Teacher Assessment Report
 
STUDENTS' RATINGS/COMMENTS ON MODULE



Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Academic Year:  2011/2012
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Semester:  2
Module:  INFORMATION RETRIEVAL -  CS3245
Note:  Feedback on module in general
QnItems EvaluatedModule Avg ScoreNos Responded




1Overall opinion of the module.4.08723
2Grade likely to get for the module.4.21723
3Difficulty level of the module.3.78323

QN\SCORE

5

4

3

2

1







Qn 1:  Overall opinion of the module.

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Poor

Qn 2:  Grade likely to get for the module.

A

B

C

D

F

Qn 3:  Difficulty level of the module.

Very Difficult

Difficult

Average

Easy

Very Easy


Frequency Distribution (Qn 1:  Students' Overall Opinion on the module)

Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)


|






ITEM\SCORE

|

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Poor


|






Module

|

5 (21.74%)

15 (65.22%)

3 (13.04%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

Module at Same Level (Dept)

|

163 (33.13%)

237 (48.17%)

75 (15.24%)

13 (2.64%)

4 (.81%)

Module at Same Level (Fac)

|

212 (23.66%)

441 (49.22%)

192 (21.43%)

28 (3.12%)

23 (2.57%)


Frequency Distribution (Qn 2:  Grades likely to get for the module)

Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)


|






ITEM\SCORE

|

A

B

C

D

F


|






Module

|

7 (30.43%)

14 (60.87%)

2 (8.70%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

Module at Same Level (Dept)

|

175 (36.23%)

254 (52.59%)

43 (8.90%)

9 (1.86%)

2 (.41%)

Module at Same Level (Fac)

|

274 (31.10%)

501 (56.87%)

93 (10.56%)

11 (1.25%)

2 (.23%)


Frequency Distribution (Qn 3:  Difficulty level of the module)

Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)


|






ITEM\SCORE

|

Very Difficult

Difficult

Average

Easy

Very Easy


|






Module

|

0 (.00%)

19 (82.61%)

3 (13.04%)

1 (4.35%)

0 (.00%)

Module at Same Level (Dept)

|

74 (15.04%)

230 (46.75%)

168 (34.15%)

18 (3.66%)

2 (.41%)

Module at Same Level (Fac)

|

106 (11.88%)

368 (41.26%)

383 (42.94%)

29 (3.25%)

6 (.67%)


Q1.  Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, and suggest possible improvements.
1.Strength: The module is thought out as a very good incremental scope of teaching.
2.Content is simple but assignment is hard as we have to study the coding part by ourselves.
3.interesting module. the prog language use is very interesting.
4.this module covers lots of useful content. While it is a bit hard to grasp all of them.
5.Lack of HW answers (at least for the essay questions) hinders my revision for the exams. More past year papers could be provided.
6.Assignments can be too time consuming at times
7.Very useful information about information retrieval and can be applied in many fields.
8.Workload feels a bit too heavy, but everything else is great.
9.Allowed me to learn a very useful language and understand how information are being retrieved.
10.This module helps me to understand more the concept of Information Retrieval and its relevance and application.
11.----------------
12.NA
13.Good



2012 National University of Singapore. All Rights Reserved. For inquiries, please email to: ccence@nus.edu.sg