| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | FOUNDATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - CS3243 | ||
| Activity Type: | LECTURE | ||
| No. of Respondents: | 154 | ||
| Qn | Items Evaluated | Fac. Member Avg Score | Fac. Member Avg Score Std. Dev | Dept Avg Score (All Fac. Members) | Fac. Avg Score (All Fac. Members) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability. | 4.000 | 0.695 | 3.820 | 3.758 |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.071 | 0.687 | 3.800 | 3.766 |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.118 | 0.680 | 3.847 | 3.802 |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me advance my research (if applicable). | 3.807 | 0.774 | 3.652 | 3.594 |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 4.032 | 0.779 | 3.692 | 3.644 |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.006 | 0.700 | 3.820 | 3.795 |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 3.935 | 0.738 | 3.769 | 3.712 |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.104 | 0.678 | 3.856 | 3.805 |
| Average of Qn 1-7 | 4.003 | 0.724 | 3.778 | 3.731 |
Note:
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 (All Fac. Members): The mean of all the scores of the activity type for each question for all modules offered by the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score (All Fac. Members): The mean of all the scores of the activity type for each question for all modules offered by the faculty.
Frequency Distribution on Overall Effectiveness of Teacher - Qn 8
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 41 (26.62%) | 90 (58.44%) | 22 (14.29%) | 0 (.00%) | 1 (.65%) |
Teachers teaching Module at the Same Level (Dept) | | | 688 (23.24%) | 1531 (51.71%) | 644 (21.75%) | 77 (2.60%) | 21 (.71%) |
Teachers teaching Module at the Same Level (Fac) | | | 1207 (22.67%) | 2744 (51.53%) | 1188 (22.31%) | 142 (2.67%) | 44 (.83%) |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | FOUNDATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - CS3243 |
| Activity Type: | LECTURE |
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | Very organized, very motivating. The best teacher I've had in Singapore! |
| 2. | Being very clear and structured. Explaining complex concepts in a simple way. |
| 3. | Very friendly |
| 4. | Patient and interacts well with students. |
| 5. | given a lot of interesting assignment |
| 6. | Very clear in his explanations and willing to answer questions from students. Always attempt to engage the students during lecture and is very understanding towards students. |
| 7. | Ability to keep concepts simple and easy to understand. |
| 8. | presents the lectures in an interesting format and also with more real life example when the concepts are difficult |
| 9. | He is well-versed in the area of AI, and hence was able to come up with innovative ideas / assignments relevant to the learning / exploration of the subject. He is also open to feedback, which is good since we students can then use it as a channel to communicate with him our feelings and sentiments over his management of the course. |
| 10. | Dr Kan is a good lecturer. I enjoy his lectures. He takes great effort in preparing material for the module, and in designing and implementing the assignments. I deeply apppreciate the effort and have benefited much from it. |
| 11. | NAs |
| 12. | none |
| 13. | really appreciate the lecturer wiling to take the effort to memorise every students' name |
| 14. | He is very approachable and helpful. He illustrates concepts very clearly and it's a pleasure listening to him speak because he has a nice accent. |
| 15. | his good linguistic ability makes it much easier to understand the lessons. and he shows understanding towards students. approachable for consultation. very good lecturer. |
| 16. | A dedicated, approachable and helpful educator, willing to spend time preparing materials to help students understand concepts better. Great job! |
| 17. | Very approachable and helpful. Gives good explainations and useful suggestions. Always positive attitude and down to earth character is very refreshing. |
| 18. | Encourages students to participate during the lectures. Prompts students to think about the concepts that has been taught. Attempts to make his lectures interesting. |
| 19. | always tries to communicate with us during the lecture, explains the concepts patiently, and the projects are not boring |
| 20. | Approachable |
| 21. | Very patient and nice lecturer. |
| 22. | I like the way he 'broadcasts' emails sent to him regarding the module in IVLE. Other lecturers don't do that. I feel that his style will benefit most people. |
| 23. | nil |
| 24. | Understanding and helpful. |
| 25. | Pretty effective lecturing style, tries to inject interest intot the lecture. Interesting examples |
| 26. | He is quite approachable for consultation. |
| 27. | Extremely helpful and approachable. Explains concepts very clearly when consulted. |
| 28. | Able to explain concepts well and never fails to make lectures interesting. |
| 29. | good knowledge , good teaching style |
| 30. | Nil |
| 31. | Friendly, approachable, knowledgable |
| 32. | Clear |
| 33. | very smart |
| 34. | humorous |
| 35. | give more example for this module |
| 36. | Excellent |
| 37. | He is quite approachable in the sense that I feel like to consult him. I can get what I need to know by the consultation. |
| 38. | N.A |
| 39. | he is very polite. I feel very comfortable when communicating as well as asking him. He made this module more interesting than usual. |
| 40. | he's very good in teaching, very clear n understandable |
| 41. | Very fluent and patient. |
| 42. | No comment |
| 43. | Know his field well, very patience and kind towards students, makes the module very interesting |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | The projects should have been more specified in the sense that the expected functionality of the program should be totally clearly defined before we chose projects. |
| 2. | It is not necessary to be THAT formal. |
| 3. | Not much. Just don't despair if you see the students don't respond to your questions. It's not you, but us, who is the problem. :) |
| 4. | talk slower and give more time for students to digest |
| 5. | Refer to more textbooks and more AI courses from other university and more your own ideas when you prepare the lecture notes |
| 6. | Maybe next time if cannot finish just leave it and have a make-up instead of rushing through the notes. |
| 7. | I was thinking that he might have too high expectations of us in giving the first homework, but the situation was made better as evident in the setting of the homework2 assignemtns. Perhaps he could do a review on what kind of students he has amongst the cohort before actually setting out to plan the assigments. This will help him to identify his target audience to better plan a module that not only caters to the needs but which also facilitates the learning of ALL the students rather than only the better ones. |
| 8. | NAS |
| 9. | none |
| 10. | Keep up the good work! |
| 11. | none! |
| 12. | maybe the tutorial questions can be updated next year so that all the questions will be relavant to the material taught in class |
| 13. | Have better prepared notes such that students do not need to refer to the textbooks. |
| 14. | He should ask less questions during lecture. Since most students refuse to answer his questions ('cos of various reasons), this form of teaching will only waste time and make everyone awkward. |
| 15. | nil |
| 16. | Lecture notes and updates are a bit disorganized at times |
| 17. | nil. |
| 18. | Perhaps the pace of the lectures can be slowed down a little, especiall towards the end of each lecture. I tend to find myself overwhelmed by all the information about 3/4 way through every lecture! |
| 19. | more friendly |
| 20. | Nil |
| 21. | More active lecture, more variations in the tone |
| 22. | need to make the presentation of lecture clearer. |
| 23. | a good lecturer, but his accent made me a bit sleepy. |
| 24. | can explain slower in some key points |
| 25. | no |
| 26. | Good enough. |
| 27. | N.A |
| 28. | nil |
| 29. | No comment |
| 30. | Can't think of any. |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | FOUNDATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - CS3243 | ||
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL | ||
| No. of Respondents: | 40 | ||
| Qn | Items Evaluated | Fac. Member Avg Score | Fac. Member Avg Score Std. Dev | Dept Avg Score (All Fac. Members) | Fac. Avg Score (All Fac. Members) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability. | 4.200 | 0.464 | 3.904 | 3.894 |
| 2 | The teacher provides timely and useful feedback. | 4.300 | 0.564 | 3.905 | 3.925 |
| 3 | The teacher is approachable for consultation. | 4.289 | 0.611 | 3.967 | 3.992 |
| 4 | The teacher has helped me advance my research (if applicable). | 4.000 | 0.655 | 3.721 | 3.720 |
| 5 | The teacher has increased my interest in the subject. | 4.250 | 0.630 | 3.762 | 3.752 |
| 6 | The teacher has helped me acquire valuable/relevant knowledge in the field. | 4.200 | 0.564 | 3.892 | 3.893 |
| 7 | The teacher has helped me understand complex ideas. | 4.200 | 0.608 | 3.902 | 3.886 |
| 8 | Overall the teacher is effective. | 4.300 | 0.564 | 3.960 | 3.961 |
| Average of Qn 1-7 | 4.213 | 0.584 | 3.872 | 3.873 |
Note:
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 (All Fac. Members): The mean of all the scores of the activity type for each question for all modules offered by the department.
5. Fac. Avg Score (All Fac. Members): The mean of all the scores of the activity type for each question for all modules offered by the faculty.
Frequency Distribution on Overall Effectiveness of Teacher - Qn 8
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| | | ||||||
Self | | | 14 (35.00%) | 24 (60.00%) | 2 (5.00%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Teachers teaching Module at the Same Level (Dept) | | | 688 (23.24%) | 1531 (51.71%) | 644 (21.75%) | 77 (2.60%) | 21 (.71%) |
Teachers teaching Module at the Same Level (Fac) | | | 1207 (22.67%) | 2744 (51.53%) | 1188 (22.31%) | 142 (2.67%) | 44 (.83%) |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module: | FOUNDATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - CS3243 |
| Activity Type: | TUTORIAL |
| Q9 | What are the teacher's strengths? |
| 1. | none |
| 2. | Tried his best to get the class involved in the discussion. Never hesitates to slow down when he saw the class getting lost. Definitely one of the best tutors i've met. |
| 3. | Able to explain the concepts well |
| 4. | Tutorials are well explained. |
| 5. | Able to explain concepts well and never fails to make tutorials interesting. |
| 6. | Friendly, approachable, knowledgable |
| 7. | Excellent |
| 8. | Very fluent and patient. |
| 9. | He guides the students in understanding difficult concepts and he is readily accepting alternative solutions |
| 10. | Same as above |
| Q10 | What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? |
| 1. | none |
| 2. | Nil |
| 3. | More active lecture, more variations in the tone More difficult exercise in the tutorials |
| 4. | nil |
| 5. | Same as above |
| Faculty Member: | KAN MIN-YEN | ||
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Semester: | 2 |
| Module Code: | CS3243 | No of Nominations: | 45 |
| 1. | Organized, unarrogant, motivating and simply nice. The best lecturer I've had in Singapore. |
| 2. | I leave that to someone else. But he definitely deserves it. |
| 3. | Genuine ethusiasm and dedication to work. Go the extra mile to ensure that students understand well. |
| 4. | Carefully thought through course material, places a lot of emphasis on student's interests instead of routine material |
| 5. | Very interesting lecturer can make eve very boring subject matter like probability seem very interesting. Is also innovative in giving more thoughtprovoking assignments rather than things which require simple regurgitating or programming. |
| 6. | He is very responsible for his teaching. I never ever met a teacher who treats teaching so seriously like him. |
| 7. | patient guy |
| 8. | Very helpful and approachable. |
| 9. | He is a very dedicated lecturer who takes the time to go through his lectures and webcast them. He is also very helpful and approachable. |
| 10. | The lecturer is approachable and is able to explain concepts clearly. Also, the lecturer allows students to have more freedom when it comes to doing assignments by not restricting that everyone does the same topic. |
| 11. | he shows understanding and concern towards his students. he is courteous even though he's the teacher and has a good attitude. He speaks good and fluent english that makes his lecture enjoyable. |
| 12. | Definitely students' fortune to have such a responsible and dedicated educator. |
| 13. | Good lectures, interesting approach, refreshing down to earth and positive character. |
| 14. | Keen on helping his students in every way he can, actively participates in forums to help students understand concepts better. Friendly. |
| 15. | Excellent teacher! |
| 16. | He is one of the nicest lecturers I've met so far in my 2 years university learning period. I nomite him for his professionalism and patience to us students. Another remarkable point is that he really THINKS how this module can improve, we can see that through the way he designs projects and so on. Thanks! |
| 17. | N.A |
| 18. | He is a nice lecturer. Always be ready for students to consult, or for students to ask any question. Although I do not understand much during his lecture, but his kindness and enthusiasm made my choice. |
| 19. | He is by far the best lecturer I met in NUS. |