Spring 2001 CSCI 150 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 150 is our first-semester course for majors. It is a survey course, with components about circuits, assembly language, programming, and theory of computation.

I taught the course in my first two semesters at CSB|SJU. These comments are from my second semester teaching it, so I was teaching it with some experience. (Student reaction the first semester was more negative. You'll notice that I haven't posted those results.) The department had a set curriculum for the course with an accompanying locally developed textbook.

1. My DESIRE TO ENROLL in this course was...

   10	Very strong
   6	Strong
   2	Moderate
   0	Weak
   0	Very weak

2. The LEARNING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES for this course were...

   6	Very clear
   10	Clear
   2	Somewhat clear
   0	Unclear
   0	Not provided

3. OVERALL, in this course I LEARNED...

   7	An exceptional amount
   7	A good amount
   4	An average amount
   0	Little
   0	Very little

4. OVERALL, I rate this COURSE to be...

   5	Excellent
   4	Very good
   6	Good
   3	Fair
   0	Poor

   WHY did you rate this course in this way?

   Excellent:

   Because it gives a good foundation/start for persons who would like to continue with a computer science major.

   Learned a lot and it was interesting.

   Very interesting class, and schedule and scheme of class went very smoothly.

   Very good:

   Since it is an introductory coruse, I felt a good variety of topics were covered.

   Some class days were boring.

   The course is challenging, but interesting.

   Good:

   It gives you a good background in computer science but some of the material seems too basic.

   It was in no way exceptional.

   It wsa an Intro course but could have used more practical knowledge about applications to the real world.

   Very difficult course that contained a lot of info that won't be used in real world.

   We covered everything we were told we would cover.

   Fair:

   In many ways it seems like a math class, and you find yourself saying, ``Am I really going to ever use vector analysis?''

   This course needs to buy an actual textbook.

5. OVERALL, I rate the INSTRUCTOR of this course to be...

   5	Excellent
   6	Very good
   6	Good
   1	Fair
   0	Poor

   WHY did you rate the instructor in this way?

   Excellent:

   The lecturer was always accessible to me. He was fast at some times but he was willing to go back over what I did not understand. He understood that everyone did not the same understanding of the subject.

   He explained things well, very helpful, only prof I know that doesn't have office hours because any time are his office hours.

   He was always more than willing to take time out to explain things I was having problems with.

   Very good:

   Prof. Burch is doing great as a first-year instructor.

   I think he presented the material very well, but the classroom atmosphere could have been more relaxed.

   He is very knowledgeable. Has a good scheme of running things, but can get a little cranky and moody, nonetheless he always helps when we need it.

   Well-organized and prepared. A little difficult to approach with questions.

   Good:

   Burch has a vast store of knowledge about computers, but sometimes is reluctant to share said knowledge with struggling students.

   He presented all materials, but did not always present them well.

   A wealth of information without the book reading to aid students.

   He was an approachable prof. But his teaching style was somewhat green.

   He was approachable and helpful, yet still needs to smooth the bumps of his teaching style.

   Fair:

   He clearly knew what he was teaching, but he was not very good at teaching us. This made things very difficult, especially since our textbook was extremely sub-par.