STUDENTS' RATINGS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member:  CHENG WEI
Department:  DEAN'S OFFICE (SCHOOL OF COMPUTING) Academic Year:  2008/2009
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  1
Module:INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTER NETWORKS - CS2105
Activity Type:TUTORIAL
Class Size  /  Response Size  /  Response Rate/  Contact Session/  Teaching Hour :47  /  35  /  74.47%  /  10  /  10
QnItems EvaluatedFac. Member Avg ScoreFac. Member Avg Score Std. DevDept Avg ScoreFac. Avg Score
(a)     (b)(c)     (d)






1The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability. 3.943 0.838 3.906 ( 3.732) 3.880 ( 3.771)
2The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. 4.029 0.785 3.957 ( 3.776) 3.947 ( 3.830)
3The teacher is approachable for consultation. 4.088 0.793 4.038 ( 3.859) 4.012 ( 3.899)
4The teacher has helped me develop relevant research skills.*NANANANA
5The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. 3.800 0.901 3.739 ( 3.561) 3.736 ( 3.615)
6The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. 3.943 0.838 3.913 ( 3.737) 3.888 ( 3.782)
7The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. 4.086 0.818 3.917 ( 3.736) 3.871 ( 3.775)
Average of Qn 1-7 3.981 0.826 3.911 ( 3.733) 3.889 ( 3.778)
8Overall the teacher is effective. 4.086 0.887 3.984 ( 3.784) 3.958 ( 3.837)

* This includes skills in research methodology, research problems/questions, literature search/evaluation, oral presentation and manuscript preparation.

** If Qn 4 is NA, it will not be included in the computation of average score (Average of Qn 1-7).

Frequency Distribution of responses for Qn 8

Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)


|






ITEM\SCORE

|

5

4

3

2

1


|






Self

|

11 (31.43%)

19 (54.29%)

3 (8.57%)

1 (2.86%)

1 (2.86%)

Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Department

|

113 (15.37%)

385 (52.38%)

206 (28.03%)

27 (3.67%)

4 (.54%)

Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Faculty

|

171 (16.55%)

565 (54.70%)

260 (25.17%)

32 (3.10%)

5 (.48%)

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 2000 ) 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 2000 ) within the faculty.

STUDENTS' COMMENTS ON FACULTY MEMBER

Faculty Member:  CHENG WEI
Department:  DEAN'S OFFICE (SCHOOL OF COMPUTING) Academic Year:  2008/2009
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  1
Module:INTRODUCTION TO COMPUTER NETWORKS - CS2105
Activity Type:TUTORIAL

Q9  What are the teacher's strengths?
1.Generous in giving comments and feedback in tutorial questions through his website.
2.Knows his stuff and always corrects his mistakes if any, even after class. Always welcome us for consultations
3.Friendly, approachable and is always more than willing to help his students.
4.Passionate, Genuinely Cares for students.. VERY very valuable attributes :) "The mediocre teacher tells, The good teacher explains, The superior teacher demonstrates, The great teacher inspires. -William Arthur Ward" The only problem is with regards to accuracy of solutions.. only flaw in the near perfection..
5.Very helpful, responds promptly to questions
6.Clear and concise. Hardworking and makes attempts to help students
7.explain clearly
8.Explains as best as he can, very friendly and approachable. Helpful whenever he can.
9.he's quite nice
10.Very patient and approachable. Good in explaining complex ideals into simpler concepts.
11.Knowledgeable. Gives clear explanations. Very Approachable.
12.Friendly and approachable. Very patient. Always available for consultation.
13.gives very clear explaination.
14.He provides timely feedback and hel.
15.He is able to explain the concepts in lecture in much simpler terms. Hence going for his tutor helped me to understand a lot clearer. He usually summaries the concepts before proceed to answer tutorial questions. Therefore even if I don't know how to answer those questions from the starts, I could usually answer them after his summary.
16.He's enthusiastic!
17.conscientious and down-to-earth. committed to his own quality of teaching standards and students are able to sense his efforts
18.A sincere tutor. Always ready to help.
19.Exhaustively discusses the tutorial questions, very approachable for doubts.
20.Approachable and friendly. Takes time to explain concepts that are not clear.
21.-Very approachable -Provide understandable explanation

Q10  What improvements would you suggest to the teacher?
1.- he may need to speak louder during class.
2.Be less shy
3.Perhaps he can try to make his lessons more interesting.
4.Passionate, Genuinely Cares for students.. VERY very valuable attributes :) "The mediocre teacher tells, The good teacher explains, The superior teacher demonstrates, The great teacher inspires. -William Arthur Ward" The only problem is with regards to accuracy of solutions.. only flaw in the near perfection..
5.-
6.-could improve on explaination of the tutorial questions better with illustration of solutions
7.None.
8.He makes mistakes too often, unclear explanation, speaks too softly
9.Keep it up!
10.nothing much, keep it up.
11.I hope he will make lesser mistakes in tutorial.
12.loosen up more and continue to mingle more with students, he has potential to become quite popular with students, which helps liven up tutorial learning atmosphere.
13.Need to improve on verbal and communication skills.
14.None



The National University of Singapore has used reasonable endeavours to ensure that the information posted on this Web-site is correct at the time of posting. However, the University gives no warranty and accepts no liability for the accuracy or the completeness of the information provided.

In providing such student feedback, the University does not in any way, expressly or implicitly, endorse the views expressed or the contents thereof.