Teacher Assessment Report
  Loading... please wait.
STUDENTS' RATINGS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member:  KAN MIN-YEN
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Academic Year:  2010/2011
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  2
Module:INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245
Activity Type:LECTURE
Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate/Contact Session/Teaching Hour :31  /  12  /  38.71%  /  13  /  26
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. 4.583 0.149 4.098 ( 4.135) 3.998 ( 3.987)
2The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. 4.333 0.225 4.100 ( 4.143) 4.041 ( 4.062)
3The teacher is approachable for consultation. 4.167 0.322 4.148 ( 4.182) 4.094 ( 4.121)
4The teacher has helped me develop relevant research skills.*NANANANA
5The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. 4.333 0.333 4.007 ( 4.083) 3.915 ( 3.916)
6The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. 4.500 0.151 4.126 ( 4.165) 4.047 ( 4.028)
7The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. 4.583 0.149 4.024 ( 4.021) 3.941 ( 3.909)
Average of Qn 1-7** 4.417 0.173 4.079 ( 4.121) 4.002 ( 4.003)
8Overall the teacher is effective. 4.500 0.151 4.133 ( 4.173) 4.057 ( 4.028)

* 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

|

6 (50.00%)

6 (50.00%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

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

|

145 (34.28%)

220 (52.01%)

48 (11.35%)

6 (1.42%)

4 (.95%)

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

|

229 (30.13%)

377 (49.61%)

112 (14.74%)

30 (3.95%)

12 (1.58%)

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 (Lecture) within the department.
 (b) the mean score of same activity type (Lecture), at the same module level ( level 3000 ) within the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score :
 (c) the mean score of same activity type (Lecture) within the faculty.
 (d) the mean score of same activity type (Lecture), at the same module level ( level 3000 ) within the faculty.

STUDENTS' COMMENTS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member:  KAN MIN-YEN
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Academic Year:  2010/2011
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  2
Module:INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245
Activity Type:LECTURE

Q9  What are the teacher's strengths?
1.He makes the module easy to understand.
2.Explains concepts and ideas well.
3.Clear explanations, even the webcasts were quite well made. Makes the effort the respond to all students queries and doubts in a timely manner.
4.loud and clear articulation
5.One of the best lecture experiences I've had in NUS, it's been an enjoyable learning experience the entire semester.
6.Encourage discussion and independent thinking
7.Knows the material. HW's are well planned

Q10  What improvements would you suggest to the teacher?
1.-
2.-
3.Get an LT next time, a lecturer of your stature deserves better equipment :)

STUDENTS' RATINGS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member:  KAN MIN-YEN
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Academic Year:  2010/2011
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  2
Module:INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245
Activity Type:TUTORIAL
Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate/Contact Session/Teaching Hour :15  /  4  /  26.67%  /  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. 4.500 0.289 3.958 ( 4.030) 3.957 ( 3.910)
2The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. 4.250 0.479 3.996 ( 4.102) 4.019 ( 4.032)
3The teacher is approachable for consultation. 4.500 0.289 4.051 ( 4.107) 4.079 ( 4.064)
4The teacher has helped me develop relevant research skills.*NANANANA
5The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. 4.750 0.250 3.831 ( 3.914) 3.846 ( 3.799)
6The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. 4.500 0.289 3.951 ( 4.009) 3.963 ( 3.922)
7The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. 4.500 0.289 3.941 ( 3.982) 3.939 ( 3.878)
Average of Qn 1-7** 4.500 0.289 3.954 ( 4.023) 3.967 ( 3.934)
8Overall the teacher is effective. 4.500 0.289 3.993 ( 4.060) 4.014 ( 3.958)

* 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

|

2 (50.00%)

2 (50.00%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

0 (.00%)

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

|

94 (27.98%)

183 (54.46%)

48 (14.29%)

7 (2.08%)

4 (1.19%)

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

|

165 (23.98%)

354 (51.45%)

150 (21.80%)

13 (1.89%)

6 (.87%)

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 3000 ) 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 3000 ) within the faculty.

STUDENTS' COMMENTS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member:  KAN MIN-YEN
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Academic Year:  2010/2011
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  2
Module:INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245
Activity Type:TUTORIAL

Q9  What are the teacher's strengths?
1.After he explain the tutorial question, it really give us a big leap of understanding! Great!
2.-

Q10  What improvements would you suggest to the teacher?
1.-

STUDENTS' NOMINATIONS FOR BEST TEACHING
Faculty Member:  KAN MIN-YEN
Department:  COMPUTER SCIENCE Academic Year:  2010/2011
Faculty:  SCHOOL OF COMPUTING Semester:  2

Module Code:CS3245No of Nominations:3

1.loud and clear articulation and shows concern for students
2.Min has been a most excellent lecturer the entire semester. He is clear with all the materials and concepts he is teaching and gives good and timely feedback. He makes students feel comfortable in class and tries to get to know all the students, a pleasant gesture to the whole class.



© 2011 National University of Singapore. All Rights Reserved. For inquiries, please email to: ccence@nus.edu.sg