CSE 574 Instructor Evaluation Spring 2003
58114 SUBBARAO KAMBHAMPATI
7/9 77.78%
PART 1: STUDENT EVALUATION OF THE COURSE
1
 Textbook/supplementary material in support of the course.
6
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
1
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
6
85.7
 
4
Good
0
0
 
3
Fair
0
0
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
1
14.3
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
2
 Value of assigned homework in support of course topics.
4
5
3
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
4
57.1
 
4
Good
3
42.9
 
3
Fair
0
0
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.57
 
 
3
 Value of laboratory assignments/projects in support of the course topics.
3
5
1
4
2
3
0
2
1
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
3
42.9
 
4
Good
1
14.3
 
3
Fair
2
28.6
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
1
14.3
 
 
Avg
4.17
 
 
4
 Reasonableness of exams and quizzes in covering course material.
3
5
4
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
3
42.9
 
4
Good
4
57.1
 
3
Fair
0
0
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.43
 
 
5
 Weight given to labs or projects, relative to exams and quizzes.
4
5
2
4
1
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
4
57.1
 
4
Good
2
28.6
 
3
Fair
1
14.3
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.43
 
 
6
 Weight given to homework assignments, relative to exams and quizzes.
4
5
2
4
1
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
4
57.1
 
4
Good
2
28.6
 
3
Fair
1
14.3
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.43
 
 
7
 Definition and application of criteria for grading.
2
5
3
4
2
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Very Good
2
28.6
 
4
Good
3
42.9
 
3
Fair
2
28.6
 
2
Poor
0
0
 
1
Not Applicable
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.00
 
 
Overall Course Avg
4.43
PART 2: STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTOR
8
 The instructor was well prepared.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
9
 The instructor communicated ideas clearly.
6
5
1
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
6
85.7
 
4
Usually
1
14.3
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.86
 
 
10
 The instructor or assistants were available for outside assistance.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
11
 The instructor exhibited enthusiasm for and interest in the subject.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
12
 The instructor's approach stimulated student thinking.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
13
 The instructor related course material to its applications.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
14
 The instructor's methods of presentation supported student learning.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
7
100.0
 
4
Usually
0
0
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
15
 The instructor's grading was fair, impartial, and adequate.
5
5
2
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
5
71.4
 
4
Usually
2
28.6
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.71
 
 
16
 The instructor returned graded materials within a reasonable period.
3
5
4
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Almost Always
3
42.9
 
4
Usually
4
57.1
 
3
50% of the time
0
0
 
2
Occasionally
0
0
 
1
Almost Never
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.43
 
 
Overall Instructor Avg
4.89
OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE COURSE AND INSTRUCTOR
17
 Overall quality of the course and instruction.
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Excellent
7
100.0
 
4
Very good
0
0
 
3
Good
0
0
 
2
Fair
0
0
 
1
Poor
0
0
 
 
Avg
5.00
 
 
18
 How do you rate yourself as a student in this course?
2
5
3
4
2
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Excellent
2
28.6
 
4
Very good
3
42.9
 
3
Good
2
28.6
 
2
Fair
0
0
 
1
Poor
0
0
 
 
Avg
4.00
 
 
GENERAL INFORMATION
19
 Is this a required course in your program of study?
2
2
5
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
2
No
2
28.6
 
1
Yes
5
71.4
 
20
 What are the average hours/week spent studying for this course?
0
5
0
4
1
3
2
2
4
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
1
0
0
 
4
2
0
0
 
3
4
1
14.3
 
2
8
2
28.6
 
1
16
4
57.1
 
21
 What is your class standing?
7
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
Graduate Student
7
100.0
 
4
Senior
0
0
 
3
Junior
0
0
 
2
Sophomore
0
0
 
1
Freshman
0
0
 
22
 What % of the class meetings have you attended?
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
7
1
 
 Response
Count
Per
 
5
10 to 29
0
0
 
4
30 to 49
0
0
 
3
50 to 69
0
0
 
2
70 to 89
0
0
 
1
90 to 100
7
100.0
 
23
 What did you like most about this course?
  
All of the material was very thought provoking and interesting.  I
thoroughly enjoyed the subject of temporal planning and especially
liked the chance to create my own classic and temporal domains.  All
of the projects and homeworks were well thought out and allowed me to
discover some of the ideas and concepts on my own rather than
memorizing them from the lecture.
  
I liked the instructor's ability to communicate ideas through use of
real-life examples of theory.
  
The way teacher communicated ideas.
  
Great course, great lectures. Every class was full of enthusiam and
had loads of crazy, funny, and great examples.
  
Very good instructor and course content , he teaches from the
basics . Homeworks and projects were very challenging and useful to
understand the subject in-depth
24
 What did you like least about this course?
  
The midterm exam was a bit frightening at first.  I disliked the final
problems -- they felt like busy work and I found myself writing more
than thinking.  I think there may have been a way to test our
knowledge on the encodings without asking us to write out each one or
at least giving the warning "this may be easier to type".
  
The projects were somewhat easy and didn't challenge me enough.
  
Too much busy-work.
  
There were a lot of readings, I had a hard time to keep up with the
speed of the course. I would prefer to know the readings more time in
advance, sometimes the readings for Thursdays were given on Tuesday
(personally, I would prefer to have about a week or more notice for
this).
  
too short to cover in a semester
25
 Comments
  
I took CSE471 with Dr. Kambhampati some time ago and enjoyed it.  I
always wanted to take the planning class but missed it in the past due
to time constraints. I am glad it was offered again and hope that it
can be offered at least once a year.  This topic is interesting,
thought-provoking, and practical.  Plus, Dr. Kambhampati is one of the
best instructors I've had.  His lectures needed little outside
clarification (which I think explains his sometimes-spoken-about empty
office during his office hours. :) ).  The slides are a great help and
the note-taking program is helpful in that it keeps students involved
in the class.
Thank you.
  
The course helped me fill in a lot of holes in my understanding of
the subject.
  
The definition and application of criteria for grading wasn't really
clear, however I am not sure whether this is a advantage or
disadvantage.