Course Evaluation

cs1700

M. Rayment

General Information

Average year of studies: 1.8
Expected Course Grade: A's: 15 B's: 12 C's: 6 D's: 0 F's: 0
Average Cumulative GPA (not accurate): 1.6
Respondants: 33
Percent Response: 68.75

Part I

The following questions have been rated according to the scale below:
1 - unsatisfactory
2 - below average
3 - average, satisfactory, usually good
4 - above average
5 - exceptional

A. Course

Question	Response	# of Responses	Deviation
How interesting did you find this course?	2.9	33	1.0
How difficult did you find this course material?	3.2	33	0.7
Clarity of the outline, marking scheme and general info about this course?	3.8	32	0.9
Usefulness of the feedback on your performance in this course?	3.4	33	0.9
Usefulness of the textbook or reading material?	3.1	33	1.0
Adequacy of the computing facilities (if needed for this course)?	3.8	32	0.8
Adequacy of prerequisites for this course?	3.3	32	0.7

B. Assignments/Projects

Question	Response	# of Responses	Deviation
How helpful were the assignments/projects in learning the course material?	4.3	33	0.8
How challenging were the assignments/projects?	3.8	33	0.6
Did you feel that the assignments were marked fairly?	3.3	33	1.2

C. Tests

Question	Response	# of Responses	Deviation
How well did the test(s) reflect the course material?	3.8	33	0.9
How challenging did you find the test(s)?	3.5	32	0.8
Did you feel that the tests were marked fairly?	4.1	32	0.8

D. Instruction

Question	Response	# of Responses	Deviation
Organization and preparation of lectures?	3.1	33	1.2
Clarity of the explanation of the main concepts and ideas?	3.2	33	1.1
Instructor's ability to stimulate interest in the subject?	2.8	33	1.2
Instructor's enthusiasm in teaching the course?	3.7	33	1.1
Instructor's command of the subject?	3.6	33	1.0
Instructor's responsiveness to class difficulties?	3.5	33	1.0
Availability of consultations outside the class?	3.8	31	0.9
Your overall rating of the instructor's teaching skills?	3.5	32	0.9

Part II

What are the aspects of this course that you LIKED most?

2.: The labs were intresting and good. Also the assignment were good too.
3.: The labs and the assignments.
4.: The lab's and lab exercises in this course were most benificial. they provided a hands on approach to the course. they really helped me to understand the course.
6.: Course is fairly interseting and challenging. I liked the labs and assignments part most
7.: Labs
8.: The lab on Turing Machines and Boolean logic.
9.: The prof.,and TA's/lab assistants were very helpful and encouraging!
10.: Anything not understood in assignments i could usually pick it up in the labs.
11.: Labs
12.: Algorithms, pascal compiler, Ingrid, Boolean Logic
13.: I liked the boolean expressions and creating circuits.
14.: I liked the labs the most. It was a nice change from themonotonus lectures experienced in other courses. It also allowed me to get "hands on" practice for course material.
17.: I best part of this course was the computer labs,boolean expressions and filling out this sheet.
19.: Writing algorithms, and writing Pascal. As well as the labs.
20.: Circuits
23.: I found the labs to be very interesting, Professor Raymentwas a wonderful and interesting influence, someone you'd like to please! It's nice to be recognized by a professor!
24.: Labs were really helpful in learning the course material.
25.: labs. Actually doing the exercises is much better than the lectures.
26.: I enjoyed actually working on the computers in the lab. The assignments were very helpful in learning the material, as were the labs.
28.: Labs/assignments helped clarify the material taught in class.The labs are well tailored to suit the course material.
29.: It was interesting to do the needed activities, and anything that was hard to understand was in all of the assignments. Anything that was difficult in the assignments was able to be done in the lab. We could see how cetain things operated, and that made it easier to understand how the different machines operate.
30.: The labs
31.: The labs -- I found the labs were not as hard as the assignments and were fairly interesting. I found the logic circuits and gates, Pascal, the first three labs dealing algorithms, and the Turing Machines fairly easy and understandable.
32.: Programming, and just learning about computers.
33.: labs helped to reinforce lecture material.

What are the aspects of this course that you DISLIKED most?

1.: The markers should know when someone is copying an assignment, as apposed to when students work together and get similar answers.
2.: The book was bad, It was very hard to understand. The lectureclass were very boring.
3.: I think that the assignment should follow the labs, in that the material covered int eh labs should be backed up by the assignments and not the other way around.
4.: I disliked the midterm mainly because my full potential wasn't shown.it was worth a bit to much and will bring my mark down considerably.
7.: Some lectures were boring
8.: 1)assembly languages,2)algorithms,3)circuits and gates
9.: Too much information packed in to one semester.
10.: how the assignments were never gone over in class
11.: Assignments
12.: I found that course just wasn't for me. Computers are the future and I guess that would mean I'm hopeless. The thing is that without hours and hours of studing i would have been lost.
13.: MACHINE LANGUAGE!!!!
14.: Lectures(based on text material) were not particularly interesting. I disliked the fact that the course gave very little "practical" exposure to computers. I realize that Computer Scinence involves a great deal of theory but I also belive that an "Introduction to Computer Science" should teach students the practical side of computing. It is pointless knowing about gates, switches, and logic switches if you know nothing of the physical aspect of computers. For example, students should be at least breifly taught about video cards, motherboards, hard drives, and cpus. It might be more interesting to learn about the progression of cpu's over the years and their importance to the computer system as a whole. Thus, theory and practicality should go hand - in - hand, allowing the student to relate to the course material better, and have a greater exposure to computing. Also, the assignment questions, in many cases were not clear.
17.: Pascal, Algorithms and Machine Language!
19.: Assignment due on lab day. Should be a different day.
20.: Getting up early Tuesday mornings for three hours of lab torture.
23.: none, really!
24.: Lectures did not reflect what was asked in terms of tests or labs & assignments,also the marking for labs was unfair since there were marks deducted for similar solutions but with a large class it became necessary to help your fellow students out from time to time by working through problems together ,not by copying as was implied by the graders!
25.: lectures were pretty boring.
26.: The lectures and readings were sometimes fairly uninteresting.
28.: The instructor was not very enthusiastic and I found this course somewhat boring. One particular aspect which I did not like is the vast amount of overheads used in class. There were far too many slides used and not enough notes written on the board.
29.: Our instructor often had too many problems with the assignments, mainly becuase he didn't make them up. If he had more time to look them over and help us, it would have been better. Another thing is the fact that our instructor grades our exams, but not our assignments and labs. We don't know what his preferences are, and I found that they were different for each. My exam was marked down because of a way that I did a question, but it was exactly like the one in my assignment where I had gotten full marks. There were hardly any markings on our assignments, so we do not know where and why we went wrong. The assignments were hardly ever discussed in class, and never gone over.
31.: I found some of the aspects and concepts in this coursedifficult to grasp, especially the Von Neumann architecture and hardware. I also found some of the questions on the mid-term exam somewhat difficult, especially the algorithm.
32.: Impractical things that I will never use; for example: Turing machines, assembly and machine language, etc.
33.: assignments were difficult and often not discussed in depth in class.

What were the STRONG points of the instructor's teaching of this course?

2.: His ability to put over heads on the projector
3.: He used a lot of examples and continually asked if students had any questions.
7.: He was very interested in the subject.
8.: He was very ethusiastic, and I believe he genuinely liked computers.
9.: Very helpful for students specific questions and problems.
10.: he was enthusatic and liked to teach and get everybody into it
11.: He knew what he was talking about most of the time.
12.: He was a nice guy and seemed to find many things really amusing. Computers are Michael Rayment World And he made me a part of it.
13.: His enthusiasm and passion for the subject.
14.: He knew what he was talking about and he wasn't outdated. :)He knew a great deal about MODERN computing and in many cases expressed this knowledge to the class (over and above course material).
17.: His enthusiasm for the course was to be comended.
19.: Compared difficult material to something well known to get the point across.
20.: Explained things well and gave good examples. His emphasis was placed upon learning the concepts rather than right and wrong answers.
23.: Gave good examples in class to relate the concepts being studied, good humor when relating personal stories and research. Created a lot of enthusiasm!
25.: He seemed to have a genuine interest in doing it. I bet he talks about the stuff outside of class all the time. He also knows a fair bit about the subject.
26.: The instructor was very understanding and made every effort to help students with difficulties. He had a good knowledge of the material and explained it very well, making it easy to understand.
28.: The professor has a very strong grasp on the material and can provide excellent help when asked.
29.: The instuctor was enthusiastic about teaching, and he was available for help when I needed him. Teaching with the overhead was good also.
31.: I found that the instructor was qualified to teach thecourse and was helpful whenever I had problems with the assignments and the labs.
32.: He is interested in the subject.
33.: was willing to help. nice guy.

What were the WEAK points of the instructor's teaching of this course?

2.: Class was very boring
3.: He bablbed from time to time and lost the interest ofthe class. he could have encouraged more class participation by asking for students to solve the problems as they were bieng done.
4.: none
6.: This is the worse professor i ever had in my universuty career. He has a good command on the course but his teachi ng skills are very poor He could not answered the questions properly. Most of the time he got stucked in the class during lectures. His way of teaching is very bad. He just summarized the book. No other information he gave in the class. his behavior and attitude towards student is very friendly which is not good for the students. He does not look like a professor .. His teaching skill are very weak. I would suggest the dean of the department to not to give him anymore course to teach.
7.: Tends to rambel on when he likes a topic.
8.: The teacher was really good but it's just that the course was so boring and dull. I think the instructors assumed that we knew more about computers than we actually did.
9.: Too much info. in one little course!
10.: he didn't go over what would be on the assignments in class enough.
11.: Couldn't get his point across clear enough.
12.: He explains things during labs that do not work in labs.
13.: Coverage of machine language as it obviously went over my head.
14.: He didn't have any. I would have liked him to teach more of what he knew to the class, he seemed to know much more than the course material allowed.
17.: His weak point was his organizational skills. He never seemed to be prepared for class and his notes(well lets just say WHAT NOTES!!)I could have learned much more if he made more use of examples throughout his lectures.
19.: None. that I know of.
20.: Difficulties in operating the projector screen(Joke, Joke).
23.: none!
25.: He isn't exactly the most exciting person in the world.
28.: Again, too many slides. Boring!
29.: He often didn't explain things well enough.
31.: I found that some of the lectures dragged on and weresometimes boring, which is why I preferred and liked the labs more than the lectures. However, overall, I found the 1700 course to be very beneficial and informative.
32.: Went to close to the book.
33.: not very good at making material interesting.

Any other comments related to the course or this questionnaire?

2.: There should be a new book for this coures. This book is too hard to under stand, read and think about.
3.: I think the taxt book xamples colud have been utilized a bit more. Not mention, in the last week before the final, all answers for the textbook should be made a vailable for students who do not have the time to be chasing after instructors, assisstants, markers, etc. Perhaps publish to the web. Thanks for an interesting coarse, I really enjoyed it.
4.: The course was pretty fair. there should be two midterms instead of one.this may be benificial to all students. if they bomb on one test they could pick it up on the other.
6.: Course is overall good and interesting but the professor was very bad. This is not only my opinion, most of the students are agreed with me. I was thinking to discuss this matter with the head of the dean about the basis of instructors. I wanted to know on what basis you evaluate the professor. Enough knowledge doesnt mean that he knows how to teach. Teaching is an art which is lacking in this particular professor. Thanks.
7.: I enjoyed the course vrey much!
8.: I had my share of troubles with this course and I'm happy that it's over, pass or fail.
9.: Very difficult to rate some things on a scale of one to five (eg. either the marking was fair or it wasn't)
10.: overall good.
11.: Hard course if you don't do alot of work with it.
12.: Ingrid the Lab instructor proved that she was a computer friend and I thought that without Ingrid I would have been lost. T%hanks Ingrid
13.: This course made me consider doing comp. sci. as a minor.
19.: None.
20.: Good introductory course-touches base on all general topics.
25.: Although this course is pretty boring, it's necessary if you plan on majoring inComputer Science.
28.: I found some of the material interesting and I learned somenew things. Overall the course is informative of the field of computer science but first year students with little or no experience with computers might get a bad impression of this exciting field due to their first experience with this subject. You should focus more on making this course more exciting, so that first year students don't get turned off from computer science.
31.: After completing this course, and hopefully receiving a goodmark after writing the final exam, I intend to major in computer science and go on to second year computer science courses in fall 1998.
33.: nope.