eCAFE - Course and Faculty Evaluation, University of Hawaii

eCAFE: Course and Faculty Evaluations


Instructor: Christian Peterson

Available Survey Results

ANTH640B, Fall 2011
ANTH699, Spring 2011
ANTH151, Fall 2010
ANTH325, Fall 2010
ANTH750B, Spring 2010
ANTH473, Fall 2009
ANTH699, Fall 2009
ANTH462, Spring 2009

Christian Peterson: ANTH640B, Fall 2011

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 640B - Meth/Thry Archaeol: Analytical Crn (Section): 79122 (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 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (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 3 0.0 Freq(%) 3 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%) 0 (0%)
7. I developed the ability to evaluate new course work content in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
8. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Providing important concepts of archaeology, such as site, community, and region; introducing various regional studies and methods.
The systematic approach to learning a broad variety of aspects in regards to the field of Regional Settlement Patterns was valuable. It was well thought out and progressive. Of course, our final research paper / project was helpful in applying the theoretical and empirical standards we were exposed to.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Too many American studies. I would like to read more studies on Asia-Pacific region which is more relevant to my study.
The small size of our class was a bit of a detriment to our discussion requirements within the extended time frame we had for the class. This is not the instructor's fault however, simply one of enrollment.
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
13. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (67%) 1 (33%)
14. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
16. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
17. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
18. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
19. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Showing some pictures would make the class more interesting.
I am not sure he can...I felt that this course has given me a strong foundation for the future studies I wish to pursue.
20. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
As mentioned above.
If there was anyway to ensure more enrollment, the discussion aspect of this course would benefit. Also, this is not Dr. Peterson's responsibility, but the Anthropology Department should encourage (through undergraduate requirement) the exposure to analytical statistics for the Social Sciences. This seems to be the greatest weakness graduate students have in this department...and consequently, courses like Dr. Peterson's.
21. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
Knowlegable, Responsible,
Experienced, innovative, and fair-minded.
22. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
23. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
24. The TA is friendly and accessible.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
25. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
26. The course was well-organized in terms of continuity and presentation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
27. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
The discussion in such a small group. The instructor would like to teach everything he knows about this field.
The wide exposure to various theoretical underpinnings of regional settlement research.
28. What changes would you make in the readings?
More studies on Asia-Pacific region.
None.
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.67 3 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%) 2 (67%)
30. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
As mentioned above.
Please see question #20.
31. Other comments:
I really learned a lot from this class. I will recommend it to other students.
Good job!

Christian Peterson: ANTH699, Spring 2011     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 699 - Directed Reading or Research Crn (Section): 89448 (028)    
1. Class Level (pick one) - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Freshman   Sophomore   Junior   Senior   Grad   Other  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
7. I was stimulated to do outside reading about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
8. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
No survey responses were found.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
No survey responses were found.
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
Freq(%)
13. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
14. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
16. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
17. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
Freq(%)
18. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
19. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
20. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
No survey responses were found.
21. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
No survey responses were found.
22. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
23. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
24. The TA is friendly and accessible.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
25. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
26. Reading assignments require a reasonable amount of time and effort.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
27. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
28. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
29. What changes would you make in the readings?
No survey responses were found.
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) 0 (0%)
31. What did you find least valuable and helpful?
No survey responses were found.
32. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Christian Peterson: ANTH151, Fall 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 151 - Emerging Humanity Crn (Section): 75561 (004)    
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  
1.74 98 1.06 Freq(%) 58 (59%) 16 (16%) 17 (17%) 6 (6%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.47 96 0.5 Freq(%) 51 (53%) 45 (47%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.77 98 0.59 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 0 (0%) 2 (2%) 15 (15%) 80 (82%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.38 98 0.7 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%) 9 (9%) 40 (41%) 48 (49%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.07 98 0.93 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 5 (5%) 18 (18%) 36 (37%) 38 (39%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.81 98 0.96 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 10 (10%) 20 (20%) 43 (44%) 24 (24%)
7. I developed plans to take additional related courses.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
2.7 97 1.2 Freq(%) 21 (22%) 18 (19%) 34 (35%) 17 (18%) 7 (7%)
8. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.78 98 1.0 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 6 (6%) 26 (27%) 38 (39%) 25 (26%)
9. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 98 0.94 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 5 (5%) 17 (17%) 35 (36%) 40 (41%)
10. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Presentations were done in a way that kept us interested in the material.
The movies really tied things together.
i enjoyed the entire course.
The videos were help
For me the most valuable is the evolution of the human race.
Having the powerpoints and videos online really helped me to back track and recap on what was covered that day.
I believe all aspects of the course were valuable. The information presented was done in a chronological order giving a clear understanding as to how it connected to other information being presented. This combination of powerpoints and videos was beneficial in understanding and visualizing different concepts. The study guides provided give a clear view as to what was to be expected on the exams.
Knowing all of the details of the power points
I felt that the aspects of the course that were most valuble was the fact that you really have to study and i am working on developing better study habits. I felt that this class helped because if you dont study you wont do well.
The power points were a good visual aid and video's are extremely helpful, and the first study guide was very helpful.
Learning about different cultures and geographic locations
I valued the overall concern of the Professor who tried to give out additional extra credit to those in dire need of a passing grade.
The aspect that i found the most valuable was the power point. It was a good source for notes, and it showed me what concepts out of the book Christian Peterson was going to focus on on the test
I thought that the second and third trimesters of the class seemed much more valuable because of its applicability to modern life. Learning about modern practices of anthropology and moving into modern humans seemed much more useful.
The development of tool-making and creation of societies.
I really liked the course material, although difficult, it was very interesting and I do feel I learned a lot. It opened my eyes to Anthropology which I had never been interested in before, and now I am considering taking another class in Anthropology.
It got a requirement out of the way.
Learning about the beginnings of the human race was a very fascinating fact for me. I enjoyed a lot of the videos that were provided as it gave me not only a oral description, but also a visual description that made it possible to view the old races physically.
I felt that the material that was taught was right on course. There was no busy work given in this class, and everything Professor Peterson taught was relevant to the class and helped me understand the material more thoroughly.
The material itself is both important and relevant. The concepts that we mastered in class are ones which we can apply to our lives, our global experiences, and our understanding of humanity. The breadth of material was very intense, but very useful.
Learning about the diferent ways that people believe where we originated from. Lerning how we modernized as a society and what they pro's and con's were
Learning about different cultures and how they formed, also how we formed throughout the years.
I think the overall information giving to us as a class was valuable, there was not bs info givin.
the book
The amount of assistance and resources made available outside of the class.
The lectures in the course were quite valuable. Showing up for class can affect you quite gravely.
Learning about our history.
He put up all the notes and powerpoints on laulima.
Learning where we as humans have come from.
The lectures
I thought that the instructor putting his lectures online to review later was nice. That way, I didn't miss information trying to copy down all of those notes. I also liked that he allowed us to have a crib sheet for exams.
Extra credit options, a page of notes which can be used during tests, bold text in the power points to underline important terms and concepts, and videos which presented the material in a different way.
I felt that the overall content was interesting however I had a hard time caring enough about the tiny details to remember them.
I enjoyed the Australopithecine unit and studying early homo.
The video's were the most valuable part of this course. This is because they actually had something that was visually engaging. Listening to a teacher give a lecture based off of PowerPoint slides helped me learn nothing.
I enjoyed Mr. Peterson's clear, to-the-point demeanor, it was easy to listen to him, and I learned a lot from he videos shown.
The understanding of the evolution of the human line from the early prehistoric time period and how the apes/monkeys'behaviors related to us in term of tool usage and biologically.
The videos were very interesting and put what we were learning into a very realistic point of view. It was easier to remember the content when we were able to 'apply' the information.
I enjoyed learning about the human brain and how we have developed over time.
The entire evolution from apes to humans. It was good to explore all the scientific evidence of the evolution, and to see what findings were made or not made.
The videos we watched in class were very valuable and interesting.
learning about orangutan rescue research
For a freshman course, this was the hardest class I've ever taken, and I'm taking ICS141, which is on the list of the hardest classes at UHM. It taught me a lesson, that just because classes are entry-level or freshman-level, that they aren't a breeze.
The course was well organized, and the flow of the material makes sense and helps the students to understand it easier. Most of the information was new and time was well spent on the various material. The video presentations were also helpful as a way to help present the material in a different format as opposed to just a lecture. The one page crib notes for exams and powerpoint presentations on Laulima were the most valuable aspects as it really helps when studying for exams.
I think that the most valuable part of the course was learning how different civilizations began and fell, and what contributions each society made to the world. It showed how people of all different backgrounds came from the same ancestors and how we are all connected in some way.
The lectures were valuable. Dr. Peterson gave very effective lectures, the material was straightforward and coherent.
Our evolution. How we have evolved throughout time and mostly how we have some similarities toward primates.
The lectures were thoroughly explained.
I learned the most from just listening to the information that the professor had. He was very knowledgeable about the subject which helped me through the course.
His powerpoints and the videos.
The powerpoints online were very helpfull.
The evolution of human beings and how it related to my biology class.
None
The lectures were very informative. The videos enhanced the specific topics of discussion.
The knowledge that could be gained from just listening to the lectures alone.
Human Societies
Learning about how we as humans developed and evolved into the people we are today. :) My favorite section was about how are brains evolved and we as a species got smarter.
The slides and the videos were the most valuable as they helped me understand the content of the readings further and helped me better remember the important dates and names of our ancestors.
The professor was great; he had such a passion for anthropology and he enthused me to really consider studying more types of anthropology. Video lessons were also very helpful.
The part that was most valuable in the course was to understand the info from the first few chapther in order to understand the subjects.
The movies
I would have to say the way Dr. Peterson structured the class was most valuable. Even though the calss, in my opinion was hard, he taught in a style that atleast gave you a sense of where to go with the information and how to take it from there.
The ideas of using anthropology as a way to dictate history.
The most valuable were the parts of how early ancestors started to settle down and were more intelligent to better suit their needs as they kept on living. The part such as their technology advancing through their weopanry and storing of food.
I preferred the teaching later on in the course because it was closer to the present then now. It was interesting to know how people before us developed into civilizations and how they had the intelligence to create such cities and such.
I believe the concepts of human life in the past and present was one of the most valuable aspects of the course. It gave me a better understanding of how our species came to be and how evolution and biology takes part in our society and culture.
Information on the genealogy of hominins.
Learning the origin of our human existence was very valuable to me considering that coming into this class i knew very little on this topic.
learning about humans came to be.
The most valuable aspects of the course were the powerpoints. They helped direct me to think in the right directions when watching a movie or reading out of the book.
The content of the lectures and text are fascinating. I've learned so much from this course. The professor really knows his material. He's interesting and has no trouble keeping my attention during lectures. Mostly, he is able to take difficult concepts and put them into a relatable context. I really appreciate that he bothers to do that.
good course
Prof. Peterson was an excellent speaker, and his lectures were both educating and interesting. The lectures were definitely the high-point of the class.
Learning about the emergence of early civilizations.
The information were the most valuable.
I enjoyed learning about the Great Apes and how closely related we are to them.
The videos helped expand on concepts reviewed in class, and I enjoy when the lecture was broken up with humor and occasional sidenotes.
The aspect i found very interesting was based on the livings of a primate and human and how similar they were . It gets me to think about the similarities and differences one another would have if they were both to adapt in one lifestyle. I never knew how intelligent monkeys and apes were until i sat down in class and listened to the various elections and the videos shown. Our professor was very clear and understanding that it was also helpful to my understanding of the topic.
the videos, study guides, and ppts
early human evoultion, and aspects of early civilization
Anything we were tested on.
The knowledge of learning about humans and their complete past.. its very interesting. Its just nerve racking to have your entire grade based off of 3 test scores.. not to mention the test questions can but pulled from a very large bank of questions because the chapters are so in-depth. the one page cheat sheet helps.. but only to a certain extent
The videos of evolution were really interesting and valuable.
Learning how man kind came about
The aspect of the course that was most valuable to me were the lectures on ancient civilizations and thier interactions and how our modern civilizations are sometime similar.
I appreciated the truth of class. I like how the information is given so that it relates to everyday life, and it can be understood on any level. It makes this class enjoyable to learn about our origins.
I think that learning about where humanity all started from and how we got to where we are today was most valuable.
11. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
The lecture seemed too long and got slightly boring after an hour
The extra readings did not help very much.
i thought it was all valuable.
I felt the least valuable was the very early beings of humans, such as primates.
I feel that the course did not have any aspects that were not valuable.
nothing.
I feel the topics discussed were sort of irrelevant im not sure when ill use them again.
The second study guide I felt fell short a bit, I think the things we learn on the power point is a little too straight from the book. Going over more conceptual things and larger concepts would be most helpful.
The movies were kind of irrelevant to the topic, or was a little confusing to understand. Maybe send out questions to fill out from the movie to gain an overall better understanding of the movie, and what's to be expected on the exam that is from that movie.
I feel like the movies did not influence my grade at all.
While the evolution and primate section was interesting, I found this information to be the least valuable.
The history of the multiple societies that were being built at the same time.
I thought the lectures could have been more interactive or varied, to round out the class a bit more. Although the lectures were informative, alot of the information could be read in the book, which is fine, but since mostly every class was the same, other then the days we watched videos, it was a little repetitive. I think changing the class structure could have helped maybe, but this isn't a large complaint because over all I enjoyed the course.
Videos
Although the study guide is made to help one study for the test, one cannot solely rely on studying it and expect a good grade. I believe that the study guide could be done away with and make sure the students focus more on the readings and the slides.
I didn't like that every lecture was taught through a powerpoint. I wish that there had been more discussions in the class even though it was a lecture hall.
The scientific references in comparison to every-day terms were confusing and underhanded in the exams.
Learning all thos dates is just unessecary. you should only look at the profound ones
Chapter on agriculture and farming.
I thought there may have been a little to much information given to us at once. Needs to be spread at more i think.
the exam
The least valuable thing about the course was the monotone that Mr. Peterson spoke with.
There wasn't much a the wasn't of value except maybe the extra readings.
Having to know every little detail.
learning the names of each individual speicies up to humans.
The videos
I didn't think that the Teaching Assistant, Rachel, did a very good job with her lectures. I didn't get as much out of her lectures because she seemed to be heavily reading from her notes. She also didn't speak loudly enough. Rachel was very nice, and knowledgeable, but I think she needs to work on her public speaking, and figure out ways to help students retain the information she is giving. I also thought that the instructor's exams were exceptionally hard. I would study for hours upon hours, read all of the assigned chapters in the book, show up to every class, review his lectures online, make a crib sheet, and I would still only get a 'C' on tests. A bit over the top for an intro course. I did feel I learned a lot from him though. He's a great teacher! I could tell he cares a lot about his students and the subject matter. Highly intelligent, too.
I felt that the videos shows were very unhelpful.
I guess some random facts that had no value besides being interesting.
The power point slides. It's like dry reading. It's boring, not helpful for visualizing something, and does not engage me in the subject at all.
It seemed like there was a lot of re-learning from high-school biology and geography classes in this class
The specific time periods. I mean, the time periods are important but they shouldn't be too much of emphasizing. This is the Anthropology 151 class so it should focus more on the evolution and the adaptation of human lineage, the concepts of human evolution, rather than about asking specific time period questions on the exam; that should be saved for history class...
I thought it was all valuable. There is a great balance between videos and lectures and it makes it much easier to grasp the information.
I did not like talking about the western civilization.
everything I learned were valuable to me.
the elaborations of religion
The lecture itself. The topics are covered so in-depth in the book, that summarizing them doesn't do you any good in learning them, or preparing you for the exams, which cover such a small portion of what is actually presented to you in the book. I don't know if that's necessarily a bad thing, but you end up spending so much time studying, just to retain knowledge that isn't relevant to more than 80% of the test.
Some of the material, notably the section on mendelian genetics, is repeat information that most of us have seen before. I recommend possibly going through this information faster in the future so that the students don't get bored. Also, the section on modern primates has a lot of information, and hardly any of it is connected to the information that follows. I see how Australopithecus is important, but don't find that much of a connection with bonobos and tarsiers to homo erectus. Possibly shorten this section as well, or focus more on the species most closely related to humans, so chimpanzees, gorillas, etc.
I think that the parts of the course where we learned about the evolution of early humans were too complicated and included too many names and dates to be very conducive to learning. I think that it should be simplified a little bit.
The class had perhaps too much use of video. The videos were all pertinent, but I would have liked more lecture time to cover other material.
None. They all seemed valuable to me.
Massive halls with low hearing abilities.
none
Nothing
The movies in the begininng of the course werent really helpfull.
none.
All.
The use of a textbook while useful, seemed to have been outmatched by the presentations in class.
I hated the videos. They didnt even teach me anything other than what we learned in class or through the book.
There were no real non-valuable aspects all aspects were knowledgeable and helpful.
The binder-text, all my pages ripped out one day.
There has not been anything least valuable in this class.
I dont really know, it was all good stuff.
The mass of the information. There is a lot of information, which I understand is important but sometimes seems to be overwhelming to many and has this blocking effect that makes it hard to figure out what needs to be learned at time and what doesn't.
The understanding of how population shifted over time.
I would the parts from the beginning such as the meitosis and meiosis part.
I did not really enjoy the course at the beginning. It was not enjoyable for me to learn about what exact years did this happen and also all the different kinds of species that were running around. The course got more interesting for me when it was beginning to talk about how higher intelligence and cultural behavior was achieved among the species.
Learning about monkeys...
Information on different types of anthropology.
The aspect of going depth on the various species of monkeys was least valuable. I think we should have just focused on which monkeys were the closest to us humans. This course has so much information so cutting back on the unnecessary information i think will help us students focus on what is important.
having tests as the only grade
The lecture when the mic was broken, made it tough to hear.
The tests were very challenging. Harder than Dr. Pietrusewsky even, and he is infamous for being a tough teacher. I've been to every lecture, taken copious notes, read all the material, done the study guide and I still find the tests incredibly difficult. The extra credit offered is nice, however on the second test the extra credit was all Hawaiian words. As someone new to Hawaii, without any knowledge of the language, I was disappointed to miss out on this extra credit. Later, I realized that having scored better on the first test because I got the extra credit that was course related, I would be ineligible for the additional grade bump that improving on each test would garner. So, because I do not speak Hawaiian I lost out on not one but two chances for extra credit. I really feel that this limits the possibility for that extra grade bump to students who speak Hawaiian. The Hawaiian extra credit should have been on the first test or the grade bump should be evaluated before the extra credit is figured in.
The assigned reading was really just an overview of what we had already gone over in the lectures, and therefore was not very helpful or interesting.
Learning about monkeys and apes.
The TA.
Egypt
I didn't find any aspects to be particularly invaluable, simply just a little dull for my personal taste at times.
There was actually nothing wrong with this course. Everything was pretty much set and went exactly as the schedule was written. It was organized !
His study guides were worthless.
the readings
everything is important but there were many small details such as sites and significance which was only breifly discussed
I didn't find anything to be of a lesser value than anything else.
The fact that what we went over in the power points did not follow the book, nor was all the information discussed in the book available for further reading about it. so you either hear it or you dont and you miss it on the test.
The specific dates and names of certain events were so detailed. I am a very "see the big picture" kind of person and these miniscule things hindered me on the exams.
I felt that the least valuable aspect of the course was memorizing the dates some historic occurances.it is difficult to try and remember the scientific names along with exact dates.
The least valuable would be the fact that there hasn't been much opportunity of asking questions. While it has been said it's encouraged to ask questions, the atmosphere is lecture only, with minimal discussion.
N/A
12. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.1 96 0.83 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 4 (4%) 10 (10%) 50 (52%) 31 (32%)
13. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.42 98 1.12 Freq(%) 8 (8%) 10 (10%) 28 (29%) 37 (38%) 15 (15%)
14. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.9 98 0.91 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 8 (8%) 16 (16%) 48 (49%) 25 (26%)
15. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.02 97 0.85 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 2 (2%) 16 (16%) 49 (51%) 28 (29%)
16. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.28 98 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (3%) 7 (7%) 48 (49%) 40 (41%)
17. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.45 98 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (3%) 5 (5%) 35 (36%) 55 (56%)
18. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.64 96 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%) 2 (2%) 28 (29%) 65 (68%)
19. The instructor presented the course materials in a clear and organized way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.3 97 0.72 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (2%) 9 (9%) 44 (45%) 42 (43%)
20. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
More class interaction/ participation if possible.
Maybe talk about the movies at the end, like how they relate to what we are learning about.
no need.
He could do more hands on things.
More enthusiasm. He's passionate about the course but needs to be more captivating when speaking and read less from notes. More improptu speaking would be appreciated. He needs to jump out of his comfort zone.
The course could be improved by adding iclicker questions to the powerpoints to review information and to clear up any ideas that the class may have misunderstood.
nothing, this class is great
I feel that possibly explaining some of the concepts better i feel confused but its just difficult material that im not familiar with but the teaching overall was very good.
improve study guide sheets
Curve Grades more. Exams are too hard
I would say if you enjoy teaching the course, make sure it comes across your face. Sometimes the emotion you inflict on your students is the emotion that is enveloped throughout the lecture. But overall, I really enjoy coming to class and learning new things about anthropology everyday.
Allow the use of computers. In other classes I'm able to use the power point in such a way that I can stay on a slide if the Professor is moving to fast.
I found that the exams tested for parts of the course that hadnʻt seemed emphasized. If there could be a more direct correlation made between the information gone over in class and powerpoints and the exams, it would make the grading seem more correlated to the course.
He could speak louder or increase the volume of his mic. Can also generalize what will be on the test, ie dates or certain facts.
It's hard in a class of this size, but it would be helpful if Dr. Peterson were a little more...energetic? I enjoyed the class, and eventually warmed up to his lecturing style, but he seemed bored. I know it's an intro level class and lecturing to 100 is hard, but I would've been more interested if he seemed more interested. I will say, however, that as the course progressed so did he.
More varied methods of conveyance, spice things up.
Like I said before, maybe changing the structure of the class from time to time or incorporating different aspects of the material into the lectures, of course this way he wouldn't be able to cover ALL the material, but doing that isn't exactly needed since the readings are required anyway. So I guess just implementing interesting examples or exercises or videos (although videos were included in the class, and they were really informative and fun in my opinion) just to improve the learning experience. But again, not a large complaint because over all the course was good.
Presenting the information in a more interesting manner.
There's not much more that can be done since it is a lecture class and I, personally, do not really enjoy lecture classes. Professor Peterson is doing a good job at trying to keep as many students interested in the class as possible; but with the class being so large, I find it a little difficult to actually pay attention.
He could try doing more class discussions to keep the students interested throughout the entire course.
Weekly assignments or in-class activities would not only help the students who don't perform well on the exams, but it would also encourage students to engage with the material throughout the term.
Work on his speech skills. He's very monotone. Needs to stop rolling his cord. It's very distracting.
More class participation
Slow down and maybe add a couple more test, so its not so much info at once.
exam questions are from the book
Anthropology is already a difficult subject. Without too much change, introduce words in a more simple, direct fashion.
Professor Peterson's teaching of the course is good. He explains where he is coming from.
Christian Peterson can improve teaching the course by trying new ways to make the material more interesting and give a better overview of what we really need to know for our exams.
Make it more interesting for students who are not going into a anthropology study.
Exams seemed quite specific, I found myself studying for important aspects and memorizing certain parts that didnt show up in any part of the exam...essay question was not worth enough.....matching questions were very specific and ruin your grade if not done correctly.
Look at his exams from a beginner's point of view. I think he's so smart that he doesn't even realize how hard his tests are. I would literally have the definition and an example of a term on my crib sheet, and I would look at the choices given (in the matching) and still have no idea what the answer was. He simplified it down to only a few words, and would boggle me with it. I was like, "I thought I knew what this meant..."
I feel that Professor Peterson sometimes felt too strongly about certain things and that relayed into his class message which was irrelevant because it was personal.
By not letting the TA teach
This course can be improved by making the vector of presentation much more interesting. The power point slides are so boring to watch and they really did not teach me anything. The video's that we watched were the most helpful part of this course because they put pictures with words. That, for me, is a better way to memorize things.
Maybe it's just the course, but i think less review is necessary
He should add in some sense of humors to make the course more enjoyable and he also should use a better microphone, since I have a hard time hearing him from the back of the lecture hall.
Make the course a little bit more interactive. Having class discussions would help us understand the material more thoroughly rather than just sitting there and listening.
make things more interactive in some way.
Although I have a great respect for our TA as an anthropologist and an academic, I think it may have been useful to give her more tips on how to condense her slides and speak without reading from a script. I felt a large drop in the rhythm and momentum of the course when she began her lectures, and found it very hard to remain focused and interested. I liked the idea of showing us how to create an achulean tool, however he never got around to demonstrating it to us. More hands on examples would have been nice. Of course, I understand that his wife gave birth to their first child in the middle of the semester, and I am sure he was very busy.
Present the information in a more interesting way.
minimize the information given out to students
For me, preparing for the tests was very difficult. The study guides were helpful, but they cover so much of the chapters that isn't on the tests. Trying to understand and remember concepts that didn't pertain to questions on the test was time consuming and made the exams very difficult to do well on.
Make the class more interesting! The material is presented effectively, with powerpoint presentations, videos, etc, but the students lose interest after a while if the instructor just talks about the material the whole time. Make it fun, throw in some jokes, connect with the students more. Also, use some physical objects such as artifacts and stone tools if you have them to demonstrate to the students. I think many students like archaeology and stuff like that. Keep it interesting, cause just straight information is a sure way to put students to sleep. Other than that, your method of teaching is rather effective.
I think that if Dr. Peterson could just liven up his lectures a bit, class would be a lot more enjoyable. Also, it was always pretty dark in the classroom, which made it difficult to write notes well.
He can use a little less video material and go into detail on a more broad range of topics.
Make the class seem more fun and interactive like putting up mini quizzes on the powerpoints after a lecture to get students to participate and also to help them to better understand the lecture.
Unsure.
i dont really know, he taught in a very effective manner.
Use more pictures to describe what he is teaching about.
Go a little slower on the powerpoints and define major topics a little more clear.
Not talking in a monotone voice. Have activities or more demonstrations instead of constant talking.
Break down better.
By making the course more interesting and appealing to those who have no knowledge of the material when they first enter this course.
I would of enjoyed it better if he continued to lecture the class instead of allowing the TA to.
becoming more elaborate in a way to teach amatuears
Be more exciting...
Christian Peterson can possibly change the tone of his voice more to make it more inviting to site in and listen to his lectures.
Nothing, maybe more videos and hands-on type teaching, but i know that's hard to do for such a big class.
make the class more interesting.
He can keep doing what he's doing because it works fine.
I have no suggestions.
Create a more-detailed study guide
By putting some more information on the powerpoints and study guides more specific on for the exams.
I think his way of teaching, as far as lecturing goes, is a very effective way of teaching. I probably have difficulty paying attention in class just because I am not interested in this kind of studies. Having a witty joke in his lectures, like he sometimes does, here and there definitely wake me up though.
I found the videos and examples given very helpful. They kept me awake and gave me a better understanding of the topic at hand.
Make it more fun.
I think having a short quiz after one or two chapters of this course will help the students better prepare themselves for the exams ahead. This way the students will know what area or chapter they need to work on more. The quizes could have the students answer definitions and concepts.
have more videos.
Mix movies and lecture throughout class.
I think he's doing a fine job of teaching the class. While the tests are extremely difficult, I like a challenge. The one thing that would make the class better is if he would crack down a little more on the disturbances. It's his class and if he said don't stomp down the stairs to sit front and center when you are late it would encourage the late comers to sit in the back where they won't be a distraction to those of us who are there on time and ready to learn.
The only issue I had was the redundancy of the required reading, so maybe fixing that.
Teach the whole course instead of letting someone else take over towards the second half.
Decrease the information given, and make his test a little less difficult.
I think Dr. Peterson expects a little too much and in his tests even though there is no assigned homework. Better study guides would help a lot, as well as having what's in the workbook/textbook on the test.
Possibly open up class for more discussion rather than strictly lecture- based.
There is nothing else to improve.
Make things more lively in his lectures. Have study guides that actually pertain to his tests.
not require his students to know so much about anthropology at a 100 level course
Less monotone but otherwise the course is well taught
I think everything is fine with the course, as long as you study the materials.
It seems like a type of course where class discussion might be useful. May be hard to organize with the number of students in the class, but something to think about.
have the microphone's volume he and rachel use louder so everyone can hear clearly, when i sat in the last 25% of the seats i could barely hear.. i actually had to lean forward and "cone" my ears so i could hear.. after this of course i moved to sit in the front area.. but i still noticed that many people still sat in the back
It would be much easier to understand and to stay awake, if he didn't speak in a monotone voice. The way the information is presented makes it very boring.
Spend more time on one subject. There was too much information to memorize
I guess point out more what kind of things will be on the test during the lectures so I sticks in our minds.
While saying "be more engaging" isn't exactly what I want to say, class doesn't seem as engaging as it could be. I understand that there is only so much that can be done in order get through all the necessary information and engage the class but I think the best would be some sort of homework assignment; a group project for a certain unit would be good for that.
I really don't think that there's anything to improve. His teaching style,in my own personal opinion, is very clear and detailed.
21. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
well-organized, meticulous
knowledgeable, organized
educated, ready,
Intelligent, passionate
Knowledgeable Funny (like "ha ha" funny)
Weirdly Funny.
Interesting, informative, and genuin.
smart and a good teacher
intellegent, passionate about his work
knowledgeable, enthusiastic
Intellectual. proud. bored
Knowledgeable, experienced, professor
Experienced, approachable, and knowledgeable
Extremely capable, clear and effective.
Informative Straight-forward
knowledgeable precise unexciting
Intelligent, informative, professional.
Smart, Boring.
intrigued, fascinated, and knowledgeable.
Productive, prepared, and organized.
Stolid, Intelligent, Thorough.
Intelligent, Boring
Interesting and intelectual
Smart, Cheerful, Human
nice, passionate, informative
Educated, approachable.
Intellectual, slightly humorous
Intellegent,fair,organized.
intelligent, organized
smart, intelligent, passionate
Intelligent. Valuable. Pleasant.
Understanding, experienced, knowledgeable
Intellectual, Proficient
Experienced Wise Intelligent
organized boring
informed, collected, clear
Enthusiastic (in teaching), educated (knowing his subject very well), and helpful (in term of help seeking after class).
intelligent and passionate
smart, boring,
Informative, consistent, knowledgable
Good&nice
Persistant, organized
Well-spoken, humorous. Dr. Peterson has to be one of the most intellectual instructors I've had in my years at UHM and KCC. Just listening to his lectures you can tell that he is a very smart person. He uses very professional language, even when being comedic.
smart, fair
Humorous and smart.
Canadian professor
Knowledgeable and Intellectual.
Thorough organized efficient
Knowledgeable, interesting, engaging.
Knowledgeable, clear
Enriching, intellectual.
Smart but boring.
Confusing.
A clear and concise communicator who obviously enjoys his profession
organized, knowledgeable
Interesting and knowledgeable
good speech well organized
Active, Interested.
Smart, Organized, Fair.
intelligent, passionate, dedicated
long winded
Organized, Helpful
knowledgable, and well-grounded
Interesting, knowledgeable
He is very enthusiastic about his subject.
Knowledgeable and Dedicated
interesting, knowledgeable
Knowledgeable, straight-forward, boring.
Intelligent, Prompt, and organized.
very interesting man
knowledgable, chill
Knowledgeable with a dry sense of humor.
Interesting, Well-spoken, Verbose.
Intelligent and well-spoken
He's professional, elite, and a bro.
dedicated, knowledgeble
intellectual, prepared, personable
understandable, organized, and influential.
Monotone, Knowledgeable
challenging, informative
knowledgeable and organized
Efficient, clear, detailed.
organized and articulate
Interesting man, seems easy going and someone i can talk to, good teacher... in-depth course with alot of information
Monotone, knowledgeable, boring
Interesting Intellectual
Knowledgeable, Extensive, detailed.
Interesting and descriptive.
22. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.97 98 0.92 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 3 (3%) 22 (22%) 40 (41%) 31 (32%)
23. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.21 98 0.76 Freq(%) 1 (1%) 2 (2%) 8 (8%) 51 (52%) 35 (36%) 1 (1%)
24. The TA is friendly and accessible.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.39 98 0.76 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 0 (0%) 4 (4%) 43 (44%) 48 (49%) 1 (1%)
25. The TA was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
4.18 98 0.82 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 1 (1%) 10 (10%) 49 (50%) 35 (36%) 1 (1%)
26. The TA's oral speaking was clear and effective.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
3.27 97 1.27 Freq(%) 10 (10%) 18 (19%) 23 (24%) 26 (27%) 19 (20%) 1 (1%)
27. Audiovisual materials (or computers) were an asset to this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.24 97 1.05 Freq(%) 4 (4%) 3 (3%) 11 (11%) 27 (28%) 52 (54%)
28. Examinations cover the important aspects of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.86 98 1.03 Freq(%) 4 (4%) 4 (4%) 23 (23%) 38 (39%) 29 (30%)
29. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.63 98 0.96 Freq(%) 3 (3%) 7 (7%) 30 (31%) 41 (42%) 17 (17%)
30. What two or three single words best describe this teaching assistant?
nice, passionate
organized, knowledgeable
smooth, ready, educated
Quite, unenthusiastic
FREAKING AWESOME!!
Kind and intelligent.
friendly, somewhat quiet
very accessible and helpful to the class!
Funny, eager, female
Soft, joy for teaching, happy
Knowledgeable, helpful
Quiet but knowledgeable.
confusing soft not clear
approachable knowledgeable inaudible
Knowledgeable, interesting, helpful.
(very) Helpful, kind, friendly.
Quiet..
diligent, enjoyable, and creative.
Prepared, considerate, although a little monotone.
Friendly, Approachable, Motivated.
Funny and interesting
Well spoken, clear,
nice, approachable, smiling
Communicative, available.
Fun, enthusiastic, knowledgeable.
Intellegent, prompt, organized.
happy, friendly, knowledgeable
funny, smart, excited
Friendly. Smart. Nervous speaker.
Engaged, lively, open
Pleasant, Knowledgable
Nice Pleasant
quiet nervous
friendly, well-spoken, well-traveled
Friendly, nice, and well-educated. PS: I like the way she always smiles to everyone, that's making her more friendlier to us and we feel kind of welcomed here to the class. Keep that up, Rachael! ^_^
She speaks very quietly and it is hard to hear her in such a big lecture hall. Otherwise she was good and seemed to know the material very well.
silent,
passionate, knowledgeable, nice
nice&prepared
diligent and helpful
Inaudible, rehearsed. Rachel is a very ncie person, and helpful, but she was hard to hear, and the lectures she presented seemed more like an audio book than a lecture.
quiet, well prepared
Friendly and Well-Prepared
Accessible Learning assistant
Caring and helpful.
I'm not sure, did not attend enough to describe
she was intelligent, interesting, and quiet.
friendly, helpful
Quiet, educated
Very soft.
Motivated.
Thoughtful presenter who clearly has interest in her subject of choice.
Thorough, Hard-working
Nervous and not prepared to be giving lectures
friendly not so well in speech
Gentle, Caring, Knowledgeable.
Knowledgeable and Polite
helpful, knowledgeable, hot
should be professor
Organized, helpful
Helpful, easy to talk to
Caring, attentive
Very enthusiastic to teach the subject and willing to keep on doing what she likes
Friendly and Helpful
helpful, kind
Quiet, shy.
Knowledgeable, prepared, and prompt.
must talk louder
professional, polite
She is very intelligent and well prepared. She does tend to go a little fast to keep up with. Even just writing down the extras and then going back later and viewing the slides online, I still have trouble getting all her information. She's very good about taking questions though, often asking us before she even changes slides if we have questions.
Able, Prepared, Knowledgeable.
Monotone, new, and nice
TALK LOUDER.
friendly, dedicated
Knowledgeable, apprehensive, funny
kind, helpful, and clear.
Unknown,
interesting, educated
nervouse but communicated well
Helpful, informative,
very friendly, easy to confront and ask questions regarding the course and its information, BUT she was very monotone when it came to lecturing, made it somewhat difficult to understand important topics.. but overall i believe she did a great job.
Prepared, boring, quiet
Helpful Experienced
Friendly, understanding
Organized and knowledgeable.
31. Global appraisal: considering everything how would you rate the overall effectiveness of this Teaching Assistant?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.75 97 0.95 Freq(%) 2 (2%) 7 (7%) 25 (26%) 42 (43%) 21 (22%)
32. Other comments:
I REALLY ENJOYED RACHEL HOREMAN. SHE WAS SUPER HELPFUL AND HELPED ME TO UNDERSTAND THINGS WHEN I WAS COMPLETELY LOST. SHE'S FRIENDLY, NICE, AND WILL ANWSER THE WEIRDEST QUESTIONS WITHOUT JUDGEMENT.I THINK SHE WILL MAKE AN AWESOME EDUCATOR ONE DAY! A+
Very interesting class, and would definitely recommend it to my fellow peers.
The TA rushes through her lectures with a soft voice.
Good teacher, and the TA especially has been extremely helpful whenever I had any questions on the material, she seems like she would be a very good teacher.
It would be nice if a class like this would not be a lecture but I understand how difficult it is to make a subject like this into separate small classes.
none
n/a
You can learn a lot about this class if you get yourself actually involved.
This class was challenging mainly because of so much information we needed to know. It would've been really helpful if we had a better idea about what our tests would emphasize.
My ratings are poor in some parts because I am a business major and antro was only taken as a gen requirement, im sure if this was my major I would have rated higher.....the exam questions really did seem very specific and the essay question was not worth enough.... you were both good teachers though
I learned a lot, and really enjoyed the instructor's lectures. He is highly intelligent, and a very effective public speaker/lecturer. He made the material accessible to me, which is no small feat since I am not great with these kinds of subjects. His lectures were entertaining, and the videos were very informative. I would take another class from him, even though his tests are so hard! I respected him as a teacher.
The microphone in the room was never working. This made it impossible to hear the TA because her voice was so soft. I learned nothing while she was teaching because I could never hear a word she was saying.
I enjoyed this class, it was one of my favorites because of how much i learned every class period.
For Prof. Peterson: You should use a better microphone in the lecture as I really, and I think others sitting in the back too, have a hard time hearing you from the back of the class. And I think it's kind of a bit unfair when you have the bonus questions on the 2nd exam all about Hawaiian terms. I mean, I agree that what we have learned later in the course are somewhat related to the Hawaiian culture but making the bonus question specifically only related to the it using purely Hawaiian language seems a bit unfair to the other students, like me, who do not speak Hawaiian language; and for the native Hawaiian speakers, those are just easy free points for them, regardless whether they know the Hawaiian-related course materials or not.
I enjoyed the class very much!
Our TA was very well prepared and presented a lot of useful and interesting material. however, i think the way she presented the material could have been better. I think my main problem was the tone in her voice. it was very steady and soft, which after an hour gets a bit tiring. I would suggest that she take advantage of the amount of space she has and move around, and also to be more animated when she speaks.
This class was ridiculously hard, and made me never want to take a class in Anthropology again, just because the subject matter is so uninteresting. It was pretty much a ten-times-more-difficult Biology 101, with a more in-depth look at societies of the past. My critique of Rachel seems harsh, she is a good TA, it was just hard to hear her because the microphone doesn't pick up her voice.
Not so many videos, it encourages people to leave class.
The T.A have a little better powerpoints or slow down on the topics that are not fully covered on the powerpoint.
none.
I very much liked this class but sometimes other students are distracting though with their cells phones and laptops.
I really enjoyed learning the material taught in this course. I learned a lot of things that I didn't know and got interested in things I initially wasn't interested in.
Overall this class was a good experience; the test and material was a challenge for me to fully understand, but the teaching styles are sufficient enough to create a normal Gaussian distribution.
Studying past human interactions, cultures, and lives are extremely hard, and i salute the people dedicated to these studies, because we still to this day do not know what we are. But the answer will come soon.
more homework less test next time.
keep up the good work
I have no extra comments.
Good class
I think the TA filled in the high energy and happy persona that Dr. Peterson did not have. I am not saying he did not have one, just saying that the TA tended to show it more.
I think for the future classes the course could do better focusing on the important information that will be on the exams or quizes since there is so much information to comprehend.
fix the mic.
To sum up, this is a great class and needs little tweaking. I'm only getting a B right now, but I'm hoping I can pull it up with this last test. I have learned a lot, and while I really want an A, I absolutely do not think Dr. Peterson should dumb it down. I would rather get a B and learn a lot then get an A and learn nothing. I love that this class is a challenge. I went into it expecting to be bored and unchallenged and that is not the case at all. The students who are failing are the same ones who are not trying, that don't come to class, or come to class and sleep.
A good course. I learned a lot about Anthropology, and was kept interested.
N/A
Dog, please talk louder.
This class was overall a good learning experience that has really pushed me to want to try harder. But still, this subject is just not my cup of tea.
No other comments !
the exams expected us to know WAY too much information for a 100 level course, didnt think the course was interesting at all, if i knew this was how the class was going to be, i would've dropped without the w when i had the chance
This course is informative and there is a large amount of information to process.I did like learning about hawaiian cultures
none
great course, very interesting information, I was never reallly sure how we came about, i am a christian and although this doesnt entail religious aspects to it, its very interesting to see data that you can tie together to show that humans actually evolved. now its from where they started to evolve that i may not be quite agreeable on, but that goes to personal opinion. GREAT COURSE! thanks Ian Barrett
None.

Christian Peterson: ANTH325, Fall 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 325 - Origins of Cities Crn (Section): 78481 (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  
3.89 18 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (22%) 12 (67%) 2 (11%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.17 18 0.38 Freq(%) 15 (83%) 3 (17%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.89 18 0.32 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 16 (89%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.72 18 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (28%) 13 (72%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.28 18 0.83 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 8 (44%) 8 (44%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 18 0.88 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 2 (11%) 7 (39%) 8 (44%)
7. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.94 18 1.06 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 1 (6%) 8 (44%) 6 (33%)
8. I developed plans to take additional related courses.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.33 18 1.33 Freq(%) 2 (11%) 3 (17%) 4 (22%) 5 (28%) 4 (22%)
9. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 18 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 9 (50%) 8 (44%)
10. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 17 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (18%) 6 (35%) 8 (47%)
11. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.78 18 0.81 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 5 (28%) 9 (50%) 3 (17%)
12. The instructor inspired me to be critical of ideas and materials.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 18 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 1 (6%) 7 (39%) 9 (50%)
13. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Daily quizzes really helped with the midterm. Also it forced me to stay current with the readings.
the discussion
Approaching ancient cities and their problems/prospects associated with them.
The readings were very thorough and pertaining to all we were discussing,as well as applicable to current situations across the world. Dr. Peterson sure knows his stuff about this course, so that was also very helpful. The course was well done with the quiz's being formatted the way they were, and having them be interrelated to all the readings, even prior ones.
the differing approaches to studying the origin of cities as they vary from place to place and from scholar to scholar.
it was all very well taught and well planned.
Everything was pretty valuable
I would say the way in which the class was planned out, very pedagogical in the way we dig deeper into the subjects starting by knowing the history of this research and then putting it in a modern context. The quizzes have been a good incentive to read the articles and therefore being able to keep a good pace in the course. Its been very interesting to learn about both old theories and newer ones in terms of archeology and the influence other subjects and more and more anthropological and historical interpretations of the data. I had no previous experience of studying archeology and thought I got a good base to stand on in my understanding of this, without loosing sight of the more cultural and sociological approaches.
I learned a lot from this class- especially when studying for the Quizzes each week. I also learned a lot from Dr. Peterson who is a highly intellectual individual.
the quiz questions really helped me to prepare for the midterm (and hopefully the final), so i really appreciated that. I liked that the syllabus listed the "goals" for each section, so that way i knew what i should be looking for in the readings. having the quizzes ahead of time also helped me get a more thorough understanding of the concepts. to simply read through all that without a purpose is a sure way to fall asleep, but knowing what i'm looking for gave me focus/purpose as i went through them.
The weekly quizes which are based on that week's readings, followed by lengthy in class discussions insure that each student is up to speed on the material from week to week. The readings chosen for the course gave an excellent overview of the topic of urbanism. What I found particularly interesting were the many paralels we discovered between ancient and modern cities throughout the course of the semester.
The in-class discussions provided a better understanding of the material.
i liked when you lectured about cities a little because i didnt really know about the cities were structured and i know we read about them but when we talk about the ideas in class it helped me to better understand the material that was presented.
The in-class quizzes at the beginning of each class. They brought everyone in the class to the same page and gave us a starting ground. Also, helped me to see exactly what themes Peterson was trying to get us to focus on with the articles assigned. I thought that what class discussion there was, was valuable. I would like to see more class discussion encouraged. I enjoyed about the first hour of class lecture and afterwards my enthusiasm would wane. NEED 5-10 MINUTE BREAK for once a week class!!! Although, Christian Peterson's insanely large vocabulary did keep me on the edge of my seat...
i liked some of the readings when they were interesting and more easier to read.
14. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
A lot of reading material. Also very dense and esoteric. The readings covered very interesting topics but became little redundant and difficult to discuss in class. Overall I really enjoyed the class.
too many readings
The length and lack of variation seen in classes. It is REALLY hard to stay interested and engaged for 2.5 hours, especially after taking a quiz daily for 30 min. It would probably get people a lot more interested if there was the possibility of having a 5-10 min break during the class.
the length of the class is rather redundant. i feel like 2 classes spaced out 1.25 hours each would be a better use of time
it was intense and I thought there was an overabundance of readings
I cant really say what was least valuable. I thought everything was pretty interesting
I would suggest that we might sit in a circle, this often helps people to talk more. If the class continues to be this long, please put a pause in the middle. Ten minutes just to stretch your legs and regain your focus.
I felt like the class time was spent mostly going over the main points of the readings, and to me that wasn't very helpful. I would have liked to have had more class discussions about the topics, so that we could have maybe gone beyond what was written in the page. 2 hours is a long time to sit there and simply rehash what we'd already spent hours reading... it was also hard to tell when it was appropriate to comment or ask questions during class, but i feel like it did get better as the semester went on. other than that, it was a LOT of information to prepare for each week. i know that the quiz was longer when we were allowed to have notes, but i much prefer that. trying to memorize all the important info from 50-60 pages of very advanced readings tended to feel unrealistic. when so much of the grade depended on weekly quizzes, it was frustrating to have to first decipher what the questions were asking, making sure we answered EVERY part, and then memorizing those complicated and long answers. it would've been nice to have more undergrad level readings, since this was an undergrad class. the textbook was good, but a majority of the stuff posted online seemed to be way above that level.
All aspects carried its purpose in understanding the assigned readings and the overall concept of the course.
i didnt really like taking the quizzes instead i would have liked it better if you duscussed them because some ideas i wasn't familiar with, i felt confident about the topics after we discussed them, maybe you could have the class write a summary or short paper after every few sections to disucss the material... you should consider making it into a writing intensive class.
Least valuable? hmmmm... I think the assigned readings could be more concise. Also, the lecturing could be a bit more concise as well.. seems like a lot of the same thing.. but I think all students say that about classes.
Having the quiz after discussion would be more helpful that way after we would understand the topic better and you could check if we were paying attention in class. Some of the readings were really dense and boring, having to get through 4 every week was difficult. Sometimes wording of quiz questions were confusing.
15. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 18 0.73 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 8 (44%) 7 (39%)
16. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 18 0.86 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 5 (28%) 8 (44%) 4 (22%)
17. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 18 0.77 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 6 (33%) 9 (50%)
18. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.22 18 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 2 (11%) 1 (6%) 6 (33%) 9 (50%)
19. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.56 18 0.51 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (44%) 10 (56%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.72 18 0.46 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (28%) 13 (72%)
21. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.78 18 0.43 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (22%) 14 (78%)
22. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
I thin a more intimate class setting would encourage more discussions and some strait forward questions on students opinions of the material presented.
more discussion among the students
Giving some power point presentation so that there is a clear structure of the class discussion. Showing some relevant videos could be helpful too.
It would probably get people a lot more interested if there was the possibility of having a 5-10 min break during the class. Likewise, there must be a more engaging format to class discussion that would get people more involved. For example, talking amongst ourselves in small groups over a specific question for the day (or likewise going over the quiz like this)and then discussing it communally and having people add in their ideas if something seems to be missing or unclear. Possibly photos or short videos about regions being studied, and the tribulations being seen would grasp more people's attention, especially with your gargantuan vocabulary which really blows my mind. Getting people more involved besides addressing the class as a whole would seem to be the easiest manner of getting people MORE involved, and displaying some of the information that has been studied about a place in photos or videos could also more so establish interest that is attainable the entirety of the 2.5 hour class and the rest of the semester.
honestly he was a greate professor, it is up to the student to learn what he is presenting.
watch for students who are cheating on weekly essays by refering covertly to their notes
He sometimes has the very classical academic problem of knowing to much, making his line of thought hard to follow in some cases. But often stops to ask so its fine. Other comments see above.
I think it may help if there were powerpoint slides or written lectures that a student can access. Only because sometimes it is difficult to say on the same page, as the information is sometimes heavy and hard to process.
*either a little less/easier readings, or easier/shorter quiz questions. this is a LOT of difficult material to cover in a week, and this isn't the only class people are taking. factor in jobs and extracurriculars and it gets to be quite daunting... *more student-led interaction/discussion in class. it lets people know if they've understood things, and it keeps the class interesting.
More projects that pertain to subject matter. Everyone loves a weekly quiz but some other sort of assignment would have been nice. Small group discussions perhaps? Reaction papers??
I am very pleased with the way he teaches this course, there isn't a need for improvement in this course.
Dont be afraid to get the students move active in discussion. would work better in a small class, maybe everyone can introduce themselves and become comfortable with each other and talking about the topics.
Be more straight-forward and concise.
have students present an article or fill the 2 hours with something other than just talk and discussion.
23. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
fair, intelligent, and encouraging
a new dad
Friendly, knows his stuffs, open minded.
Intelligent, comical
Factual. Punctual. Direct.
intense, dynamic, exurburant
intelligent, friendly, sociable
Inspiring, knowledgeable, funny
Intelligent Sarcastic
Knowledgeable, challenging, thorough, convoluted
Intelligent enthusiastic proactive
Dedicated, Organized, Passionate
White Bald Canadian
Smart, witty, and awesome.
knowledgable and fair
intelligent, experienced, and collegiate
likes to talk :D (not a bad thing)
24. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.39 18 0.78 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (17%) 5 (28%) 10 (56%)
25. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
3.67 17 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (12%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 14 (82%)
26. The TA is friendly and accessible.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
3.67 17 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (12%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 14 (82%)
27. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 17 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 10 (59%) 6 (35%)
28. The exams cover the reading assignments well.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 17 0.99 Freq(%) 1 (6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (47%) 8 (47%)
29. The exams gave students an opportunity to demonstrate what they had learned.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 17 0.59 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 10 (59%) 6 (35%)
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.06 18 0.87 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (6%) 3 (17%) 8 (44%) 6 (33%)
31. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
Other than what was stated above this course was very good and extremely interesting.
Try to involve the students in more discussions
Some audio visual material could be helpful. Class could be organized more methodically by providing some power point or clear outline of the class discussion.
There must be a more engaging format to class discussion that would get people more involved. For example, talking amongst ourselves in small groups over a specific question for the day (or likewise going over the quiz like this)and then discussing it communally and having people add in their ideas if something seems to be missing or unclear.
again shortening the length of class might be better.
less readings at a time
I thought the course was fine. There was a lot of reading to do but all in all not that bad
See above.
Written lectures. More cookies
already answered this in the above comments...
Hard to pull concepts from the reading and restate them on the weekly quiz.
No need for improvement.
maybe you could generalize questions so we can better demonstrate what we learned.
The material was great. He's very smart and seems to seek to impart his knowledge on the student, but it's just so dull. It's just very mono-tonal and consistently the same.
didn't this question already happen up there^
32. Other comments:
Great course, awesome readings and information, and well taught.... Your humor makes the course that much better.
Great class.
I received an override for this course,which made it difficult to fully understand the readings assigned on my own (before we discuss it in class).
very detailed class .. it was good, I learned a lot
I like Christian Peterson, but I think i'd like him more in a smaller class with more discussion.
Congrats on your baby! :) and have a good holiday!

Christian Peterson: ANTH750B, Spring 2010     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 750B - Rsch Sem: Archaeology Crn (Section): 88531 (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 4 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (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 4 0.0 Freq(%) 4 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 0 (0%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.96 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
7. I learned to identify main points and central issues in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
8. I developed the ability to carry out original research in this area.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
9. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.25 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%)
10. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
11. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
Dr. Peterson's commentary and feedback were helpful. He's incredibly insightful, and his comments provided me with new perspectives on archaeology as a discipline and chiefdoms as an area of research. Some of our course discussions were also stimulating. I also appreciated how the precis questions were tailored to our discussions and readings for the week, and were also designed to integrate previous reading assignments. I also appreciated Dr. Peterson's efforts to keep the class going and all members of the class engaged despite the lack of preparedness displayed by some of the students. Also, he is fantastic at explaining complex things clearly and efficiently. Lastly, I think the weekly critical commentaries were helpful. They helped me organize my thoughts on the readings and better prepare for class discussions. Reading the critical commentary of my classmates also enabled me to gain different perspectives on the course materials. I would encourage Dr. Peterson to continue teaching much as he is. I think he brings a much-needed academic rigor to our graduate courses.
The broad spectrum of theoretical approaches to the topic of chiefdom-level societies was helpful. In challenging each student to consider various perspectives in light of their own research area and work was a great way to engage and motivate. It also helped to generate useful ways for each student to consider her/his own work.
This course provided a broad understanding of chiefdoms
12. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
Some of our course discussions were not very productive. In most cases, I felt that was due to a lack of preparedness on my classmates' part. Sometimes during course discussions it was difficult to discern what Dr. Peterson was asking us. He often spoke in strings of questions for several minutes, which didn't garner much student response, and was an ultimately ineffective way of initiating conversations.
Discussion in the class was often stunted or lacking. Perhaps an approach that requires students to be responsible for leading part or all of a discussion would be more beneficial.
13. The instructor makes good use of examples and illustrations.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 4 1.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%)
14. The instructor puts material across in an interesting way.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 4 1.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%)
15. The instructor seems to enjoy teaching.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
16. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
17. The instructor was able to explain concepts clearly and effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.75 4 1.26 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%)
18. The instructor was effective in meeting the objectives of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 1.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 3 (75%)
19. 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 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
20. The instructor treated students fairly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 4 1.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 2 (50%)
21. The instructor seems well prepared for each class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%)
22. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Overall, Dr. Peterson is an excellent professor. Eliminating the strings of questions he asks may have helped along our discussions. For the most part, however, the biggest problem in this course was how unprepared and unable many of my classmates were to engage with the material.
As mentioned earlier, creating a discussion format that has students responsible for discussions would help to motivate greater participation in class.
23. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
intense condescending supercilious
Critical, insightful, intelligent.
Intelligent Engaged
enthusiastic
24. The TA appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
25. The TA is friendly and accessible.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree   N/A  
0.0 3 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (100%)
26. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
27. Reading assignments are interesting and stimulating.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
28. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 4 0.58 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%)
29. What changes would you make in the readings?
I think the readings were excellent and don't warrant any changes.
None
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
3.75 4 0.5 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%) 0 (0%)
31. State in two or three sentences how this course could be improved.
As previously stated, the biggest challenge to this course was the level of effort put forth by some of the students. It seemed their other courses in the graduate program had in no way provided them with the background or ability to critically discuss the course materials.
This section seems entirely redundant.
This course could provide a more specific focus on chiefdoms.
32. Other comments:
No survey responses were found.

Christian Peterson: ANTH473, Fall 2009     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 473 - Lithic Analysis in Archaeology Crn (Section): 77754 (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  
4.29 7 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%) 0 (0%)
2. Course - please note that by answering this question you could potentially jeopardize your anonymity
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Elective   Required  
1.57 7 0.53 Freq(%) 3 (43%) 4 (57%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 0.95 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
7. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
8. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
9. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 1.21 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.57 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
This course covered a broad range of lithic analyses in detail whenever possible. In addition, we received hands-on experience as well as interaction among our peers.
The presentation/discussion segments at the end
The labs were valuable in teaching us the methods of lithic analyses. The Behaivoral Inferences readings and discussions were valuable.
For the most part, I feel the labs were well-coordinated and explained well. They helped vastly improve my archaeological analytical skills and reasoning. I also truly appreciated Dr. Peterson's ability to clearly explain the mechanics and purpose of complex statistical analysis. Also, he was incredibly accessible in person and via e-mail throughout the semester. He dedicated a great deal of his office hours and free-time to enriching my learning experience in the course.
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
lecture
none.
The least valuable aspect of this course was the instructors seemingly subjective method of grading which precluded improvement on subsequent projects... Also, his lack of specific criteria to be used when conducting the labs which were later called on and marked down. Very frustrating and seemingly random.
The question does not apply to my experience. All segments of this course were valuable to my education as an archaeologist.
14. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 1.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 5 (71%)
15. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
16. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.71 7 0.49 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 5 (71%)
17. The instructor is skillful in observing student reactions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 1.15 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
18. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 1.11 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
19. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.29 7 1.25 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 5 (71%)
20. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.29 7 1.38 Freq(%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)
21. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.43 7 0.79 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 4 (57%)
22. The instructor sets high standards for students.
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%)
23. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
Be more specific with grading criteria. It felt like our lab assignments were not graded according to specific or explicit set of criteria it seems like we were not graded on the strenght of our arguments but on something else that i was un aware of. I also think the labs are far too time consuming. It was not uncommon for me to spend an upwards of 30hrs. on lab assinments, which left little time to polish the final product to be handed in.
Involve more student participation and engage the students more into the lecture. I would incorporate more on Hawaiian stone tools and Pacific Island stone tools. About half of the class will be focusing on Hawaiian Archaeology in the future and would like to learn more on Hawaiian lithics and how it is applied in a behavioral context. It would be great to read about specialization and exchange in Hawai`i, in addition to the basic knowledge about Hawaiian stone tools.
The labs required a great deal of time to complete. I spent upwards of 15+ hours per week doing the lab work and write-ups. While I appreciate the level of commitment the class requires, I feel we didn't have enough time to complete some of the labs.
24. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
More resources
I would have liked a more basic indroduction to the physical properties of lithics. and less reliance on quantitative analysis.
The course was very much a crash course on Lithic Analyses, and sometimes it was too much. The labs took a tremendous amount of time, making it difficult to keep up with the readings. The last portion of the lab was useful while focusing on behavioral inferences, still not all students participated in the discussion, therefore it turned into more of a lecture.
The lectures feel a bit long at times. I would suggest more student discussion. Students at UH seem to prefer dividing to discuss in groups, then reconvening in a more casual way to talk about what they've learned. Other instructors have sent out discussion questions students should bring to class answered, or asked students to come up with three to four topics they want to discuss. It seems to work and to keep students engaged.
25. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
enthusiastic, informative
obsidian, chert, and math
Knowledgeable, hardworking, and articulate.
Knowledgeable, dedicated, fair
26. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.17 6 0.75 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 3 (50%) 2 (33%)
27. Laboratory assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 7 1.29 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%)
28. Directions for laboratory assignments are clear and specific.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.14 7 0.9 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)
29. How can the laboratory be improved?
All the labs were very valuable, but was very time consuming. After spending between 10-23 hours per week on a lab, it still felt as if I was rushing. I felt more pressure in writing up the lab because majority of my time was spent performing the lab. It would be useful to probably minimize the sample size. It was hard to do any reading that could help during the write up phase because it majority of my study time was spent on lab reports. The lab instructions are also too dense and exhausting, it was informative, but when following step-by-step instructions, it takes longer. Perhaps an outline format will work better in giving instructions. I would keep the final lab report, but not count it as 20%, its too much. Instead I would add more points to the labs assignments since they initially take more time, and I would add more points to participation to encourage student engagement.
I would perhaps cut out one lab and allow students an extra few days to complete assignments.
30. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)

Christian Peterson: ANTH699, Fall 2009     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 699 - Directed Reading or Research Crn (Section): 79622 (023)    
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 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (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 2 0.0 Freq(%) 2 (100%) 0 (0%)
3. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
4. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
5. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
6. I gained a good understanding of concepts/principles in this field.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
7. I developed the ability to communicate clearly about this subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
8. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
9. I learned a lot in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
10. I performed up to my potential in this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 2 0.71 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 1 (50%)
11. I felt that this course challenged me intellectually.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
12. Which aspects of the course were most valuable?
The instructor provides a great reading list covering most of the important aspect of the course which enables students to grasp an overall understanding of the subject. The instructor also takes into consideration of student's interests and restructures the course to meet a common goal.
Class discussions were good. This is the best way for me to work through my ideas and understanding of the issues.
13. Which aspects of the course were least valuable?
N/A
The class was very focused, so I think it was all quite valuable. I never felt like anything we discussed or read was irrelevant or a waste of time.
14. The instructor stresses important points in lectures/discussions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
15. The instructor is enthusiastic about the course material.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
16. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
17. The instructor is skillful in observing student reactions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
18. The instructor broadened my understanding and grasp of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
19. The instructor maintains an atmosphere of good feeling in class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
20. Students in this course are free to disagree and ask questions.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
21. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 1 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%)
22. The instructor was consistently well-prepared and organized for class.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
23. The instructor sets high standards for students.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
24. How can the instructor improve the teaching of this course?
The overall course is great from preparation to discussion. However, I would suggest that at the beginning of the course the readings should be adjusted to a little lighter introduction to allow students new to the subject to be prepared for the heavily focused materials. Overall, I still agree with the structure of this class.
I am glad that you will be developing this course for the regular schedule. It will be a great addition to the course list and I think a lot of graduate students will find it useful. I think that the course materials are perfect for a graduate seminar. The topics may be less useful to undergraduates, who are not designing their own field studies at this point. I hope that that is the format you will use. I think that a graduate seminar also gives you the flexibility to adapt the reading list to the group of students in the class and their particular interests. I really appreciated your efforts to do that for us. One thing that might be useful would be to add an introductory set of readings that introduces the basic chronologies and material cultures of the core set of areas/projects that recur throughout the reading this. This would allow students to contextualize the readings a bit more and not get bogged down in any misinterpretations of chronology.
25. What two or three single words best describe this instructor?
Enthusiastic, challenging, knowledgeable and well-prepared.
Focused. Intelligent.
26. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
27. Reading assignments seem carefully chosen.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
28. The reading materials were relevant to the course objectives.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
29. The assigned readings were instrumental in the development of my knowledge of the subject matter.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
30. The instructor's expectations regarding assignments were explicit.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
31. What changes would you make in the readings?
Introductory set of background readings for the primary areas covered.
32. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
5.0 2 0.0 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%)
33. What did you find least valuable and helpful?
N/A
I really do not have any criticisms here. The readings were all quite helpful. Though some topics may be more or less relevant to my personal interests and study region, I felt that I needed to know something about all of the included topics, regardless. The readings on Interaction and Communities, Subsistence and Resource Use, and Surface Archaeology and Geology are all very relevant for me, personally. Thanks for the great course, Dr. Peterson.

Christian Peterson: ANTH462, Spring 2009     Back to top

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Department: Anthropology
Course: ANTH 462 - East Asian Archaeology Crn (Section): 85700 (001)     3907 (331)    
1. The instructor demonstrated knowledge of course content.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
2. The instructor fulfilled the goals of the course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
3. The instructor communicated effectively.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)
4. I deepened my interest in the subject matter of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.17 6 1.33 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%)
5. I developed more confidence in my ability to communicate effectively through writing.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 6 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)
6. 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  
4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)
7. My opinions about some topics changed because of this course.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.5 6 1.05 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%)
8. The instructor appears to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.83 6 0.41 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%)
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  
4.17 6 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 3 (50%)
10. The instructor explained the writing requirements clearly.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)
11. The instructor was able to clarify difficult course topics.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)
12. The instructor was easy to talk with and available for consultation.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.5 6 0.84 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 4 (67%)
13. The instructor's feedback about my writing helped me become a better writer.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)
14. Feedback from other students about my written work was valuable.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 6 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)
15. The instructor was well organized and prepared for each session.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.67 6 0.52 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (67%)
16. Please list your suggestions for improving the course and/or the instructor's teaching style and methods.
The course was well structured, nicely paced, and informative without being overwhelming.
This Professor has a style that leans heavily towards his own conclusion about the field. Many professors do this and I often find they prefer papers that in many ways merely reiterate their own beliefs. While this professor was not so opaque, during his lectures he often alluded or directly stated his own reasoning behind things that are still contested. He highlighted certain pieces of evidence that almost shouts what conclusions he wanted us to make. I find this is pretty common with many professors but I prefer professors who are a bit more impartial, especially in more general course such as a pan-Asian introduction into archaeology.
N/A.
Maybe a small pre-req should be required as I knew nothing about Archeology or Asia as a whole, so I was a little lost at times.
My only suggestion for him is to give out the paper topics earlier instead of a week before the drafts were due.
17. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.5 6 0.55 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)
18. The writing assignments helped me develop abilities to solve problems.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
3.83 6 0.98 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%)
19. The course is highly recommended if it were taught by this instructor.
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree   Disagree   Neutral   Agree   Strongly Agree  
4.0 6 0.89 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)
20. Which aspects of the course did you like the best?
That the emphasis was on writing, rather than tests. This seems logical for a writing intensive class, but it was nice not having a final simply for the sake of having a final.
The presentations by graduate students along with the professor's input along the way; the topics that were covered.
I liked writing the papers. I felt that even though I was essentially teaching myself, I gained a great amount of info from them.
the material
Making the powerpoint presentations available was invaluable and allowed me to follow the lectures more closely since I knew I needn't write everying down. The texts were excellent choices for the course, and with the supplemental reading material provided by the instructor it amounted to a wealth of current information. The writing assignments were very carefully orchestrated for maximum benefit in this writing intensive course.
21. Which aspects of the course did you like least?
The writing assignment topics were handed out very close to the submission deadline. Having them about a month before the deadline would have given us more time to prepare our papers.
The lectures were pedantic and at times hard to follow. Due to the fact the course was an aggregate of various periods and areas, I felt the Professor was not as knowledgeable in some areas as others. Also his lectures were very slanted towards his view and understanding of the subject. Something many professors do but I prefer professors who merely impart knowledge of the field and allow students to make their own impartial conclusions.
Instead of relying on powerpoint presentations almost every day, there should be some variety, perhaps discussion questions in groups every now and then to spur conversation and critical thinking among peers. The two research papers would've been easier to do if students were given a list of topics in advance (perhaps at the beginning of the course, in order to facilitate ideas early on). Also, undergraduate students should be given the choice between doing their oral presentation on a shorter version of their paper(s) or on a different topic altogether, particularly if the paper covers a topic that has not been brought up in class/only briefly brought up in class.
I know it was an upper level course and we should keep track of our own assignments, but it seemed as thought certain things just sprang up without him even mentioning them, and it also seemed that they syllabus changed a little and it was hard to follow. Maybe just an update e-mail or reminders might help keep it organized.
writing assignments
It all worked for me.
22. What changes would you make in the writing assignments?
Other than the timeliness of receiving the topics and initial references, no changes are necessary.
The topics were vague in the sense that it was difficult to marry the content from the lectures and reading to the assignments. There were classes that served as a precursor of writing but I felt they were too broad, and merely reviewed what was covered in English 100.
I would change the length of each paper, perhaps give students the choice between 5-10 pages, since it has been my luck to receive peer review papers that were half the required length. I also noticed that some of the students in this course were not Anthropology/Archaeology majors and thus had a harder time writing papers on such topics, leading them to stick to arguments that have been done many times before. Even though this is an upper-level course, I believe more students would be encouraged to take this class if there were three shorter papers, one oral presentation for each undergrad, and more participation discussions to engage and connect students with the course material.
none. Those went very well.
giving ample time for the writing assignments and not giving the topics a week before.
none
23. Global appraisal: Considering everything how would you rate this COURSE?
Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor   Poor   Average   Good   Excellent  
4.33 6 0.82 Freq(%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%)