| Faculty Member: | LEONG WING LUP, BEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2014/2015 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | PROGRAMMING METHODOLOGY - CS1010S | ||
| Activity Type: | RECITATION | ||
| Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate : | 42 / 27 / 64.29% |
| Contact Session/Teaching Hour : | 10 / 10 |
| 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. | 4.593 | 0.110 | 4.434 ( 4.313) | 4.434 ( 4.313) |
| 2 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 4.444 | 0.134 | 4.243 ( 4.087) | 4.243 ( 4.087) |
| 3 | The teacher provided timely and useful feedback. | 4.444 | 0.145 | 4.278 ( 4.281) | 4.278 ( 4.281) |
| 4 | The teacher has enhanced my ability to communicate the subject material. | 4.519 | 0.112 | 4.303 ( 4.243) | NA (NA) |
| 5 | The teacher's attitude and approach encouraged me to think and work in a creative and independent way. | 4.630 | 0.109 | 4.401 ( 4.304) | NA (NA) |
| 6 | The teacher cares about student development and learning. | 4.593 | 0.110 | 4.368 ( 4.322) | NA (NA) |
| Average Q1 to Q6 | 4.537 | 0.095 | 4.338 ( 4.258) | NA (NA) | |
| Computed Overall Effectiveness of the Teacher. | 4.561 | 0.100 | 4.389 ( 4.288) | 4.389 ( 4.288) |
Notes:
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 (Recitation) within the department.
(b) the mean score of same activity type (Recitation), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score :
(c) the mean score of same activity type (Recitation) within the faculty.
(d) the mean score of same activity type (Recitation), at the same module level ( level 1000 ) within the faculty.
| Faculty Member: | LEONG WING LUP, BEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2014/2015 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | PROGRAMMING METHODOLOGY - CS1010S | ||
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 17 (62.96%) | 9 (33.33%) | 1 (3.70%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Department | | | 49 (42.61%) | 54 (46.96%) | 11 (9.57%) | 1 (.87%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Faculty | | | 49 (42.61%) | 54 (46.96%) | 11 (9.57%) | 1 (.87%) | 0 (.00%) |
Frequency Distribution of responses (Qn 2: The teacher has increased my interest in the subject.)
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 15 (55.56%) | 9 (33.33%) | 3 (11.11%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Department | | | 41 (35.65%) | 46 (40.00%) | 26 (22.61%) | 1 (.87%) | 1 (.87%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Faculty | | | 41 (35.65%) | 46 (40.00%) | 26 (22.61%) | 1 (.87%) | 1 (.87%) |
Frequency Distribution of responses (Qn 3: The teacher provided timely and useful feedback.)
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 16 (59.26%) | 7 (25.93%) | 4 (14.81%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Department | | | 46 (40.35%) | 54 (47.37%) | 14 (12.28%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Recitation), at the same level within Faculty | | | 46 (40.35%) | 54 (47.37%) | 14 (12.28%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
| Faculty Member: | LEONG WING LUP, BEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2014/2015 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | PROGRAMMING METHODOLOGY - CS1010S | ||
| Activity Type: | RECITATION | ||
What are the teacher's strengths? (21 comments) | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. Engaging and motivated. | |
| 2. Explains concepts well in recitations. Have a great sense of humour. | |
| 3. Explains the content very well. How cool is that? | |
| 4. Explanations are clear | |
| 5. He is a really caring teacher. | |
| 6. He taught very well! He knows what is the most important thing for us to know. | |
| 7. Recitations are always fun and interesting, and he also ensures that students are able to understand key concepts by going through step-by-step examples. | |
| 8. The prof was exceptionally good in teaching for this module. | |
| 9. Very funny and insightful teacher! Dr Leong, I always enjoyed your recitations and you always made sure that the lesson weren't too boring. | |
| 10. his explanations are a lot clearer. | |
| 11. nil | |
| 12. very smart and concise | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 4.0 and less than 4.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. -Clear and patient with content delivery | |
| 2. Engaging during recitation. | |
| 3. Strongly encourages class participation. Another lecturer with a personality (Y) | |
| 4. clear explanation | |
| 5. explain clearly the misconceptions what students have | |
| 6. teaches concepts well, very knowledgeable. | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 3.5 and less than 4.0 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. adds humor into teaching | |
| 2. funny | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 3.0 and less than 3.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. VERY KNOWLEDGABLE |
What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? (19 comments) | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 3.0 and less than 3.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. too knowledgeable and going too fast. expecting too much from students, stressing us out | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 3.5 and less than 4.0 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. nil | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal 4.0 and less than 4.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. - | |
| 2. None. | |
| 3. dont talk so fast | |
| 4. maybe speak more slowly | |
| 5. nil | |
| Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.5 for the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher | |
| 1. - | |
| 2. -NIL- | |
| 3. -nil- | |
| 4. Nil | |
| 5. Nil. | |
| 6. None. | |
| 7. Nothing regarding his teaching, but the module itself is really tough. | |
| 8. Sometimes you might be a little too fast for the weaker students. | |
| 9. nil | |
| 10. nil | |
| 11. nope | |
| 12. talk slower |
| Faculty Member: | LEONG WING LUP, BEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2014/2015 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module Code: | CS1010S | No of Nominations: | 3 |
| 1. | He is extremely approachable and is able to easily demonstrate difficult concepts. He also doesn't have any airs about him and is passionate about what he does despite not being the lecturer this semester. The methods of teaching (Coursemology) implemented are also rather innovative and helps students strive to do better. |
| 2. | Funny, friendly,knowledgeable |
| 3. | He taught very well. Really good! |