| | |
| Teacher Assessment Report | |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2011/2012 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245 | ||
| Activity Type: | LECTURE | ||
| Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate/Contact Session/Teaching Hour : | 48 / 23 / 47.92% / 13 / 26 |
| 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. | 4.348 | 0.135 | 4.157 ( 4.255) | 4.073 ( 4.046) |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.261 | 0.144 | 4.164 ( 4.292) | 4.094 ( 4.089) |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.478 | 0.106 | 4.229 ( 4.372) | 4.167 ( 4.166) |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me develop relevant research skills.* | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 4.304 | 0.132 | 4.080 ( 4.226) | 4.004 ( 4.004) |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.391 | 0.104 | 4.174 ( 4.291) | 4.113 ( 4.099) |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 4.261 | 0.129 | 4.124 ( 4.228) | 4.038 ( 4.016) |
| Average of Qn 1-7** | 4.341 | 0.099 | 4.151 ( 4.278) | 4.078 ( 4.070) | |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.304 | 0.117 | 4.190 ( 4.293) | 4.110 ( 4.080) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 8 (34.78%) | 14 (60.87%) | 1 (4.35%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within Department | | | 213 (40.80%) | 259 (49.62%) | 41 (7.85%) | 8 (1.53%) | 1 (.19%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within Faculty | | | 300 (32.36%) | 456 (49.19%) | 132 (14.24%) | 23 (2.48%) | 16 (1.73%) |
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.
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2011/2012 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245 | ||
| Activity Type: | LECTURE | ||
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | NIL |
| 2. | funny, understand the topic that he teach, approachable, try to remember student names |
| 3. | humorous and patient to answer all the questions from students. |
| 4. | - |
| 5. | nil |
| 6. | Able to explain clearly and interesting. Gave good examples for each topic. |
| 7. | Able to explain concepts very well. Punctual and ends lectures on time. |
| 8. | An extremely helpful teacher, who takes time and effort to answer each and every student's query. |
| 9. | He's passionate, knowledgeable, and interesting (friendly). He also replies to e-mail quite promptly, and he answers questions in forums quite fast. And he's the best lecturer I know in term of webcast quality. He delivers the lectures with awareness that it will be webcast. |
| 10. | ---------------- |
| 11. | NA |
| 12. | Good. concepts cleared. Uploads webcasts for all which is important for us to clear concepts. |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | NIL |
| 2. | - |
| 3. | it may be better if we can have more tutorials questions for exercises. |
| 4. | - |
| 5. | nil |
| 6. | - |
| 7. | Content is a bit boring sometimes, make lectures more interesting. |
| 8. | NIL. |
| 9. | Please include our feedback for future versions of this module. |
| 10. | ---------------- |
| 11. | NA |
| 12. | None |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2011/2012 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245 | ||
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL | ||
| Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate/Contact Session/Teaching Hour : | 41 / 19 / 46.34% / 10 / 20 |
| 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. | 4.211 | 0.123 | 3.983 ( 4.030) | 3.953 ( 3.927) |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.158 | 0.138 | 4.017 ( 4.065) | 4.019 ( 4.013) |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.263 | 0.129 | 4.094 ( 4.169) | 4.092 ( 4.096) |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me develop relevant research skills.* | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 4.158 | 0.115 | 3.897 ( 4.000) | 3.881 ( 3.908) |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.158 | 0.115 | 3.990 ( 4.068) | 3.970 ( 3.962) |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 4.053 | 0.120 | 3.998 ( 4.025) | 3.964 ( 3.911) |
| Average of Qn 1-7** | 4.167 | 0.111 | 3.997 ( 4.060) | 3.980 ( 3.969) | |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.158 | 0.115 | 4.019 ( 4.073) | 4.004 ( 3.985) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 4 (21.05%) | 14 (73.68%) | 1 (5.26%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Department | | | 126 (31.66%) | 197 (49.50%) | 58 (14.57%) | 12 (3.02%) | 5 (1.26%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the same level within Faculty | | | 167 (27.51%) | 301 (49.59%) | 110 (18.12%) | 21 (3.46%) | 8 (1.32%) |
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.
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2011/2012 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | INFORMATION RETRIEVAL - CS3245 | ||
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL | ||
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | - |
| 2. | teach more relevant useful contents based on one tutorial question. |
| 3. | - |
| 4. | nil |
| 5. | Able to explain concepts very well. |
| 6. | An extremely helpful teacher, who takes time and effort to answer each and every student's query. |
| 7. | He asked questions in a way that encourage students to answer the question. He has a good class management. |
| 8. | ---------------- |
| 9. | NA |
| 10. | Good |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | - |
| 2. | it may be better if we can have more tutorials questions for exercises. |
| 3. | - |
| 4. | nil |
| 5. | NIL |
| 6. | - |
| 7. | ---------------- |
| 8. | NA |
| 9. | None |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2011/2012 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module Code: | CS3245 | No of Nominations: | 7 |
| 1. | he is knowledgeable, really understand the topic he teach. he also try to make friend with student |
| 2. | The reason I chose him from the rest is because I can really feel his care and concern for all his students. Many heartfelt thanks to him for being such a good lecturer. |
| 3. | Very meticulous in teaching |
Loading... please wait.