have a potential to add a lot to the learning experience.

Creighton Litton: NREM682, Fall 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 682 - Restoration Ecology Crn (Section): 79101 (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  
5.04 24 0.21 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 22 (92%) 1 (4%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.22 24 0.42 Freq(%) 18 (75%) 5 (21%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 24 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 24 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 24 0.34 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (13%) 21 (88%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.96 24 0.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 23 (96%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 24 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 18 (75%)
7. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 24 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (21%) 19 (79%)
8. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 24 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (29%) 17 (71%)
9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 24 0.98 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 5 (21%) 16 (67%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
I think Dr. Litton's lectures and comments were very valuable. I had some background on many of the topics covered but the course provided in depth lectures and discussions which helped me to better understand the topics and put them into a big picture. Restoration ecology is way more multidimensional now then I thought at the beginning - there are so many factors to consider.
Discussion of articles pushed me to critically think and contribute my ideas, opinion and comments on the topic.
I enjoyed the lectures and the debate.
I would say the discussions and presentations - it gives enough information that will be useful for my future.
The layout. Actually using a powerpoint with specific topics outlined each week followed by a discussion.
Being able to listen to my classmates present on a different article each week that went along with the class chapter readings help bring the topic each week into perspective for me
One thing that I would like to enphasize is the unique structure ofthis class. First half is lecture by instractor, and the lest halfis discussion with using articles which is chosen by students. The preparation for discussion was quite hard both as a discussion reader and participants, but it was a great experience for me at the same time.
I really enjoyed the class discussions of articles. It always helps me further my understanding and gain new insight on things that I may of otherwise looked over.
Having to present to the course helped us to practice our public speaking skills in addition to mastering one of the chapters. In addition, reading new articles every week allowed us to broaden our repertoire in scientific articles.
Presentation and discussion of research articles for topics discussed in class were the most valuable because it gave me an insight on how one might go about doing a restoration project when looking at different aspects of restoration ecology.
The discussion portion which required us to read and analyze peer reviewed scientific papers.
I thought the lectures were very informative and felt it was easy to ask questions.
the discussions were of great value seeing how people view different things and how the compare and contrast different values
I enjoyed being able to challenge myself through class discussions. Leading the class was definitely intimidating, especially since there were students from different backgrounds, different colleges, and some older students, but I do enjoy being encouraged to speak my mind and question anything that might come up. Discussions helped to make the 2.5hr class more entertaining and conducive to learning and for class participation
It offers very broad topics of ecology and even an individual that only has taken basic ecology can learn from it.
Really like the course structure, in terms of moving through the hierarchy of ecosystem complexity. I also enjoyed Creighton's (and classmates) first hand knowledge of aspects of our discussions that really made them interesting.
Its hard to pick only a few, since all course components complement each other so well! If I had to pick a few readings, I would say - foundations, the debate papers, community ecology, and plant physiological ecology. Overall, the book in combination with the slide notes are valuable. The book provided me valuable weekly primers on the lesson and the notes highlight the most critical concepts and are great for review. I can picture myself coming back to these again and again over the years.
I think the discussions were very valuable sometimes, although sometimes the conversations were somewhat stagnant or ended up getting distracted. I think the hand raising during discussions was a very good idea and should be implemented from the beginning in the future.
I appreciated the lectures that really clarified what we read in the book and assigned readings. The seminar-style of the discussion papers were also informative and engaging.
I like the approach from going small to big, that is, learning about restoration at a spp/pop level and going up to landscape/global. I like that we learned about detailed processes (photosyn, soil properties, genetics) and broader topics as well. He has good examples of work done in HI and other places to support the concepts learned. Even though being a discussion leader was a lot of work, it was the best part of class and really made me learn the subject matter. I liked feeling like an "expert". The rest of the class was pretty light in work-load, but was still engaging, which I liked.
This class actually made me want to participate in discussion and give my opinions. In the NREM department, this is the only professor I would willingly take classes from because you learn a lot of information and it makes you feel knowledgeable about the subject.
I enjoy the discussions as not everyone has the same opinion/questions on the same paper. Overall I enjoyed this class as a lot.
I felt that the two sections of the course, i.e. lecture and student led discussion, complemented each other well and that one was more valuable for having the other.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
It felt like a lot of material was expected to be covered by the student presentations. It was very difficult to try to fit in case studies along with the details of the specific paper. Not sure if the case studies were required but every presentation seemed to include them. I would like the presentations to be more concise. But I understand it is also a learning process.
I thought that the discussions after the student presentations were interesting, but over the course of the semester felt a bit repetitive given that many of us have limited experience with field work. For quieter students, it was also difficult to assert and participate, so it was helpful towards the end where we rose our hands.
The only part that I didnt like was that it was only once a week for a 2.5 hour block of time. I wish it would have been split up.
None. I learned something from every experience.
Honestly speaking, the quality of discussion is totally depend on how discussion reader have prepared for it. Thus, sometime I was confused.
I think pretty much everything was helpful in some way. I did really like when we started raising hands in discussion though because I feel like certain people tend to dominate the conversation otherwise.
Nothing I can think of.
none
When the instructor spoke during the debates. I felt this time should be used for the students and while many questions were directed to the instructor I felt this took away from the time allowed for the class to speak (which effected participation grade)
i dont, none of the subjects or aspects were least valuable.
There should be more room for topics for discussion that involved more than just plants. Restoration through marine/animal context would also be interesting to have focused on.
Many details of the selected articles are not discussed because students might not have time to understand every detail in the articles.
I felt that a couple of the chapter readings would be better replaced by separate readings, as they didn't represent the title for that week as well as they probably could. Specifically, the soils and belowground ecology chapter reading should consider the soils themselves, both abiotic and biotic components, and consider the relevant belowground ecology occurring. Instead this chapter really focuses on microtopography which, while interesting and important, really doesn't consider belowground ecology very much. This may be a giveaway, but I thought this would mean a consideration of belowground organisms and their interactions - earthworms as soil engineers, microbial symbioses and their relevance to aboveground ecology, etc. While the lecture does address these topics, I would have appreciated some readings as well- maybe something suitable doesn't exist though...The other chapter I thought poorly reflected the weeks title was the Landscape ecology reading, which really didn't cover the major aspects of Landscape ecology, and rather it was a chapter on macroecological study rather than Landscape ecology.
Hard to say, I think all the components provided lots of value, it just depends what your interests are. I liked how each lesson seemed to build upon knowledge gained in previous lectures.
No comment.
Sometimes it felt humbug to have a somewhat forced discussion on some papers, but I still feel like it was a good thing to do in class. Sometimes I feel like subjects in ecology are too academic and ecologists are trying too hard to come up with hard "rules" (theories) to explain the natural world. But.... I still think ecology is valuable and I'm glad I learned more about it!
N/A
Learning mainly about plants. I wish there was more wildlife integration in the class.
12. The instructor gives clear explanations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 24 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (21%) 18 (75%)
13. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 24 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 20 (83%)
14. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.96 24 0.2 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 23 (96%)
15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 24 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (17%) 20 (83%)
16. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 24 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (29%) 17 (71%)
17. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 24 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 22 (92%)
18. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 24 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 18 (75%)
19. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 24 0.56 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (4%) 6 (25%) 17 (71%)
20. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I understand that the course has a restoration ecology focus but I think at least one class period should focus on the applied side of restoration. Or at least a guest speaker should come in and talk about the difficulties of ecological restoration along with success stories and failures.
Maybe try discussion methods that invite greater participation so itʻs not as intimidating for students.
No suggestions. It would be nice to have access to the powerpoint before the lecture, but I understand how some people may not pay attention if this were the case. Just a personal preference.
Sometimes during class discussion, the same people dominate discussion and it can be hard for people who aren't as outgoing to get a word in. Maybe by having people raise their hand and having the discussion leader call on those who are more shy before calling on those who talk all the time would give everyone an opportunity to share their thoughts.
I would appericiate if he would check the contents of power point slide before the presentation day.
I think it is a lot of information that we cover each week and I think each of the topics could go further into detail but given the amount of time we have that is probably the best way to do it.
Field trips would have been beneficial in this course to represent the concepts learned in class. During discussions, it would be helpful if Creighton facilitated student discussions instead of leading them.
Going over restoration of other habitats (marine etc.) in relation to the material as well (even though plants are your thing)
allow for more opportunities to gain participation credit.
I think if this class could be offered more often so that it could be a smaller course it would be better because it is hard to participate when there are 23 other people trying to speak.
maybe more time exploring the really important concepts that are most applicable to todays problems. like invasive species and climate change. but also a view of how the value of restoration fits in with the goals of a county or state.
N/A
AS far as I know, if there is another way for students to have more materials in the lecture, it can help students understand more about ecology and discussion during the class.
Great course. We never did talk more about going on a field trip after that was introduced as an idea early on- not anyone's fault necessarily, I guess I'm wishing I brought it up again as I think it can be really helpful in bringing home the concepts thought about in class, using an on the ground example. The class debate is interesting. It really makes all the students prepare very well. It was kind of intense. The only thing I'd say is that the value of science in restoration (the topic) is something that is surely near to the hearts of everyone in the class - it would have been difficult to me to have to participate on the side which I didnt agree with. I guess I'm saying it might be good to think of another way of assigning students to groups, or perhaps choosing a topic that is more of an academic discussion. I suppose the more academic, the less intense and dramatic though...up to you, I'm just giving my two cents.
Creighton could continue to build bridges between each lecture. I think he does a good job of this already, through use of examples and references to previous slides/concepts but there's always room for improvement.
I think when we are selecting our articles for the discussions we should lead, there wasn't enough of a feedback process. Maybe a little more time from the point where we intially meet with Creighton to when we have to select an article would've allowed us to find better ones in some cases.
My only thought is that maybe he should try to be more involved in restoration projects here on Oahu. He seems pretty knowledgeable about projects on the B.I. but there are a lot of people doing valuable work here on Oahu too. In general, I think more interaction between academics/scientists and natural resource managers/conservationists would be overall beneficial for everyone (and the Earth!).
Incorporate more wildlife aspects into discussions.
The only suggestion I have is to take a slightly less directive approach to the student led discussions. There were some discussions which would have floundered a bit without your interjection, but there were definitely times when your comments changed the course of an otherwise lively discussion and/or prevented other students from being able to participate. Personally I feel that the student led discussions should be just that, and that your role should be to provide the expert information and clarification that most of the students won't have.
21. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
Great teaching style. Very good at encouraging questions and discussions. Good organization of lectures, both slides and topics. Very knowledgeable but not condescending which I feel is very important for effective teaching.
great instructor who always showed enthusiasm and knowledge on restoration, which made the lectures interesting.
A well-prepared professor who encourages active engagement in coursework
He is a fantastic, passionate professor who wants students to learn and pushes them to become better.
As far as knowledge of course material, ability to communicate it in an effective/ organized manner, relaying the applicability of what we were learning, and overall enthusiasm... I would say he is the best professor in the department.
He is an excellent teacher because he is approachable, fair, knowledgeable, and relatable.
He is a great instructor who is really kind and encouraged us to study about ecology.
Good Job! My one real critique is that I felt as though we could have used a little more guidance on our partner presentation. We were marked off for things that I was not aware would be considered.
Knowledgable of the topic at hand and insightful to the course material. Easily approachable if you have any questions (via e-mail and in person) and makes it easy to understand the topic at hand.
great teacher
I really appreciated your teaching style. I felt material was very clearly conveyed and showed how it worked with the bigger picture. I learned a lot!
Great teacher and lecturer and is very enthusiastic about the subject.
very knowledgeable professor who is very easy for students to approach. He knows how to handle a class and keep the class focused on the discussion/lecture at hand. Genuinely interested in the success of his students. He encouraged questions/topics about class or the dept to be brought to his attention and he'd be willing to work on it. If I continued in the Applied Terrestrial Ecology Concentration, I'd definitely be up to take another course under Creighton's direction.
The grading system is fair, the lecture is overall concise yet informative and the discussion is very rewarding.
Great teacher, great job.
Creighton is hands down (excuse the pun) an excellent professor. His teaching style allows students to thoroughly digest readings and material presented in class. He is very well informed in the subject matter, yet is still humble and treats students with respect. He encourages dialogue in class, and creates a classroom environment where students feel comfortable expressing their ideas amongst their peers. He clearly communicates his expectations of his students in terms of assignments, participation, testing, and evaluation. This clarity provides students a steady measure (rather than a moving target) to strive toward achievement.
Excellent teacher and NREM is lucky to have him.
Very knowledgeable on terrestrial ecosystem restoration. Makes the class and material accessible to learn even for those that have no strong background in the topic (like me) :)
He is well organized and prepared. His .ppts are nice, clear, and well put together. He is smart and seems motivated. I think he is a good professor and I would recommend classes from him.
that he is an excellent professor. He encourages discussions and provides good feedback.
An awesome teacher! He is very enthustatic about the class & always encourages discussions/ questions. He is always willing to help with any questions.
Dr. Litton has a strong aptitude for teaching and is effective in conveying information and ideas of a complex nature. I thoroughly enjoyed this course with him and would recommend any class that he teaches to my fellow students.
22. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 24 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (33%) 16 (67%)
23. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 24 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 9 (38%) 15 (63%)
24. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 24 0.88 Freq(%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 17 (71%)
25. My overall evaluation of this course is...
I always look forward to this course because I enjoy the lecture and discussion. I also think that the student led presentation and discussion is a great learning exercise - much more so than writing a term paper. While I understand that the course is focused on ecological theory and plant centered. I think Dr. Litton is knowledgeable enough to include a lecture or two on applied restoration and/or coastal restoration in Hawaii. If need be you could perhaps bring in a guest speaker.
Enjoyable, interesting, and informative.
One of my two favorite NREM courses so far- it was well organized, challenging and I felt supported as a student.
It was my favorite course of the semester and one of the best offered in the department!
I would highly recommend this course and professor to anyone interested in any aspect of natural resource management because this course didn't just get me to think about restoration ecology, but got me to think about the greater picture of the importance of preserving, protecting, and restoring our natural resources, especially in Hawaii
Useful to understand the concept of ecology and how to apply the theory to restoration.
I very much like this course. Of the course that I have taken in NREM thus far I think restoration ecology and conservation biology have been the most useful relevant to me.
Excellent, I would definitely recommend this course to other students. This was my first ecology course and I felt that I took away more from this class than any other class thus far. Although the discussions were intimidating, they were important to the course because they brought up issues and examples of restorations going on in Hawaii (and other parts of the world) that students were involved in.
I would recommend this course to my fellow graduate students.
yay!
good course i would definitely like to take other course upon restoration, and how to incorporate it with other land uses.
Awesome class.
This course is a course that plays a role of bridge between students with minimum ecology requirements to more advanced graduate courses.
Great course.
Excellent- Well structured syllabus, clear expectations of students, and highly valuable course materials. I would highly recommend this class to any student interested in restoration ecology.
One of the more enjoyable courses I have taken in the NREM department.
Very informative and engaging class. Learned a lot about restoration ecology.
Good. :) I liked it. I am happy I took it, esp. after taking a few really bad classes in the NREM department. I have more hope now for my MS education.
that I learned a lot of information and I was able to learn from my peers.
One of the top 2 courses I've taken so far. I really enjoyed the course.
A
26. Other comments:
None
I think a course like this is much more valuable than any of the core courses we have had to take. None of those were particularly well taught and something like this I think could be useful to all students especially in order to learn about this unique environment in which we live.
Raising hands for discussion helped lower the intimidation factor for those who are not as aggressive at speaking up as others. A lot of times it felt like certain people were in their own conversation which made it hard and intimidating to jump in.
none
Mahalo!
n/a
Nothing additional to say.
Keep up the excellent work Creighton!
I think that visiting some nearby examples of ongoing ecological restoration sites would have been beneficial for reinforcing some of the concepts discussed in class, even if that meant going out as a class on a weekend.

Creighton Litton: NREM301, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301 - Natural Resources Management Crn (Section): 84485 (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  
3.18 11 0.87 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 6 (55%) 4 (36%) 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 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 11 (100%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 9 (82%)
7. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 9 (82%)
8. I learned a lot in this course.
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%)
9. I generally understood the material presented in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 9 (82%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Involvement of students was great. It created a passion for subjects I did not previously have. Both Dr. Litton and Dr. Crow are incredible professors. I wish there were more like them.
Lots of examples of real life application and good explanations of why the things we were learning were relevant
Oral communication and teamwork. The class offered numerous knowledge and understanding in the field of natural resources and environmental management, along with its branches such as forestry, coastal management, soil, etc.
I think the soils section and the forestry section were most valuable because they provided me with more than just a very basic understanding of the subject. I felt that I learned something new for these sections because the difficulty level was higher.
The aspects of the course that were most valuable were the introduction of different key topics in environmental science. This got me thinking in terms of what area or field I would like to specialize in.
Exposure to people and places that will enhance our environmental careers
I liked that it touched a little on a lot of different subjects.
I enjoyed interacting with our peers to help us better understand concepts taught in lecture.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
I can't think of one thing wrong with this course. It was well structured, extremely well taught and taught with passion from both instructors.
The readings.
The hydrology section was too general. Since most of the people in the class were upper class men in NREM, it did not present much new information.
I think that the teacher was trying to cram too much information in. Did not really incorporate discussions.
It was hard to follow the lecture when he just spoke to us with writing notes on the board. TA is not approachable.
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
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%)
13. The instructor is 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%)
14. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 11 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 9 (82%)
15. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%)
16. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
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%)
17. The course objectives were clear.
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%)
18. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
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%)
19. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Present more information that would not be commonly known for an NREM student.
I would prefer if the course had someone who was an actual expert on the Coastal Ecology portion of the course. There are plenty of NREM majors who plan or are specializing in this topic. With that being said, I feel that Dr. Crow did an exceptional job communicating the Coastal Ecology material to the class. I do not want to take away from her excellent efforts to teach the subjects. I still learned plenty from her lectures.
Free coffee 5 mins before lecture starts!
incorporate discussions.
I would not mind seeing more interactive/ hands on activities to help understand the complex concepts. I know why that is why there is the lab but it would be nice to have a reinforcement in lecture. Maybe going over the graphs little better. The TA doesn't seem approachable. Quizzes before some classes would encourage students to read and to keep up with the class.
20. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
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%)
21. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
22. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
23. Instruction is well-coordinated among the team teachers.
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%)
24. The teachers were compatible in this course.
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%)
25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.64 11 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%)
26. Other comments:
Very informative class!
Why don't you just upload the readings online instead of printing them. I appreciated it but wouldn't that save more trees?
Really enjoyed this course. It was difficult but fun.
This course is very well structured and taught. There is only room to make the class even better than it already is. This has been one of my favorite courses in my academic career.
Dr. Crow and Dr. Litton are the BEST!
I do not not think that this course should require bio 172.
Thank you

Creighton Litton: NREM301L, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301L - Natural Resources Mgmt Lab Crn (Section): 84487 (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  
3.18 11 0.87 Freq(%) 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 6 (55%) 4 (36%) 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 11 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 10 (91%)
3. 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%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
6. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
7. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 2 (18%) 8 (73%)
8. This course was helpful in developing new skills.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
9. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The field trips were interesting.
I really enjoyed the field trips.
This lab was educational, practical and fun. I enjoyed every day in the lab. I can not say the same for other courses such as biology or chemistry.
This course left me with a better understanding of how to communicate the results of science. I will always cherish the guide that was provided by the course to help guide me in similar courses in the future.
The tree was excruciating. Please, for the sake of future students, change that somehow. . .
The intensive writing and field experiments were intense and it gave students an insight in future science lab experiments and writing intensive laboratories. The laboratory experiments were fun!
interactive hypothesis formulating
It was nice doing on-hands work and being able to experience what we would possibly do in the field. It personally helped me narrow down my career choice.
Field Trips!
10. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
some of the labs that were spent in Ag sci doing working on spreadsheets.
This course takes place on a Friday and goes well on into the afternoon. From the point of view of a student, this is the most dreadful day and time to host such an intense course.
N/A
11. The instructor helped me understand how writing is used in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
12. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Get a TA that's approachable.
make the labs shorter
I would like to do an experiment that demonstrates some aspect of Coastal Ecology.
Free coffee before class!
Not much. It is what it is
I think the computer lab on forestry would be improved, especially more efficient.
13. The TA grades paper (exams, homework) fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.45 11 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (55%) 5 (45%) 0 (0%)
14. The TA was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.45 11 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (55%) 5 (45%) 0 (0%)
15. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
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%)
16. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
17. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
18. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
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%)
19. Laboratory assignments make students think.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
20. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 11 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (55%) 5 (45%)
21. Lab assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
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%)
22. Lab reports are graded fairly.
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%)
23. Lab reports are returned promptly.
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%)
24. The field trips were useful learning experiences.
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%)
25. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.45 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 6 (55%)
26. Other comments:
really enjoyed this class and feel that I learned concepts that were applicable to a wide range of jobs.
All field trips and computer lab helped me a lot. For some computer labs, I felt I wanted more technical instruction on excel before the lecture. It is great to know how to use excel.

Creighton Litton: NREM480, Spring 2013     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 480 - Applied Forest Ecology Crn (Section): 88975 (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  
4.32 19 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 11 (58%) 7 (37%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.32 19 0.48 Freq(%) 13 (68%) 6 (32%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.84 19 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 17 (89%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.74 19 0.56 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 3 (16%) 15 (79%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 19 0.68 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 3 (16%) 14 (74%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 19 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 3 (16%) 14 (74%)
7. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 19 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 4 (21%) 13 (68%)
8. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.63 19 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 5 (26%) 13 (68%)
9. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.68 19 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 2 (11%) 15 (79%)
10. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 19 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 0 (0%) 3 (16%) 14 (74%)
11. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 19 0.61 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 6 (32%) 12 (63%)
12. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 19 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (21%) 15 (79%)
13. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 19 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (16%) 5 (26%) 11 (58%)
14. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.37 19 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 1 (5%) 7 (37%) 10 (53%)
15. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
He is well versed with the topics and makes complicated things easy to understand. he is easy to approach and is open to comments... One of the best classes i ever had in my university life is this class!!
He is nice and kind of helping me answer questions, and he arranged some field trip as supplement for the lectures.
Very knowledgable, Helpful
Very smart
Overall, he was a great teacher. He obviously cares for students and has well prepared for all the lectures. I think he does a good job in emphasizing on what will be important on exams based on what he highlights or repeats within lecture. I also appreciated his little burst of humor in correspondence with the lecture material:)
He was open to questions and challenged the class. He also responds to email timely
He is very knowledgable in this field and is able to help with any questions or comments. The course makes me able to be involved in very intellectual conversations/discussions that are always interesting.
He makes things interesting and relevant, and encourages class input.
I enjoyed the style in which Dr. Litton presented his material. He allowed the class to come up with their own solutions to problems that he presented, and then provided solutions. This allowed for active listening, thinking, and conversing during each class. His attention to detail was outstanding, and his memory and acknowledgment of "who said what" was incredible. I also appreciated that he memorized each student's name by the second class period.
Lectures weren't boring and he really explained things well both for students who didn't have much of a background in forest ecology but also for students who do. One of the better classes I've taken here.
You can tell he enjoys teaching, he is a great teacher.
Available to help and answer questions outside of class. Field trips were an exciting way to understand the material. Homework assignments were different and interesting. Discussions were engaging.
Every begeing and end of the class, Dr. Litton gave us the opprtunity to ask question catch up with what we learn in his class. Also, he paid great attention to student with good eye contact. It makes the lecture more focused and understandable. The course material (readings) are very informative, and by reading it carefully, I got a better sense of lecture.
Passionate, challenging and interesting, high expectations
Willingness to explain concepts
Engages all the students in discussions throughout the semester. I felt as though he created a nurturing learning environment where I could ask many questions as well as interact with fellow students. He is also very straightforward and reasonable but at the same time holds you to high standards. I think Dr. Litton has found a great balance between being flexible, easy going, stern, and challenging with his students.
He has a very methodic and open teaching process, and is very easy to follow.
He communicates effectively and uses many examples to demonstrate a specific concept.
Dr. Litton always did a good job at answering any questions asked in class.
16. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
Nothing!!
His explanations of some concepts were vague.
n/a
strict
The large stacks of paper readings. For sustainability, maybe there could be a way we could have the readings in a PDF, or at least make the option available.
He was somewhat short-tempered and belittling when he noticed any students whispering to one another, even if they were asking each other questions about the lecture.
His presentation is very informative, and evry after class those PPT files are uploaded on the web. Also, during the lecture, he clearly emphasize the KEY sentence by repeating or stressing it. These help me alot to remind what I learned, and prepare for exam. Additionally, he always creates a relaxed environment and actually, many students ask him question frequently.
Did not cover all course material as planned
Too many handouts
N/A
n/a
17. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Only improvment of the course would be if the final exam is not cumulative and has just the final things we have done after mid - term 2. Other things are great!
I hope the slides can provide more contents, and upload before the lecture, thus I can easily follow the lecture.
More of the lit reviews they were helpful
more multiple choice on the exam
The course was well organized! Good course. As for critiques on Litton's teaching style, I just have one minor suggestion in relation to how he responds to classroom questions. He sometimes responded to questions before they were fully asked, due to excitement or other causes, and I feel that some student questions did not have enough time to articulate. Very minor though!
Term paper OR homework assignments
The structure of the course is a good structure. Although the tests were pretty easy to handle, some of the questions were hard to study for like the "fill in the blank" portions. A better design for that section of the test will most likely improve test scores.
There was a lot of reading. Although I liked most of the reading it was a challenge to keep up. I probably would have liked a little more homework and less reading. A little burned out at the end of semester, just when the topics were getting really interesting.
If possible, I would like to obtain presentation slide before class so that I can bring it to his class. Sometime, I could not catch what he said because of the terminology. This issue may partially be solved by preparing ahead.
More applicable to Hawaii
I think that some of the questions on the exams need to be adjusted. Some of the fill in the blank questions are hard to tell exactly what is being asked. Specifically it seemed as though multiple answers could be appropriate for various fill in the blank questions. The course may also be improved by trying to hear from more students in the class. During the class the same couple people talked and asked questions over and over and over again. It would be interesting to hear the thoughts and ideas the quieter students had on subjects. Rather than hearing the same person 20 times a lecture.
n/a
wish the term paper was due a little earlier in the semester
Have more in-class discussions. The articles are interesting and it forces students to engage in discussion.
18. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
He is an amazing teacher and thumbs up and thank you for a wonderful semester
He really concerns about his teaching, and prepares well. But sometime, he was rigorous, I felt overwhelmed.
Excellent teacher one of the best in nrem
good
Great! He is an excellent professor and is definitely a gem within the NREM department. Throughout my four years at Manoa, he has been one of the best and I would highly recommend him for any teaching award as well as nominating him for tenure!
Enjoyed all the courses I took from him!
Great professor
I really appreciate Creighton's teaching style. I like that his syllabus clearly states not only what he expects of you as a student, but also what you should expect from him as a professor. He makes lectures interactive and gets you to think for yourself, and uses a variety of real-life examples to keep things related to forest ecology here in Hawai'i specifically. The field trip options were also a nice bonus.
One of my favorite instructors.
One of the better professors I've had.
Awesome
Great! Loved his teaching. Truly listened to students and tried engaging the class into critically thinking about the concepts from different perspectives. He was excited and enthusiastic about the course, which is the best quality in a professor. Cared about the students and provided many opportunities for students to improve their grades. Always well prepared for class, very organized.
Dr. Litton's class is very worthful not only for getting knowledge about forest ecology, but also training my skill such as reading, participating, and writing appropreatelly. And, I would like to emphasize the usefulness of his guide about every assignment. It lead me correctly, helps me alot.
integrate videos or guest lectures
Not too bad
Excellent. I very much enjoyed his class. I really appreciate that he allows plenty of opportunity for discussion and questions. He is easy to get along with and doesn't suck!
I think that he has a natural disposition for teaching. He goes through the material very thoroughly and builds from one concept to the next which is very helpful.
Great teacher!
Very good professor. I can tell Dr. Litton is passionate about forestry.
19. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.32 19 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 11 (58%) 7 (37%)
20. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.32 19 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 9 (47%) 8 (42%)
21. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.79 19 0.54 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (5%) 2 (11%) 16 (84%)
22. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
The readings and the lecture notes were very informative and went hand in hand!! They were interesting topics as well.
Conservation and restoration
In class discussions, field trips
all the readings and the discussions
I appreciated the lecture topics! It was well organized!
Silviculture topics and field trip opportunities
Getting a more in-depth understanding of topics that I've been introduced to in other courses. The class discussion was great, and would have been even better if people weren't so shy (I've heard some students say they are intimidated by him, and the only reason for this I can imagine is that his knowledge base is pretty vast, and they don't want to embarrass themselves?) It was also nice to not have to buy a textbook, and having readings pulled from a variety of sources definitely helps for a broad understanding of the concepts we discussed in class.
Succession and climate change
I think the critiques - which are similar to ones I've done in a grad-level course - were good for undergrad students, and it was good that there were only 2. I think for undergrad students it showed them what higher-level classes are like which I think is important.
The fieldtrips were great beacuse we got to see systems first hand Stand dynamics and ecosytem service
I appreciated not having to buy one text. We got reading from a variety of books, which kept them interesting. I liked the field trip opportunities. Especially for student who have just moved to Oahu, it was a great chance to see other parts of the island. Overall, the class lectures, readings, assignments, etc. were well thought out and flowed together.
Discussion with other students is the great opportunity to deepen my understanding. Field trips are also worthful experience to know about the actual environment which I learned in his class.
Covered a wide range of topics
The discussions
I liked that there was no group work. However, the environment Dr. Litton created in class allowed me to get to know the other students and have good exchanges of ideas and thoughts.
I found the material itself to be my favorite part of the course.
Class discussion
23. Which aspects of the course did you like least?
Discussion section and filling blank in examinations.
n/a
too picky about definitions
Term paper
While relevant, some of the readings were kind of long (and in some cases just a little bit dry). He did ask for our input following the reading assignments, but I for one would never want to flat out tell a teacher I disliked a reading that they had handpicked and taken the effort to copy for us. Sometimes receiving a long reading on Tuesday and being expected to have it read by Thursday is just not feasible with a full course load and a job. Maybe passing out all the readings at the beginning of the month, or a little bit farther in advance, would give students a better chance to finish reading them completely (and if they misplace them, tough luck!..just kidding)
The classroom :(
The readings were a bit extensive at times
reading, but thats not a big deal. it was worth it
The readings sometime too much for me. However, if I read it, I get more understanding about his lecture.
The generalized nature of the course
Many times the amount of reading was burdensome considering the amount of work I needed to complete for other classes. It would have been nice to not have to take as many other classes and be able to have the time and energy to really get into the course material for this class. I would of liked to have done all the readings but simply didn't have time.
n/a
24. My overall evaluation of this course is...
The course has been very informative and has given me alot of knowledge. the structure and design of the course is great.... Thanks Dr Litton for being amazing!
It is useful for students who want to make their way in ecology, and practice and lecture are combined well.
Excellent
very good
Great course. It would be even better maybe this course had a lab aspect that allowed us to really get hands-on experience or at least a field trip relating to each section: silvaculture, restoration, and conservation.
Challenging but was one of my favorite classes
This is one of the best courses I have taken here at UH Manoa.
Great class. Will totally recommend it to others interested in ecology and/or forestry.
Excellent, and worth the work input.
Great
Great! Would love to take another of his ecology classes if I had the opportunity.
Very useful for improving the skill that necessary for academic life include speaking, reading, and writing. Parsonally, I think this course is one of the best course to take in first year.
Interesting course with a good projessor
Fairly beneficial
Great course. I would recommend this course to other students and I would jump at the opportunity to take other courses taught by Dr. Litton.
A+
Challenging course, but I learned a lot of information regarding forestry ecology.
25. Other comments:
none
More field work would be beneficial
You don't suck.
I thought that the field trips were an excellent source of enrichment of the course materials.

Creighton Litton: NREM301, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301 - Natural Resources Management Crn (Section): 84856 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (54%) 6 (46%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 8 (62%)
5. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
6. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 10 (77%)
7. I generally understood the material presented in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Hands on experiences
This course was great because I feel like I really gained immense knowledge on not only the basic aspects of natural resource management, but also on field-work procedures which will be very useful in my prospective career field. Lectures were informative, slides with easy to interpret graphs and figures were a great addition!
The professors were very knowledgable about the material being taught and the course was very organized
I liked how for each topic we discussed, we were given basic scientific information which was followed up by implications for management. Learning some basic tools, such as the USLE and basic forest mensuration calculations, was a good preview of what some of us will undoubtedly be doing in the future.
Giving examples of real life ecosystems around the world where the Natural resource management techniques or lack there of are being used or not. Being able to relate what is learned in the class to what is actually happening out in the world.
I enjoyed getting a taste of all the components of natural resource management before choosing a specialization
i really enjoyed the global change biology section.
going out into the filed and gaining the knowledge of how things are done in what order and being able to know what exactly to look for, and then taking this data back to the lad and analyzing it.
I felt that the course as a whole contained so much valuable information that I can apply in real life as well as my specific field of work.
I thought how the instructor was able to get class involvement and how he related the topics to the students and everyday life was most valuable.
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
none
Sometimes lectures were a little boring, but that is bound to happen in any science course.
N/A
Any course with such a range of topics will, by nature, have to remain relatively general. I guess this generality was the least valuable aspect of the class, but I understand its nature. It would be impossible (to teach AND learn) in-depth on each of the individual sections covered throughout the course though.
Nothing
it was all pretty valuable to me
There were not really any aspects of the course that I found the least valuable. All of the aspects were valuable in one form or another.
N/A
10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
11. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
12. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
13. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
14. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
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%)
15. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
16. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 8 (62%)
17. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
He was a very good professor wouldn't change anything
I personally feel like the class is a great introduction course for those students, like myself this semester,who are starting to get more familiar with the major. I feel like the class doesn't need changes.
I really can't think of anything...
A lot of information is given out and while all of it is interesting, sometimes it can be hard to determine what is most important to focus on in terms of needing to remember especially for the test.
put more notes on board and put powerpoints on laulima for students who are too lazy to search for his site.
I felt it was easier to follow Dr. Bruland's notes when he wrote them on the board the way Dr. Litton presented the information.
just keep on doing what your doing!!!
He could definitely point out more important points in his lectures. Especially points that we will need to know for the exam.
I thought the overall the instructor was well rounded and don't see anywhere he needs to improve.
18. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.31 13 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 7 (54%) 5 (38%)
19. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.31 13 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 5 (38%) 6 (46%)
20. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 13 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 7 (54%)
21. Instruction is well-coordinated among the team teachers.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
22. The teachers were compatible in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
24. Other comments:
Awesome broad range course on natural resource management
Thanks :)
It was a fun and interesting class.
i always get excited to come to class and learn !
This is a very well taught course. I think that all the material were pertinent and the instructor is very knowledgable.

Creighton Litton: NREM301L, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301L - Natural Resources Mgmt Lab Crn (Section): 84858 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
4. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
5. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
6. This course was helpful in developing new skills.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.85 13 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 11 (85%)
7. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Hands-on experience helps me learn, so completing the lab reports and activities really helped me study for the lecture portion of the class. Having the labs coincide so well with course material is the way to go! I've had lecture+lab combos where this wasn't the case, and I think it really makes a difference. I liked how we were given the mandatory revisions on the first two reports, so we could get used to what was expected of us. Passing out an example of an ideal lab report was a smart move too. (I promise that wasn't my report so that isn't why I'm saying that!!)
Having to write lab reports was a great experience. Writing them and getting feedback was a great way to improve my writing and is a good way to instruct others as well
I thought that learning how to write formal and good scientific papers were most valuable.
the free admission to waikiki aquarium and increased familiarity of excel
I found it helpful to do the first two reports with a rough draft and then it was a lot easier when we did not have them on the next two to remember the comments given out and not make the same mistakes when we just turned in final drafts. Also making us write our own hypothesis before the lab and then going over a hypothesis together helped me to have a better understanding of a good hypothesis and determine what mine was lacking.
Going out and doing field-work oriented labs were awesome...good way to understand what resource management actually entails.
hands on learning
The hands on learning. I also really enjoyed the field trips it kept class interesting. All of the instructors were also very helpful and nice.
The writing of lab reports was very valuable as a skill that I will continue to use in my field of work in the future. It was very clear what was a good report and it was reflected in the grading, so overall the expectations of writing as a professional was a great skill that I learned.
Data collecting in the field
i really improved my skills on excel which is advantageous for everything and anything i want to analyze and set up as graphs
Learning scientific writing skills
8. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
I'm sure this is where everyone writes "lab reports!!!" But I'd rather write a lab report than a research paper any day, so for a WI class I really don't think the reports were so bad. That being said...I don't really know what I found least valuable. Maybe for the soil lab you can find a site that has actual canopy cover, so students (like myself) don't get confused when writing their lab reports.
Although I thought the symposium was really interesting, I would have thought that it could have been replaced with a lab that was conducted outdoors more in line of a hands on experience as opposed to seeing it on posters.
Sometimes computer based labs were difficult if they were not thoroughly explained at the start of lab.
N/A
Some of the labs could have been elaborated to relate to what was being learned in lecture at the time.
none
labs that we collected non-important data (such as the aquarium lab - not that it wasn't interesting but it could have been an extra credit lab, the information we learned is learned by everyone walking through there and didn't really benefit me much)
9. The instructor helped me understand how writing is used in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%) 9 (69%)
10. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
I thought that he already is a great instructor.
It would be helpful to start each lab by going through all steps (at least briefly) so time can be used most effectively.
His teaching was very good. One of the best professors yet
I donʻt really feel that any improvements needed to be made. Maybe explain specific things that need to be included in each lab report a little more.
penmenship when writting notes
i really enjoyed the outdoors adventures especially the soil lab where we came out with a great understanding of what components are most important to avoiding soil loss. basically keep teaching things that can be used outside the classroom :)
More field trips
11. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 13 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (46%) 7 (54%)
12. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 12 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 6 (50%) 5 (42%)
13. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
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%)
14. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 6 (46%) 6 (46%)
15. Laboratory assignments make students think.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
16. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.66 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 5 (38%) 7 (54%)
17. Lab assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
18. Lab reports are graded fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 8 (62%)
19. Lab reports are returned promptly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.08 13 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 5 (38%) 5 (38%)
20. The field trips were useful learning experiences.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
21. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.75 12 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 9 (75%)
22. Other comments:
I would have like to have gone to coconut island.
This lab really helped to bring the lecture portion of the class into a new perspective and help me better understand how Natural Resource Management techniques are applied.
Awesome labs!

Creighton Litton: NREM680, Spring 2012     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 680 - Ecosystem Ecology Crn (Section): 88412 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
5. I learned a lot in this course.
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. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
7. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
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%)
8. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
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. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
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%)
10. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and 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%)
11. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
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%)
12. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
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. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 10 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (100%)
14. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
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%)
15. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
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%)
16. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
It probably makes sense to discuss Chapter 8 first before Chapter 9.
I loved the class as it was
Cover more aquatic ecosystems
As participation is a big part of the grade, please be aware of speaking over others who are trying to answer or ask questions and thus lose that opportunity to be heard. It only happened once that I remember. Otherwise, discussions were conducted fairly.
I did't think that the last mid term covered materials evenly. There were a lot of questions from nitrogen.
None, the course was taught effectively and every subject was well explained and developed. Handouts for each class were very good also.
17. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
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%)
18. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
19. Exams are creative and require original thought.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 6 (60%)
20. What changes would you make in the lectures?
It probably makes sense to discuss Chapter 8 first before Chapter 9.
one, they are always really good and clear
Cover more aquatic ecosystems
Is there a way to make them more interactive? Brainstorming sessions to help tie things together?
I was satisfied with the lectures.
I would have liked to see more about overall nutrient cycling, such as the mobility of other nutrients in ecosystems apart from N and P, such as Sulfur. Maybe it can be covered in a discussion lab.
21. What changes would you make in the readings?
less readings would be helpful, though I do feel they were all very helpful to facilitating understanding, It's just they take a long time as they are very dense. Combined with discussion articles this can take up a significant portion of one's time each week which can be difficult to balance. Maybe providing some reading notes or small assignments with reading questions could be helpful to ensure students are understanding the key concepts and able to synthesize the main points. It can be difficult to know what to focus on learning since the material is so dense and much of it is important and new information to students.
Readings were good.
I was satisfied with the lectures.
None that I can think of.
22. What changes would you make in the discussion sections?
Doing it by twos (pairs) is probably a good idea. It creates teamwork and more heads are better than one.
I would change discussion so that they are not all about reading articles. It would be good to do activities together, games or some sort of interactive application of the concepts. I'm not sure what this would look like, but for example, understanding the climate system could be facilitated by an activity whereby students are asked to correctly assimilate lessons learned into a working diagram of climate/global atmospheric and ocean currents. Or having students be at different stations where they have to correctly map/track a carbon molecule through different types of ecosystems under different conditions. These sessions could then be followed by discussion about student's different thoughts and processes. The info is so dense when read, that "living" it would help imprint deeper understanding about these complex topics for students. There are so many moving parts floating around in my head that having some sort of assignment or more practice collating them all together would be helpful and fun. I'd have been willing to stay for the full discussion time to participate in that type of exercise.
Announce certain feedbacks not to just the individual discussion leader, but to the entire class, so that the next students do not keep repeating things that get points deducted
Extremely intimidating at first, but the snacks help!
I was satisfied with the discussion sections.
Many readings were highly technical, bordering on the abstract, while others were very straightforward and pleasant to read, therefore I think there was a good distribution of topics and matters.
23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
Overall, it is a good course. Dr. Litton is very passionate about the course. Having the guest lecturers also enhanced the overall quality of the class. It is just unfortunate that the guest lecturer's schedule sometime is not in sync with the discussion (sometimes before the guest lecturer presents, we have not learned the concepts or theories yet). It would help if the students at least would have some conceptual background of the topic before guest lecturers present the applied research.
I liked the class, overall I feel that Dr. Litton does a great job of conveying the matterial and has high expectations of his students (which we may or may not meet, but it encourages us to strive. THe discussion classes are good, I sometimes wished we had more time to tlak about the bigger picture on some of the papers after hashing out the methods and results, but over all the discussions were great, people were prepared and the discussions organic. His tests were fair and required synthesis of the material. I like the informative challenging classes that Dr. Litton teaches.
this course was great!
Superlative
Challenging, but extremely beneficial because Dr. Litton makes himself available for questions and promotes discussion.
great class where you can learn subjects and also participating skills such as discussion leader. The teacher answer the students' questions clearly and effectively. He does his best to listen to students comments and feedbacks.
Being a purely ecological/scientific subject, I think the course could not have been taught any better. I have never appreciated ecosystmes from a purely ecological point of view (productivity, cycling, etc.) and I have to say that I learned plenty from this standpoint, and have a new appreciation for carbon.
Fantasic course overall. The passion of the Dr. Litton went a long way toward driving discussion and interest in the topic. The only suggestion I would make is the possible addition of a few homeworks (graded or not graded) between exams. There is so much material that reviewing for exams is difficult. I think having homeworks along the way that reaffirm the main concepts of the topic sections would help students keep ontop of the material during the course as well as help when reviewing for exams. Other than that, Great Job!
24. Other comments:
Thank you for a wonderful semester. I did learn a lot! I would strongly recommend the course to other students.
why is this not a core course? One of the best courses and seemingly a crash course to everything terrestrial ecosystem managers should.
The exams were too intensive. Strongly suggest to change from 2 midterms to 3 shorter midterms

Creighton Litton: NREM682, Fall 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 682 - Restoration Ecology Crn (Section): 78748 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 17 0.24 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 16 (94%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 17 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (12%) 15 (88%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 17 0.24 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 16 (94%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 17 0.47 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (29%) 12 (71%)
5. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.76 17 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (24%) 13 (76%)
6. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
7. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The synthesis of many other ideas that I have learned in other ecology classes and in the field into a holistic view of restoration was helpful. I also enjoyed the discussions and reading current papers.
Group discussions were valuable. The mixing of many perspectives from many different fields gave me further insights into restoration ecology. Also, the focus put on Hawai'i was much appreciated and really spurred my interest. Much more so than reading about restoration research elsewhere.
The chapter readings were generally good in summarizing the very broad issues that were covered in the class, and helped to flesh out the lectures.
The presentations and student-led discussions were very helpful.
lecture and discussion
The discussion sessions were very helpful and gave an opportunity to apply the concepts discussed in lecture.
I thought the most valuable parts of the course were the discussions about papers.
I found that the lectures were most helpful in really understanding the concepts being presented in the course. The discussions were interesting but I did not feel that they always provided additional insight into the topics at hand.
I enjoyed how every class started with questions and comments about the reading. It was a great primer to get me thinking about the topic to be discussed
Student presentations (specifically doing it!)
Learning the theories behind all levels of ecological processes from individual to ecosystem really gave this course a broad but thoughtful approach. The class presentations did a good job of showing the real world application of what we learned in class. Adding a concurrent lab where we could do some more application would be helpful but at the same time, Im not sure if that could be done in a semester time frame.
I liked the way the course was structured and organized. I also thought the discussion sessions were very interesting.
I enjoyed it all. The text readings and scientific readings built off on another and allowed the students to see how the science was practiced in the field. Discussion was good for synthesis of information.
I liked the discussion portion of the course in particular. I thought reading papers and discussing them with my classmates not only gave me a better understanding of topics in restoration ecology but also gave the information a practical context.
The most valuable aspect of the course were the group discussions. I do not have much experience sitting around smart people that talk about science to better the world. I am only a part time student so this once a week class helps me keep that part of my brain working.
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The papers and presentations at times were not very stimulating, though I would not take it out of the course.
Some readings are very technical to me. But the lecture helped me understand these technical concepts most of the time.
Team discussions presentation format. With everyone having read the paper - I think the format should have focussed more on the related studies and less on the article.
Some of the papers that we had to discuss as a class seemed to be slightly off topic. I feel like maybe it would be better for Dr. Litton to pick the article just to make sure it was relevant and useful.
Some students monopolized the discussion. More importantly, they monopolized with what I thought were asides, tangents, and inane stories relating to your work. I know that it's not the professor's fault but eventually, I would tune out the second certain individuals started speaking
Midterm- maybe a little less writing intensive?
I would have liked that the students chose more controversial and thought provoking discussion topics.
I really enjoyed it all.
I didn't find the textbook particularly valuable, as the important portions of the readings were covered in lecture anyway. Sometimes figures were too small to see on the lecture slides. This ended up being irritating as I couldn't figure out what was going on.
10. The instructor gives clear explanations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.88 17 0.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (12%) 15 (88%)
11. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 12 (80%)
12. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
13. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 16 0.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 15 (94%)
14. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 16 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 16 (100%)
15. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 17 0.24 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 16 (94%)
16. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
17. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.76 17 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (24%) 13 (76%)
18. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
I appreciate having the slides printed out so that I could take notes on the paper and not have to fervently wirte everything down, it allowed me to listen and pay attention to what he was saying. I like his teaching style.
Spreading the overall class time over 2 class periods would have been more conducive for absorbing information.
Perhaps splitting the class into two smaller classes could help as far as increasing the students ability to absorb more and new information. The two hours were manageable, but splitting it into two class sessions with the lecture first and the presentation and discussion the second day, could help to keep the energy up in the class.
The chapter readings are good. It would be interesting if a part of the class would be devoted to cater for students who do not have any ecology background.
Team discussions. While I enjoyed having everyone lead discussions, if the discussions had to be done as a team it would have been nice to chose team members. For several of the teams you could tell one person was carrying more of the effort.
Sometimes the lecture part of course ran a bit long and timing the presentations might help us have the correct amount of time for discussion. Overall though I've really enjoyed the course.
Having the papers available in an electronic format would be nice. I frequently use a tablet to read material so having to keep track of papers and slide printouts was tedious. Laulima is free
Great job with the knowledge your provide with the course. Teaching style is great and great use of lecture time and to stay enthusiastic during the 3 hour course.
Maybe talk a little more about models and how they work. I think a lot of students would have benefited from a brief background on modeling. Not specifically on any kind of modeling program, but the concepts behind modeling.
The only improvement I could suggest is that "debate" in the second lecture allow for rebuttal. I did not learn much from this debate style....discussion seemed more important. But if you leave it structured, I would suggest allowing rebuttals so that it is more discussion-like. Leaving the rebuttals until the conclusion was confusing.
I think the course is already quite good. My only suggestion would be to get rid of the textbook or to more carefully consider which chapters to assign for reading. Some of the chapters were good but I thought some were not.
Could a lab section or a ecological restoration techniques section be added?
19. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
Overall, I enjoyed the class and interacting w Dr. Litton. I found him to be passionate and knowledgable about the material and that he expected me to work and learn, I appreciate that. I also found him to be available for out of class time when I requested it.
Great. Excellent teacher, lots of experience with restoration efforts in Hawai'i.
Great teacher, as he said himself, can talk a bit much, but it just shows his enthusiasm and knowledge of the subject.
Great instructor. I appreciated his manner in which he engaged students in discussion during lecture - especially for an after lunch class.
that he is really interested in this topic and has enthusiasm for teaching
Great professor, one of the better classes I've had in NREM. It makes me wonder why the elective classes are so excellent but the required ones are so rubbish.
Great lecturer. I enjoyed taking this class.
Great professor!
I thought Creighton did an amazing job. It's difficult for professors to allow their students to take charge of a discussion and give only a little input, and he did very well in this aspect.
Creighton is good lecture, is always well-prepared for class, and has clear expectations of students. I appreciated that grades were returned quickly and that we were given a mid-semester evaluation of our participation grade.
Excellent. Very well spoken and knowledgeable of course content and material. I would consider him an expert in the field and use him as a resource in the area of restoration ecology.
20. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
21. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.82 17 0.39 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 14 (82%)
22. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.94 17 0.24 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 16 (94%)
23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
The course was fun and informative and as mentioned earlier, synthesiszed much of what I have learned elsewhere. While it is not a cookbook class on how to restore a system, I feel more prepared to figure out how to approach a restoration project in any given area.
Great. Challenging course, but full of intriguing and extremely useful information.
Great, really helps to give perspective to those who are going into restoration ecology or those going into ecology restoration who will probably have to use restoration ecology to help in their projects.
This class was really beneficial. It brought me quickly up to speed either on theories that were rusty or new concepts.
One of the best courses NREM has to offer.
A+, even though the plus won't increase your teaching GPA above 4.0
Great class, but it would be nice to have some more practical knowledge to go along with all the theory.
I think it was a great course and it should be something natural resource managers include in their coursework.
The course is great. I would suggest it to other students. I appreciated that discussion was encouraged. I dislike group work, but I know its probably important in the long run. Creighton is well-read in this field and can explain concepts eloquently.
Restoration Ecology was a valuable course overall. I learned a lot of important ecological principles as well as how restoration ecology informs ecological restoration. The discussions and journal articles gave practical context for the theoretical information we were taught in lecture. I liked how the course material progressed from the small scale to the large scale as well.
Excellent. I would definetly like to continue to work or study in this field but am not sure what the next steps are...
24. Other comments:
You should offer a lab that gives us more practical knowledge from how and what kind of herbicides to use, to restoration plants for specific areas. This would really help, but this class served the purpose that you said it would from the first day. Thanks!
I hope ecosystem ecology is just as good:)
It was hard to find primary articles of restoration ecology work in hawaii. There should be more funding towards this field of work and money should be set aside somehow in the government system to keep projects sustainable.

Creighton Litton: NREM301, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301 - Natural Resources Management Crn (Section): 85254 (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  
4.75 12 0.45 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 9 (75%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 12 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (42%) 7 (58%)
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 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (17%) 9 (75%)
5. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 4 (33%) 7 (58%)
6. I learned a lot in this course.
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%)
7. I generally understood the material presented in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (25%) 8 (67%)
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The readings that were given provided good background info on the subjects presented during the lecture.
Course contents(syllabus). Instructors' ability and willingness to enhance students' understanding. Style of lecture. Hint of humor. Also, helpful TA.
I really liked some of the materials that we have covered in class such as soil basics, forest ecology and management, and also global change biology. Actually, I liked all the materials/ topics throughout this semester but those I mentioned above are the most interesting for me. However to view the entire coursework I would have to say that everything is valuable. I'm not speaking in a sense of the material itself, but rather how it changes the way I think about natural resources management. The guest lectures were so helpful as well.
I thought that the introduction to soil science was the most valuable because it is a widely used sub-discipline in the fields of conservation, planning, engineering, sciences,et.
I liked this course, and appreciated how passionate both professors were.
The covered material was well versed in different areas of ecology and environmental issues that helped me determine my interests and what I would like to focus on for my specialization.
words
The group activities in class that related to the same day lecture
taking notes in lecture
I thought that every part of this class was valuable, and the subjects continuously built on each other.
I felt the lectures to be surprisingly intriguing WAY more than my bio172 lecture class. The instructors did a great job at intriguing the class about the material through their in depth lectures and powerpoints.
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Markers used to write on the whiteboard could be newer(darker).
Only few discussions that we had in class.
I honestly thought that climate change should have not been given much focus because it is such a redundant topic for those in the environmental field.
I think the radical shift between teaching styles was hard to get used to. On one hand taking an overlod of notes, and then on the other not knowing what exactly to write down, also never knowing whats really going to be on the test was confusing some other students and myself.
I would have like to discussed more about what solutions there are to some of the environmental problems we discussed.
tsunamis
N/A
none
It might just be me but i hate doing group work during class. I'd much rather have the teacher teach me instead of having the students engage with classmates to find out the answer.
10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
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%)
11. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
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%)
12. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
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%)
13. The instructor treated students fairly.
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%)
14. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
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%)
15. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (25%) 8 (67%)
16. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.42 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 5 (42%) 6 (50%)
17. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Not being able to finish + double check my answers during the allotted time was stressful(since the exams were designed to take up the whole period). But being allowed to go overtime a little bit was very helpful/less stressful.
All the professors are great. They knew exactly their materials and I really liked their teaching methods. I might only suggest one thing. I do hope if the professors could talk and explain the materials a little bit slowly because I found a hard time to take notes and listen to them at the same time. But overall, they are great teachers. Thanks very much. It is a pleasure to be one of your students. I really enjoyed this course.
For those of us not taking the lab if we could have more practice doing paper exercises regarding modeling such as hydrological flow, total production, etc.
Maybe more consolidation of objectives. Learning about sooo many different ecosystems and processes, we as undergrads get a little lost. Overall I enjoyed the course and thought both professors were awesome and defiitely treated students fairly as well as putting out an extra effort to let students know they were always there for us to come talk to if we needed help or support.
I enjoyed his "discussion style" of teaching the course material but a little more notes on the board would be helpful.
He can't because it's perfect
give better review of material that is going to be on exams
I felt that the instructors of this course were extremely knowledgeable and very organized and thorough in the way in which they taught the material. both instructors were also approachable and encouraged questions and responses from the students. I felt they always pushed students to think not just in small terms but on a global scale, they constantly challenged us. The only improvement i might suggest would be perhaps a study guide for the exams even if it is a brief one.
18. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.58 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (25%) 8 (67%)
19. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 12 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 4 (33%) 6 (50%)
20. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 4 (36%) 6 (55%)
21. Instruction is well-coordinated among the team teachers.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 12 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 4 (33%) 7 (58%)
22. The teachers were compatible in this course.
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%)
23. 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%)
24. Other comments:
Overall this class was enjoyable,I looked forward to going to class. The professors and TA were nice and easy to talk to, which made asking questions easy. The course covers a lot of topics but it is a good starting point to figure out what you want to do later on.
Extremely exciting contents, extremely approachable instructors, and looking forward to studying more NREM!
Awesome
A study guide for exams would be helpful but not necessarily needed
one of the best courses ive taken
Great class with great teachers Asking the class questions during lectures to keep the students involved, and bringing up important facts or terms to help the students remember them really helped.
awesome class! i learned a lot!!! thank you!!!!!!!!

Creighton Litton: NREM301L, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301L - Natural Resources Mgmt Lab Crn (Section): 85256 (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  
4.82 11 0.4 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (18%) 9 (82%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
4. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.
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%)
5. I improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.
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. This course was helpful in developing new skills.
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. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Field trips with hands on experience were very helpful in understanding the material and it made it easier to write lab reports.
The field trips were the most valuable to me because not only were they the most fun but i also felt like i learned the most on fieldtrips because it was more hands on.
Getting out and using the ideas, theories, and techniques talked about in lecture. GIS and GPS Learning to use Excel How to write a scientific paper, and all the steps involved before
learning to improve my writing on lab reports
The labs allowed us to get actual field experience in a broad array of various fields. And learning how to use excel was a helpful thing too.
Field trips
Hands on experience
The field trips were so helpful to understand the materials that we learned in class. I have also improved my scientific writing skills throughout this semester. The feedback of the two first lab reports were helpful because I was able to improve grades for the next lab reports.
The feedback on the first drafts of the lab reports was really helpful and allowed me to improve my writing skills and grade. The field trips were also really interesting and fun.
The labs and getting hands-on experience.
8. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
N/A
none
n/a
I wish there could be a make up lab for the forest measurements which has been cancelled due to the tsunami warning. I was trying to say that it would be better if we always have a back up plan, so we all could have a chance to do the measurements. I think that is important to do and learn.
I think that some labs could of been changed, for example the waikiki lab.
9. The instructor helped me understand how writing is used in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
10. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
have more fieldtrips!!!!!
have labs relate to lecture. some topics in lab didnt go with what we were learning in lecture
More funding
The professors' teaching are great. They always answered all the questions that I had which helped me to fully understand about the materials. The explained things clear and well too. There is nothing to be improved for now because everything went well so far.
During lecture, Dr. Litton needs to write key notes he wants us to remember on the board, not just verbally. There was some moments that it was hard hear what he said or what he actually wanted us to remember from all the information he was stating.
11. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
12. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
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%)
13. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
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%)
14. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
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%)
15. Laboratory assignments make students think.
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%)
16. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
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%)
17. Lab assignments are relevant to what is presented in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.55 11 0.69 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (9%) 3 (27%) 7 (64%)
18. Lab reports are graded fairly.
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%)
19. Lab reports are returned promptly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 11 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (36%) 7 (64%)
20. The field trips were useful learning experiences.
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%)
21. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
22. Other comments:
SUPER FUN and i also learned tons!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thank you!
I hate having labs on Friday
really enjoyed this lab. i liked that the instructors developed a good relationship with the students. it made it easier to communicate and learn.
Great class!
The TA for this class was so great and helpful. :) :) THANKS RYAN, Dr. Litton and Dr. Bruland.
i really liked the hands on experience during each field trips

Creighton Litton: NREM480, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 480 - Applied Forest Ecology Crn (Section): 89327 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.93 15 0.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 14 (93%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 11 (73%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 15 0.63 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 4 (27%) 10 (67%)
5. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 14 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (43%) 8 (57%)
6. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
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%)
7. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 15 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 14 (93%)
8. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 15 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (20%) 12 (80%)
9. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 12 (80%)
10. The instructor makes me feel free to ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.53 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 3 (20%) 10 (67%)
11. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.73 15 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (27%) 11 (73%)
12. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 7 (47%) 6 (40%)
13. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 7 (47%)
14. What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
Dr. Litton's lectures are very effective. He communicates very well, is enthusiastic about the topic, and makes the environment easy to ask questions. His lecture slides are brief and to the point, and the examples that he uses to further explain his point or slides are very relevant and helps to better understand the course material. A lot of the concepts I remember, while studying, are through his examples that he brings up outside of the slides. Also, his classes are actually relevant to natural resource management as he focuses on the science, management, AND application of the topic. On the other hand, a lot of classes just focus on one of these and forgets to tie in the need for interdisciplinary and multi-perspective approach.
I liked how he structured his class where he makes his expectations specific and clear. Meanwhile, he still encourages a classroom atmosphere that shows that he is open towards his students; very approachable and tries to accomodate our needs as students.
-articulate -extremely knowledgeable and passionate about the subject
Field trip and critiques & discussion.
He was available for outside help if needed
i learn a lot from this course, particularly in the forest field
Powerpoints clear and direct, gives overall class results for tests...
He explain concepts and examples clearly and effectively. He also is well-prepared lectures.
Dr.Litton was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively. The contents are not so intensive science.So,it is understandable and fun ,even having limited basic scientific knowledge.
He demonstrates respect to the students by creating a comfortable intellectual environment filled with discussion.
He makes it very easy to ask questions, easy to talk to. Presents info in great format for learning and is a very good lecturer, as was Lisa. Its rare that a TA is as knowledgeable, or able to give a quality lecture as she was.
enthusiastic about the course material and was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Creighton is extremely enthusiastic about this course. He's extremely involved in the students progress in the course and is willing to give up his time to educate students outside of the classroom. It's hard to come by a professor who is so willing to go the extra mile to see a student do well.
very knowledgeable about the subject and makes it easy to ask questions
15. What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
NA
Homework
Gave way too many handouts. For a class talking about forest management we sure wasted a lot of paper that I'm sure the majority of will not get recycled. Having the handouts and chapters available online to view would be far more sustainable
critique
His monotone voice and over enunciation of words.. it almost comes off as over-the-top or slightly condescending.
No ideal
so much pressure during take the test, because too many details to be productively completed in time.
He can be so thorough and enthusiastic about lecture and answering questions that some lectures were skipped due to time constraints.
This class needs a lab. Then it would be applied forest ecology.
Creighton loves to use definitions as a way to educate his students. The issue isn't the definitions, but sometimes (and very rarely) is a tad bit too wordy. His use of word play can get hard to follow after a long lecture - for example: "Conservation biology is to biological conservation what restoration ecology is to ecological restoration." Clever clever, tricky tricky.
16. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
NA
I really enjoyed small group discussions--I think that by doing smaller discussions first and then bringing those discussions into a collective larger group might be more beneficial for some students. I know with the readings for each class session it was a struggle to get opinions from us--an idea would be to assign pairs to briefly summarize and start a discussion about the reading to start the lecture--it would ensure that everyone participated over the course of the semester.
1. More case studies would help students to understand the topics. 2. The readings are too long for students to finish. 3. The exams are too detail, I would expect essays to discuss real problems with the basic knowledge of forest ecosystem.
Exams are too long and far too detailed. The length of the exam makes it difficult to finish in the given amount of time. When almost the entire class is still working when class time is over, the exam need to be shortened.
- more field trip and field work would be helpful for understanding the applied forest ecology.
Vocal enthusiasm! More hands on activities, even videos..to make up for lack of lab class..
Giving more problem sets, for example the assignment is related to species richness and abundance calculation. Writing critiques cost much time, so the syllabus should mention them. I can manage my available time to do them. All assignments you intend to give us this course should be in the syllabus.
please decrease the number of questions in each test a little bit
The course should contain a lab portion, but with that it should be a 4 credit course. The lab portion is invaluable applying concepts from the classroom and demonstrating them through field methods and techniques. Lecture is knowledge and lab is application of that knowledge. If the course is called 'Applied' Forest Ecology there needs to be a lab portion.
A study guide would have been very useful for this course. Even just a list of topics needed to know for exams. The exams literally covered EVERYTHING we went through in class, so it was difficult to study when typically the most important topics are covered by exams. Its kinda of overwhelming trying to make sure you studied EVERYTHING. Just a list to check off terms or topics you know would be great to help studying.
Hands on learning. Add a lab or field course.
The students in this course are a little disconnected from one another. It would be nice if we were able to interact with one another more. It can get a little intimidating speaking with Creighton because he has a tendency to question/correct students - but overall his corrections are appreciated!
I would have liked to have all the lecture powerpoints before hand.
17. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
very good professor
I really enjoyed his teaching style and the classroom atmosphere he established. I would enjoy taking another course from Creighton.
Great!
Good guy but needs to shorten his exams
He is able to explain terms and stuff very clearly
Good teacher, very interested in students doing well.. but just lacks audio and visual appeal..
He is really good teacher but rather demanding
He did a very good job.
He is a knowledgeable professor with a down to earth attitude willing to learn from the students just as much as we learn from him.
Great professor. He knows his stuff, can present it in a clear manner, and is very helpful. You can tell he cares about teaching, which can be hard to find in professors.
good
Creighton is one of those professors students will talk about later in their lives because of his incredible attention to details. He is thorough and encouraging. I will definitely remember him for these qualities.
very good teacher
18. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.2 15 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 1 (7%) 7 (47%) 6 (40%)
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  
4.2 15 0.94 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (7%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 7 (47%)
20. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 15 0.74 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (13%) 5 (33%) 8 (53%)
21. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
I really enjoyed the lecture style and the actual lectures themselves. It is difficult to find a professor who can communicate effectively and that is enthusiastic about what they are teaching.
I tend to favor lecture based classes more than discussion classes but I think there was a good balance of discussion (on readings/articles) and lecture, which I liked. I also enjoyed the field experience; learning by doing is always fun. I also really liked the test format--the mix of different types of questions is different from the normal type of short answer/essay based test.
lectures, field trip
the discussions and lab handouts.. although tedious, they made me apply my skills..
No idea
I enjoin most of the content, which I am able to understand.
The research paper, because this was a way to apply concepts from lecture.
The field trips. And how easy the slides were to follow. Photos. I really really like the format of the exams ( Fill in the blank, matching, define, short answer etc.). I like having all different styles of questions. The short( or long) answer question are a very good format for the material of the course.
restoration and conservation sections
The readings are helpful and his lectures are thorough.
22. Which aspects of the course did you like least?
There were not really any aspects of the courses I disliked. I personally found the section of nutrient cycling boring; however, that's more so personal because it was very science-heavy and not really my area of interest at all.
The discussions were always difficult for me in a "large" group setting.
I think showing us an example for the final project would have been helpful. Towards the end of the semester I had a very hard time keeping up with the readings expecially around the time when the final project was due. The final two journal reviews were helpful and interesting, but having them earlier in the semester would have been easier to manage.
The long exams
a little bit too much exams and homework
The readings! An enormous amount of material, wasting paper! Most students dont even read them!
No ideal
the number of questions in each test
The readings for the conservation lecture series were disinteresting.
Although I loved the format of the exams, they were too long for the given time. I was too rushed on my answers and didn't have time to think. Some you know right off the bat, but others take time to put into words and I was not able to that. I ended up putting some bs answers just to have something since I didn't have time to write out a quality answer. Perhaps a "choose 7 out of the 10 questions to answer", or just cutting a few of the longer questions out that you don't feel are as important. I understand the prof may want to test on all the info from class so maybe just convert some of the long answer questions into another form that won't take as long to answer. I felt like I could have done better if I had a little more time for such a long test. I also felt great about how I was doing until "Only 20 minutes left!" and I realized how many questions I had left. I knew I could answer some but didn't have time to get to it. I didn't like some of the readings because they weren't written in an easy to follow style. Sometimes the daily readings were too long to reasonably complete when required. Also, when the powerpoints were posted online (since animation was used one some I think) not ALL of the text on the slides that appeared in class showed up when posted online. That made studying difficult when trying to connect my notes with the slides.
this class would be better if applied forest ecology was applied in the field.
The power point is intended for lecture, but it would be nice if it included a little more than just pictures. There are a LOT of readings...
I wished that we would of had some field exercises
23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
one of the better courses that I have taken in NREM and sufficient for a 400-level introductory class to this topic.
It was really interesting and stimulating and I would recommend the course/professor to a friend that was interested.
Excellent
Good course
a great course that makes me interested in working on the field of forest ecology
Slightly boring, but valuable knowledge for my career...
I really enjoyed this course
The course is very good.
Great course! Learned priceless information in regards to general ecology and forest ecology.
I highly recommend it.
good
Awesome.
24. Other comments:
Although I really enjoyed the class and found it very interesting. I think it's funny that although i think this class is good for a 400-level class, it was more challenging, I learned a lot more, and is much better organized than some of the 600-level classes I have taken in NREM. This class made me realize more that some 600-level classes in NREM are definitely more so appropriate and at the level of 400/undergraduate classes, but that may just depend on my own personal undergraduate educational experience/college....
Another valuable part of this course was our TA; she was able to share a lot of knowledge and expereiences on specific parts of this course that was helpful to our understanding of particular concepts in the course.
Good to know what are under the ground and above the canopy. Now I know a little bit more.. forests are not only trees or animals! ^_^ Mahalo
Jesus loves you!
THANK YOU CREIGHTON!

Creighton Litton: NREM301, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301 - Natural Resources Management Crn (Section): 85767 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
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%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.8 10 0.42 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 8 (80%)
5. I developed the ability to solve real problems in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
6. I learned a lot in this course.
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%)
7. I generally understood the material presented in 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%)
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
All. I really enjoyed myself for this course. It was incredibly thorough!
I felt that most of the information that we learned in this class is the basis of learning for the other NREM courses. I feel that this class has prepared me to know whats to come in my other courses. It allowed me to learn about many different parts of resource management.
All
management tools and techniques. Better understanding of Mans impact on planer
It was a really encompassing course that did a good job of showing the range of resource management. The online slides were great and really helpful and I liked the games too.
The lectures were always informative and flowed well.
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
I didn't think that any thing taught in this course was not valuable.
None
The room.
We needed to do more in-class exercises to solidify formulas and concepts.
10. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%)
11. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
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%)
12. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
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%)
13. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.85 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 1 (10%) 7 (70%)
14. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.67 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 8 (80%)
15. The course objectives were clear.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
16. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
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%)
17. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
I thought his teachings were good.
N/A
Be more organized in how you present your lesson for the day.. you would often randomly write scattered notes all over the board and it was difficult to follow the topic. Stay more on point and make sure everything moves along in a logical order. Also be more enthusiastic in the method of presenting as well as your tone of voice.
More information and in class assignments. Class is required attendance but students can do well w/o attending class b/c not very much is covered. Class seems fairly simple and could have covered more information and had more rigorous testing.
?
More in class exercises.
18. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.4 10 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 6 (60%)
19. The guest lecturers were interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
20. The exams were a fair test of your knowledge of the course material.
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%)
21. Instruction is well-coordinated among the team teachers.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
22. The teachers were compatible in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.6 10 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 6 (60%)
24. Other comments:
Its a great course!!!
I like the lab class--helps to REALLY understand and apply the knowledge learned in the lecture.

Creighton Litton: NREM301L, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 301L - Natural Resources Mgmt Lab Crn (Section): 85769 (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  
4.88 8 0.35 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 7 (88%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
4. I improved my abilities to do the kinds of writing used by professionals in this field.
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 improved my abilities to revise my rough drafts and to make my writing more effective.
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%)
6. This course was helpful in developing new skills.
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%)
7. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The rough drafts. It really helped to see where silly mistakes were made and what style of writing was appropriate
I really enjoyed actually going out in the fields and actually having hands on experiences. The experiences allowed us to be in the situations that we were learning about in lecture.
Applying the formulas and knowledge from the lecture in real worlld examples.
Experience gained during field trips
All!
8. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
I thought it was all valuable.
None
9. The instructor helped me understand how writing is used in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 7 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%)
10. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
I thought this course was great!
N/A
11. Assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
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%)
12. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
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%)
13. The laboratory was a valuable part of this course.
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%)
14. Laboratory assignments are interesting and stimulating.
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%)
15. Laboratory assignments make students think.
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%)
16. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
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%)
17. Lab assignments are relevant to what is presented in 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%)
18. Lab reports are graded fairly.
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%)
19. Lab reports are returned promptly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 8 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%)
20. The field trips were useful learning experiences.
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%)
21. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.86 7 0.38 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 6 (86%)
22. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Creighton Litton: NREM680, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 680 - Ecosystem Ecology Crn (Section): 88847 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.6 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 11 (85%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 0.65 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%) 9 (69%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.46 13 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 8 (62%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 3 (23%) 8 (62%)
5. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.54 13 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 9 (69%)
6. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.85 13 1.28 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 4 (31%) 5 (38%)
7. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.62 13 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 11 (85%)
8. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.69 13 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 9 (69%)
9. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
10. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 13 1.19 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 9 (69%)
11. The instructor frequently discussed recent developments related to the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 13 0.44 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (23%) 10 (77%)
12. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 13 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 2 (15%) 3 (23%) 6 (46%)
13. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.92 13 0.28 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 12 (92%)
14. The amount of work required is appropriate for the credit received.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.08 13 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (31%) 4 (31%) 5 (38%)
15. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.62 13 1.12 Freq(%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%) 5 (38%) 4 (31%) 3 (23%)
16. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
good, lots of information in short time
Reduce the course work required.
Great content, but I think students would retain more if more time was spent going through subjects. We covered a lot of material, very quickly. When You (Creighton, I'm assuming you're reading this) would ask us if we understood everything, and whether things were clear... I think we were just somewhat recovering from everything we'd been hit by. When you asked that, I personally just couldn't even think of anything. I'm not sure why. Some of the time I felt like information was just going to my short memory bank, then later I hadn't retained it all. Take time. Encourage discussions. Don't steam roll the class.
1. Exams should be taken during lecture, not laboratory, time blocks. 2. Consideration of international students' language barriers interfering with ability to perform well on exams; either providing some approved, extra time for international students on exams or taking this into consideration when formulating the length of exams overall. 3. I did not think it was fair when two people were allowed to "adjust" their topics for methods leader presentations. One of the presentations was hardly even on topic for what we were learning in the course. These methods presentations required an intense amount of preparation and planning, and I felt like these individuals were in some way exempt from the hard work required to prepare a methods review. 4. Some discussion leaders did not lead the discussion, instead, Creighton did most of the facilitating. I think Creighton should try to restrain from any facilitation of discussion until there is a very noticeable and apparent lull in the discussion, and until the discussion leader obviously needs help re-directing. Sometimes it was hard to tell if the leader knew the topic well, because Creighton would answer questions instead of the leader themself. 5. If possible, partners on methods review should receive slightly differentiated grades based on individual performance during the presentation. 6. Maybe instead of two big exams, there could be one big midterm, and smaller "quizzes" on key topics and readings given consistently throughout the semester. If there were quizzes, people would be more inclined to read. And I personally like a dozen or so quizzes throughout the semester much better than an additional exam. 7. Figure handouts were key. It would have been helpful to have access to the powerpoints before the class in which they were presented, so we could have thus taken notes directly on the powerpoint presentations.
Shorten the exam questions or shorten the exams. Students should be able to demonstrate their knowledge with a different format of questioning.
Overall I felt that the design of the course was excellent. If I had to change anything it would be that the 2nd test not be so long. I felt it a little unfair/unnecessary to make that test twice as long than the first test. Yeah we got extra time, but I thought the whole reason for changing the date of the test was to give us extra time to do the same length test, not elongate the test. If I had known that I would have voted to NOT have the test on the Wednesday and instead have it on the scheduled Thursday.
N/A, Creighton ROCKS!
Class was almost exclusively focused on biogeochemistry and could have benefited greatly from more diversity of topics or guest lecturers on other aspects of ecosystem ecology. Methods review too exhaustive and not all that useful. Take home exams would make more sense for the types and number of questions posed on midterms.
-- snipped --
* Showing 8 out of 9 survey responses.

 

17. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.23 13 1.01 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 2 (15%) 3 (23%) 7 (54%)
18. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 12 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (33%) 8 (67%)
19. Exams are creative and require original thought.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.31 13 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (15%) 5 (38%) 6 (46%)
20. What changes would you make in the lectures?
Absolutely nothing, the best lectures in UH. I really enjoy going to class, maybe allow more time to discussion. Sometimes I think that there was a lot of material to be cover and that conflicted with class discussion...but the lectures were amazing.
spend more time to explain? I feel sometime too many information to absorb in a single lecture, maybe because I have little background in biogeochem
n/a
Take your time. Let the class absorb the information. Let it sink in. Encourage questions with a more mellow atmosphere. Don't slam things you don't necessarily agree with. I'd say, also, just cut like three lectures out, there's a lot of information there.
I would have stuck to the originial order on the syllabus for nutrients, instead of waiting until after the second exam for the last lecture on nutrients.
Sometimes I felt like it was more important for you to get through the slides than it was for you to explain individual concepts clearly.
Get Noe to shut the hell up every once in a while
Great lectures! Good preparition of materials. Creighton knows his stuff!
Simplify lectures, make the main point-there were too many details, lists of them, which should be left for the reading. Could also bring in guest lecturers to mix things and topics up.
Exams are to long for the available time.
The book does a great job of going into depth on the principles taught in class. the instructor does not need to repeat word for word the things in the book. lectures would have been much more effective if the instructor would have synthesized the information and explained it clearly. Instructor needs to slow way down. There is way too much material covered in the course and it is not clear what is important. Instructor can not assume that all students have had and understand soil science, organic chemistry, and statistics.
21. What changes would you make in the readings?
Probably none.
nothing, its been great.
n/a
Readings were fine.
Readings were valuable and interesting. No change.
Readings were execellent.
None
Textbook good, but more readings about ecosystem ecology beyond what is talked about in the course syllabus would be nice.
-- snipped --
* Showing 8 out of 9 survey responses.

 

22. What changes would you make in the discussion sections?
Methods and discussion leader are perfect for this class but if a format is chosen, it should be followed. I didn't like the change of methods review topic with one team, from the established topic to an open one, personally I think it represented unequal treatment, it made me feel a little mad. The rest of the groups had to confront a challenge situation and it looked like a joke for those two students. I was really close to leave that particular session.
encourage the student too speak out, sometime some student overdominating the other, sometime the lecturer that dominates.
Maybe doing hands on experience with different instruments.
The discussion sections were good, but almost became a class directed lecture at times. They were better when people read and discussed. I do feel like most of the time the discussions were between like three people, and could have done with more participation.
See block 16.
On several occasions the discussions were dominated by the instructor. I think the discussion section is an execellent opportunity to reinforce the material presented in the presentation but there should be more responsability placed on the discussion leader to keep the conversation going. When the instructor takes over the whole discussion something is lost in the exercise. This happened on several occasions.
Dr. Litton would encourage discussion leaders to take charge of the discussion but would sometimes take control without giving the leader a fair chance. Most of the time it was necessary for Dr. Litton to jump in and take the bull by the horns, but sometimes it was not.
Nothing, I learned a lot preparing my discussion and found that most of the discussions in class were very helpful.
Be more patient and let students run the discussion, defer especially to the discussion leader. This would dramatically improve the dialogue and make the discussion less of a lecture or ongoing debate between the instructor and 1 or 2 students.
-Not allow Creighton to take over the discussion like he is the leader.
-- snipped --
* Showing 10 out of 11 survey responses.

 

23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
10 over 10, no doubt about it. Amazing material and probably the best instructor in the department.
Great! very informative for me, I learned a lot. really makes me think.
Good
This course was FULL value... this course was actually a bit sandbagged. I think that it was a bit more than 4 units worth of information.
Creighton is one of the best teachers I have had so far at UH. His body of knowledge and experience in the field is incredibly vast and that was apparent through his teaching. He has high expectations for students, which I personally found to be a good thing; enhancing desire to learn and absorb material as well as providing incentive to try your hardest. I rarely felt like there was a question asked he could not give some form of answer to address accurately. This was also the most challenging course I have had yet at UH. Finally, I felt like I was in graduate school and not simply a repetition of undergrad!
Outstanding!
Good course. The work load seemed to be a little daunting at first but after getting through the class I think it was fair.
Fantastic! I recommend this course and Creighton to all students in the NREM department!
It's a good course if you want to learn about carbon cycling, which is the most useful thing I learned in this class. But sometimes, I could not see the trees for the carbon.
-- snipped --
* Showing 9 out of 10 survey responses.

 

24. Other comments:
The exams were great but I would recommend to measure time more accurately. Both exams were too long for the time frame given. I don't mind to answer 20 questions but you have to give me the time to do it. It was kind of depressing to know the answers and not have time to write them down. From my point of view the extra point question in the exam is unfair and even insulting, but that is just my opinion. I wander how many people actually had time to answer those. Anyways, great class, challenging, amazing...so far the best I've taken in UH.
n/a
That second exam was NOT the same length as the first exam. That thing was killer. Work on your perception of time. Ten minutes is not an hour and we can't fit 40 power point slides into 15 minutes. If you lower the volume, people will gain more knowledge in the end. I think I was fairly redundant in these comments, and I think other students will write the same thing. So, you get the point.
The instructor is extremely well organized but I believe that there should be more consideration put into time management. It's ok that all of the material that you were planning on covering didn't get covered. It probably means students were asking questions and trying to grasp certain concepts. Maybe schedule one or two more catch up days to take the pressure off of yourself and the students to get though more information than can reasonably fit into a single lecture. This was by far one of the best learning experiences I have had at UH Manoa. Keep doing what you are doing. You are an execellent instructor and an asset to the NREM department and the University of Hawaii.
Creighton is an awesome teacher, and more importantly he puts a lot of time and thought into the materials he is presenting. If more of the staff in the NREM department were like Creighton the program would be top-notch in the nation in no time!
Thanks for the take home final-relief.
-- snipped --
Exams were very unfair. first exam was way too long for the time provided and no students finished in time. second exam was twice as long as the first? adding a major project to the course at the very end of the semester is unreasonable. there are 2 hours allotted for a final exam, and it is not the instructors business how much time we "should" put in studying and thus "should" spend on a final project. the project is not a terrible assignment, it is just very unfair to add it in at the last minute. if students knew this was part of the class they could have been thinking about it and working on it much earlier. telling new grad students that they need to come up with a research proposal in 3 weeks is totally unreasonable. new grad students cannot be expected to know how to lay out an experimental design, what kind of sampling is necessary, and how write good objectives.
* Showing 7 out of 8 survey responses.

 

Creighton Litton: NREM682, Fall 2009     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Natural Res & Environmtl Mgt
Course: NREM 682 - Restoration Ecology Crn (Section): 79438 (001)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 10 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (100%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
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%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
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%)
4. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.9 10 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 9 (90%)
5. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
6. I enjoyed this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.6 10 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 8 (80%)
7. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 10 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 10 (100%)
8. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Leading and taking part in the discussion component. Coupling lectures that coincided with a student led discussion on the subject covered in the lecture. It was good to provide information and reinforce it with an example of how that information is put into practice.
I really enjoyed the reading discussion days and felt it was an excite way to further explore the restoration topics as well as interact with fellow classmates. Also the field trip was excellent and brought a new understanding to why the work at that site was being done.
I enjoyed seeing how restoration integrated at all levels. I also thought the student led papers was a very good tool for teh class.
presentation leader was a good challenge. The text book is awesome, one of my favorite reads.
I like the class discussions. I find them much more stimulating than lectures. Although Dr Litton is one of the best lecturers I have experienced to date. He is very animated and enthusiastic, speaks clearly, and encourages input from students. The field trip was also very valuable. I would recommend a field trip be put in the syllabus next time the course is taught.
I like the discussion leader sessions, it gave me opportunity to freely convey my thoughts and generate new thoughts on the issues discussed.
Discussions on how ecology in the restoration context pertains to Hawaii
Discussions
9. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The assignment on the field trip I didn't attend. Haha
I thought all parts were valuable
I liked all aspects of the course.
all part were valuable
none
10. The instructor gives clear explanations.
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%)
11. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.7 10 0.48 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 7 (70%)
12. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
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. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
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%)
14. The instructor encouraged class discussion.
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%)
15. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
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%)
16. 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 10 0.97 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%)
17. The amount of material covered in the course is reasonable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.53 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%)
18. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
Ensure that powerpoint presentations have all of the slide content on it when printed as a handout. Smile more, you have a great smile.
I really enjoyed the course design, but do feel that I could have benefited from at least one to two examinations... as another way to reinforce the material.
I liked the course and the instructor methodology.
is there a possiblity of a lab component? visiting various land managers implementing restoration ecology ideas in the field. Maybe a second mock debate like one in the begnning of the semester.
Let the presenting students lead the in-class discussion more. Do not let students go more than 5 mins overtime when presenting.
None. For 2 credit of course, nothing can be improved. The teaching materials and curricula is perfect. If the course become 3 credit course, than more fieldtrip/discussion with local stakeholders that doing the ecological restoration in Hawaii, would give more benefit to the students.
Sometimes the professor would dominate discussions when they were supposed to be student-led. Too focused on terrestrial plants, should be a more well-rounded and balanced approach to restoration ecology including all ecosystems as well as plants, animals, etc. to better train students and to meet the diverse interests of the class. A lab component of actual restoration. move beyond just restoration ecology theory and discussion and into ecological restoration in the field
19. My overall evaluation of this instructor is....
Dr. Litton was professional, prepared and knowledgeable about the course material. He made himself available whenever you had questions and treated students fairly. Overall I would say that he has been one of the best instructor's I've had over my academic career.
Excellent!
An excellent instructor who was well prepared and organized for all classes.
great powerpoints. i love the printed sheets at the beginning of the class. It helps for students to bring in copies of their reads and outlines of presentations.
Excellent!
Excellent!
The best instructor I've had so far. Very knowledgeable of the subject material. Presented material of the course in the best way possible.
great. very knowledgeable, prepared, organized and enthusiastic about the topic.
20. The assigned readings significantly contribute to this course.
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%)
21. The course materials (texts, handouts) make a valuable contribution to the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 10 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)
22. The course was a valuable contribution to my education.
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%)
23. My overall evaluation of this course is...
I thought that the material covered was informative and interesting. I thought that the course overall was excellent.
The course was great and I fell that I learned a lot over the last few months.
A very useful course for expanding my understanding of ecology.
application of restoration ecology, share ideals of restoration ecoog with community members, create that bridge between academia and community. Create a community restoration ecology project with ecological restoration implementation at the end of the semester. Many require opening of separate course.
Excellent.
I found this class is very interesting, not only because it gives me better understanding on the context discussed, but also it encourage me to convey thoughts. What is also interesting with this class, the instructor gave material from new perspectives that are discussed in the current publications.
An excellent course and am looking forward to taking futher courses taught by the same instructor.
great