Fall 2002 CSCI 210 evaluation comments

This is CSB|SJU's evaluation form. I've written down the entire array of comments for the course, so they of course run the gamut. Giving you only a selection of comments would make it look better, but they wouldn't be representative. This gives a sounder idea of general student satisfaction.

CSCI 210 is the lower-division computing systems course, covering compilers, operating systems, assembly language, and CPU architecture; majors typically take it in the fourth semester of their curriculum. This was the off-semester, so there were only 10 students in the course.

  1. My DESIRE TO ENROLL in this course was...
    5Very strong
    4Strong
    1Moderate
    0Weak
    0Very weak
  2. The LEARNING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES for this course were...
    3Very clear
    4Clear
    3Somewhat clear
    0Unclear
    0Not provided
  3. OVERALL, in this course I LEARNED...
    3An exceptional amount
    7A good amount
    0An average amount
    0Little
    0Very little
  4. OVERALL, I rate this COURSE to be...
    2Excellent
    5Very good
    3Good
    0Fair
    0Poor

    WHY did you rate this course in this way?

    Excellent:
    It pushed me to learn a lot of material, but was not overwhelming.

    Learned a lot. Was constantly challenged but not worried about failing or doing poorly.

    Very good:
    I learned a lot but it was a struggle.

    It was hard, but rewarding.

    It would have been excellent if not for its historical bent.

    Good:
    Covered too many topics.

  5. OVERALL, I rate the INSTRUCTOR of this course to be...
    5Excellent
    5Very good
    0Good
    0Fair
    0Poor

    WHY did you rate the instructor in this way?

    Excellent:
    Presents the material in an understandable fashion.

    Very intelligent and helpful.

    Carl is very knowledgable, helpful, and friendly. Always willing to help, but doesn't allow you an easy solution without you getting it.

    He went through material quickly, but made it easy to understand, so I feel like I learned more in this course than any other.

    Very Good:
    Very knowledgable and always willing to be friendly when helpuing, but sometimes the help is too little.

    Always willing to help students, good clasroom instructor.

    He spent a lot of time on the class.

  6. Other comments:

    Give a little more guidance on the labs. Sometimes I would be going down the wrong path and Carl would just let me continue. This is probably necessary in the learning process, but it is frustrating all the same.