CS 110 201510: Faculty of Science Feedback

Summary of Likert Scale Questions

4 (Strongly Agree) 3 (Agree) 2 (Disagree) 1 (Strongly Disagree) Total
Q7. The course is well organized 1861328
Q8. The methods of evaluation are fair 11061128
Q9. The instructor explains ideas and concepts in a clear, logical manner 13121228
Q10. The instructor is readily available for out-of-class consultation 9100322
Q11.The instructor shows mastery of the subject 5124728
Q12. The instructor treats students fairly and with respect 10141328
Q13. The instructor stimulates critical thinking and independent learning 5107527
Q14. I would recommend this instructor to others 1531524
Total Percentage 16%34%18%32%

Word Cloud Summary of Course Instructor Comments

classassignmentstextbookstudentsjustmaterialtimecoursequestionsgoodlabweaknessteachingteachexperiencesomethingstudentmakepiazzaclasseswayterribledifficultlikeworthdrbetterhardwellmarksprofneverlasteasilydontcomputerlabshelpfeelevergreatusefulnicecsneedlatealsomaynothingwasteimnewcodefirstbitdaryl=onetwoendfeltlotpreviousplanexceptzeroreadfrontmattertopicmustworstwentdidntwantsnextdaycontentcoverivesupercomesfairjokefindattempts110tellseenhesguyletunpreparedsolveupsettingpromotesreceivesinsufficientlyweightedcamedeservesgamecriticalmeetingthinkingwinginputbunch

CLICK HERE to toggle details

(Numbers on responses DO NOT indicate correspondence between respondents, only the quantity of responses for each heading.)

Identify what you perceive to be the main strengths and weaknesses of the course

  1. Course itself could have been very interesting and very thought provoking but the instructor made it pretty unbearable.
  2. I can't really speak on the course cause I'm not 100% sure what I was supposed to be learning in this class.
  3. I don't particularly feel that it should be a required course. However, it is quite interesting!
  4. I think this course is very important to have and think its hard to convince students the importance of the class.
  5. The course has a major focus on present day issues, which I find very interesting. The material was important and relevant.
  6. The course has good material to cover and make us thin about whether or not we as computer scientist should or should not do certain things. weakness is that it can be too broad and not very concrete.
  7. This is by far the worst class I have ever taken. It tooks us two months to figure out a syllabus that everyone understands, piazza is the worst software ever, it took us two months to get our midterms back. Right before we got our midterms the professor told us if he doesn't have them back within a week everyone gets 100. Who does that? Class was a terrible was of time just watching TED talks.

Identify what you perceive to be the main strengths and weaknesses of the instructor

  1. A little disorganized at times, but he stimulated individual thinking. It made me see other things that I should be looking for while programming.
  2. I like the class discussions because they allow students to get to know each other. The instructor explains concepts well and posts the notes online.
  3. Strengths - Attemps to invovle class and simulate engaging disscussion which sometimes works. Does a good job challanging student assumptions/makes them think Weakness - Mumbles a lot, blog posts had shifting requirments and everything always seemed up for discussion which made it hard to figure out what was required. Rubrics only really work if they have clear definitions about what is expected as each stage (the rubric was vague and was applied to everything which means its not actually a good indication of whats expected of us). Many times class time was not used effectivly.
  4. Strengths: Very nice guy and very generous regarding marking and such, however the weaknesses are alot. Often had to wait a lot for him to figure out how to use the computer, was fairly boring to listen to.
  5. Terribly unorganized, always unprepared and late to class.
  6. has good intentions. fails to get point across by stuttering, being vague, and stopping mid sentence
  7. main weaknesses... Lets see. His marking schemes were incredibly confusing if not even given, we debated how we should be graded more in class this semester than we did covering course material. The professor was on time i think a total of 3 or 4 classes in the entire semester and we never really did anything relevant to the textbook until 35 minutes into the class on average. (yes i was keeping track)

Comment on the value of the textbooks and the assignments in the course

  1. Assignments need to be handed back in a more timely manner. Waiting several weeks for everything is really annoying. Midterms were handed back so late it was after the drop-date we got them back if someone wanted to drop because of the midterm mark they never had a chance. Blog assignments should not be posted to other students no one will read them all. Maybe do 1/3 should be posted to everyone and have different groups do it so there's something to discuss everyweek.
  2. Assignments were just given to us as something to do. Didn't relate to class, our group work we still don't understand the mark layout.
  3. Textbook was good, assignments were confusing, poorly explained, changed way to much before due dates, due dates changed way too much....
  4. The textbooks and assignments were helpful during this course. They worked well together.
  5. Very confusing on mark breakdown and how to achieve them.
  6. good textbook
  7. stimulates thought.

Any other relevant suggestions?

  1. Remove this awful course or change the instructor.
  2. Students hate group work. Students are never going to like group work. Does that mean we shouldn't do group work? Of course not- group work is expected in life; however, the prof asked us several times if the students were more or less happy with group work and we wasted a lot of time discussing why we even had group work. If group work is expected, expect that students will be unhappy and tell them thats life.
  3. more course material, less.... talking about nothing relevant.
  4. none