| Faculty Member: | STEVEN HALIM | ||
| Department: | DEAN'S OFFICE (SCHOOL OF COMPUTING) | Academic Year: | 2006/2007 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 1 |
| Module: | DATA STRUCTURES AND ALGORITHMS - CS1102C |
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL |
| Class Size / Response Size / Response Rate : | 111 / 54 / 48.65% |
| 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. | 4.130 | 0.728 | 3.893 ( 3.873) | 3.898 ( 3.901) |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.204 | 0.683 | 3.942 ( 3.958) | 3.966 ( 3.991) |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.000 | 0.777 | 4.038 ( 4.096) | 4.059 ( 4.111) |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me advance my research (if applicable). | 3.800 | 0.805 | 3.719 ( 3.683) | 3.741 ( 3.737) |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 3.889 | 0.839 | 3.713 ( 3.663) | 3.728 ( 3.709) |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.056 | 0.738 | 3.888 ( 3.886) | 3.909 ( 3.932) |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 4.037 | 0.699 | 3.896 ( 3.899) | 3.892 ( 3.915) |
| Average of Qn 1-7 | 4.031 | 0.754 | 3.881 ( 3.880) | 3.894 ( 3.910) | |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.185 | 0.675 | 3.958 ( 3.965) | 3.976 ( 4.004) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 17 (31.48%) | 31 (57.41%) | 5 (9.26%) | 1 (1.85%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Department | | | 259 (25.85%) | 514 (51.30%) | 179 (17.86%) | 35 (3.49%) | 15 (1.50%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Faculty | | | 461 (23.03%) | 1170 (58.44%) | 305 (15.23%) | 50 (2.50%) | 16 (.80%) |
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 (Tutorial) within the department.
(b) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score :
(c) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial) within the faculty.
(d) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the faculty.
| Faculty Member: | STEVEN HALIM | ||
| Department: | DEAN'S OFFICE (SCHOOL OF COMPUTING) | Academic Year: | 2006/2007 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 1 |
| Module: | DATA STRUCTURES AND ALGORITHMS - CS1102C |
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL |
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | dedicate teacher |
| 2. | He is very encouraging; often using meaningful quotes to sum up this tutorials. The summaries he has provided and various resources which he has uploaded onto this website is extremely helpful in my learning. Also he is very humble to gather feedbacks from his students to improve in his teaching. |
| 3. | Showed good empathy |
| 4. | He has prepared his lessons well, and gave invaluable tips and advice to students on how to cope with the course module. |
| 5. | able to undertstand our difficulties with the concepts and able to help us accordingly |
| 6. | responsible, approachable and good teaching style. |
| 7. | It is good to summarize the important points in tutorials and also it is good to give more examples to help students understand important ideas. |
| 8. | He is highly dedicated, and spent a lot of time to prepare for each tutorial. He also tries his best to motivate the students. |
| 9. | Able to teach concepts well, interesting tutorials. |
| 10. | Timely responses on the forums. |
| 11. | good preparation for tutorial |
| 12. | very organised |
| 13. | He is prompt in replying my replies, although at times when he sounded busy. His presentations of tutorial solutions is clear and tries his best to attempt at answering our questions with easy-to-understand examples. Overall, he is clear in his explainations, and willing to spend time to prepare for his classes. |
| 14. | Good and willing to help students who seek to ask for his consultations |
| 15. | explanation |
| 16. | He understand the topics very well can explain them very clear in the tutorial class. |
| 17. | students with teacher close communication |
| 18. | he makes a good TA, but his questions are DAMN TOUGH!!!!! |
| 19. | very good teaching style. gd explanations during tutorials |
| 20. | He gave creative ideas, better solutions to problems, ... He always seems happy to talk about programming. |
| 21. | very good in making me understand difficult problems |
| 22. | Good knowledge of the subject. |
| 23. | His approach to problems |
| 24. | NIL |
| 25. | kind person!!really!!! a potential good lecturer in future! good understanding about this module,so make his students more clear as well!!!!!good teacher!!! |
| 26. | The ability to catch student attention |
| 27. | Very IT kind of person. Able to present tutorials solutions very well. |
| 28. | the best tutor for all my module |
| 29. | He is so willing in giving his time to help the students and very systematic way of thinking. |
| 30. | good teaching |
| 31. | Good |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | open more consultaion session |
| 2. | Perhaps he could slow now his pace of teaching at times as he could get pretty fast and muffled in his speach. But in general, he is a very good and encouraging tutor. |
| 3. | dont think there is any |
| 4. | Nil |
| 5. | Keep your good work and wish your dream of becoming a professor come true! |
| 6. | N.A. |
| 7. | give simpler lab problems and PE!! =P |
| 8. | He should try to include animated slides when illustrating difficult to understand concepts, instead of trying to draw them on the board, since it takes up too much time, and may not be effective for an 1 hr tutorial class. He should not also not rely on students for tutorial answer presentations when tutorial participation is not an examinable component of the module. |
| 9. | nil |
| 10. | be a bit entertaining while taking the class |
| 11. | student explaination in tutorial is not as clear as tutor. Maybe consider explain the model tutorial solution after student |
| 12. | nil |
| 13. | nil |
| 14. | nothing |
| 15. | I don't like student present the tutorial questions. Feeling unprofessional, sometimes cannot hear what they talked and don't understand their working. |
| 16. | Should not waste time in asking students to solve the problems if they don't know. |
| 17. | Try to set the questions more clearly and use meaningful name. Not sth like "Mr Crazy" (the one in P.E) |
| 18. | As i mentioned at Part 2. |
| 19. | NIL |
| 20. | having a clearer pronounce! |
| 21. | He's good enough |
| 22. | Give clearer and precise explanations. |
| 23. | work hard for the PHD ... dont be stress by us students |
| 24. | giving more hints and clear sample tests would be a great help to many students in doing the lab and pe. |
| 25. | Nil |
| 26. | N.A |