| Faculty Member: | STEVEN HALIM | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2005/2006 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 3 |
| Module: | INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAMMING - IT1002 |
| Activity Type: | LABORATORY |
| Class Size / Response Size / Response Rate : | 16 / 9 / 56.25% |
| Qn | Items Evaluated | Fac. Member Avg Score | Fac. Member Avg Score Std. Dev | Dept Avg Score | Fac. Avg Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) (b) | (c) (d) | ||||
| 1 | The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability. | 4.222 | 0.667 | 4.222 ( 4.222) | 4.222 ( 4.222) |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.556 | 0.527 | 4.556 ( 4.556) | 4.556 ( 4.556) |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.111 | 0.782 | 4.111 ( 4.111) | 4.111 ( 4.111) |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me advance my research (if applicable). | 4.200 | 0.837 | 4.200 ( 4.200) | 4.200 ( 4.200) |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 3.444 | 1.014 | 3.444 ( 3.444) | 3.444 ( 3.444) |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.000 | 0.866 | 4.000 ( 4.000) | 4.000 ( 4.000) |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 4.111 | 0.782 | 4.111 ( 4.111) | 4.111 ( 4.111) |
| Average of Qn 1-7 | 4.085 | 0.816 | 4.085 ( 4.085) | 4.085 ( 4.085) | |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.333 | 0.707 | 4.333 ( 4.333) | 4.333 ( 4.333) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 4 (44.44%) | 4 (44.44%) | 1 (11.11%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Laboratory), at the same level within Department | | | 4 (44.44%) | 4 (44.44%) | 1 (11.11%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Laboratory), at the same level within Faculty | | | 4 (44.44%) | 4 (44.44%) | 1 (11.11%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Note:
1. A 5-point scale is used for the scores. The higher the score, the better the rating.
2. Fac. Member Avg Score: The mean of all the scores for each question for the faculty member.
3. Fac. Member Avg Score Std. Dev: A measure of the range of variability. It measures the extent to which a faculty member's Average Score differs from all the scores in the faculty member's evaluation. The smaller the standard deviation, the greater the robustness of the number given as average.
4. Dept Avg Score :
(a) the mean score of same activity type (Laboratory) within the department.
(b) the mean score of same activity type (Laboratory), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score :
(c) the mean score of same activity type (Laboratory) within the faculty.
(d) the mean score of same activity type (Laboratory), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the faculty.
| Faculty Member: | STEVEN HALIM | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2005/2006 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 3 |
| Module: | INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAMMING - IT1002 |
| Activity Type: | LABORATORY |
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | Gives interesting questions and makes the questions already given even more challenging, this motivates us to think more and get to know more about the possibilities of programming and its limitless use. |
| 2. | |
| 3. | He tries to help you think by giving minimal help which stimulates your thinking. |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | could find a way to make very clear the coding preferences (e.g. how much white spacing is desirable, what is the 'correct' level of commenting, etc |
| 2. | |
| 3. | Sometimes, the minimal help seem to make him unhelpful because some students are just slower in thinking. |