Rutgers University Student Instructional Rating
Electrical and Computer Engineering (Online Survey)
Ashok Ashwin (Teaching Assistant)
Fall 2009
14:332:347:02 — LIN SYS (index #21101)
Enrollment= 37, Responses= 20
Student Responses
Weighted Means
Strongly
Disagree
1
No
response
4
Strongly
Agree
5
2
3
1. The instructor was prepared for class and presented the material in an organized manner
1
1
2. The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions
0
1
3
8
6
3
7
8
3. The instructor generated interest in the course material
2
4. The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course
material
1
1
4
7
0
2
8
5. The instructor assigned grades fairly
6. The instructional methods encouraged student learning
0
1
6
2
1
3
7. I learned a great deal in this course
1
3
8. I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course
1
2
Section
Course
Level
Dept
1
3.89
4.33
4.24
4.25
1
4.16
4.34
4.11
4.07
5
1
3.63
4.20
3.80
3.81
8
1
4.16
4.47
4.13
4.16
4
8
1
4.00
4.35
4.13
4.12
8
5
1
3.68
4.15
3.76
3.76
5
6
4
1
3.47
4.05
3.78
3.88
5
7
3
2
3.50
3.76
3.53
3.78
Part A: University-wide Questions:
Poor
Excellent
9. I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as
1
1
3
8
6
1
3.89
4.21
3.79
3.82
10. I rate the overall quality of the course as
1
3
6
3
6
1
3.53
3.83
3.61
3.72
11. I was satisfied with the degree of utilization and the quality of the WebCT or course web
page in this course
0
3
6
7
2
2
3.44
3.60
3.72
3.66
12. The computer resources were adequate and sufficiently available for the needs of this course
0
0
7
8
2
3
3.71
3.46
3.68
3.70
13. If a lab course: the necessary equipment to do the work assigned were adequate and
sufficiently available
0
0
5
7
4
4
3.94
3.34
3.56
3.75
14. If a lab course: the experiments were relevant and the laboratory manual was helpful
0
0
6
8
2
4
3.75
3.88
3.74
3.80
15. If software was used: I was well prepared to complete the assignments using the required
software
1
1
5
7
3
3
3.59
3.81
3.47
3.43
2
3.50
3.52
3.75
3.59
6
3.57
3.96
3.73
3.75
13
3.71
3.93
3.59
3.62
8
3.50
3.54
3.49
3.50
Part B: Questions Added by Department or Instructor
Easy
16. Rate the relative difficulty of this course compared with other engineering courses of similar
level
0
Hard
1
9
6
Overhaul
Completely
17. Indicate the degree of your satisfaction with the MODE of presentation of the material
0
Do not
change
1
5
7
0
2
5
2
4
4
Low
18. If a design course: rate the percentage of the content of this course occupied by the design
component
0
0
1
High
Poor
19. If the course had prerequisites: rate the degree of preparation these prerequisites gave you
for this course
2
0
Excellent
2
Rutgers University Student Instructional Rating
Electrical and Computer Engineering (Online Survey)
Ashok Ashwin (Teaching Assistant)
Fall 2009
14:332:347:03 — LIN SYS (index #24673)
Enrollment= 45, Responses= 22
Student Responses
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
1. The instructor was prepared for class and presented the material in an organized manner
0
2. The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions
1
3. The instructor generated interest in the course material
4. The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course
material
Weighted Means
3
4
Strongly
Agree
5
1
9
7
5
0
10
6
5
1
1
5
8
0
1
5
9
5. The instructor assigned grades fairly
0
1
4
6. The instructional methods encouraged student learning
2
0
8
7. I learned a great deal in this course
1
2
8. I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course
1
3
No
response
Section
Course
Level
Dept
0
3.73
4.33
4.24
4.25
0
3.64
4.34
4.11
4.07
6
1
3.81
4.20
3.80
3.81
7
0
4.00
4.47
4.13
4.16
9
8
0
4.09
4.35
4.13
4.12
6
6
0
3.64
4.15
3.76
3.76
7
6
6
0
3.64
4.05
3.78
3.88
9
5
4
0
3.36
3.76
3.53
3.78
Part A: University-wide Questions:
Poor
Excellent
9. I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as
0
2
7
9
4
0
3.68
4.21
3.79
3.82
10. I rate the overall quality of the course as
2
1
6
8
4
1
3.52
3.83
3.61
3.72
11. I was satisfied with the degree of utilization and the quality of the WebCT or course web
page in this course
3
2
5
5
2
5
3.06
3.60
3.72
3.66
12. The computer resources were adequate and sufficiently available for the needs of this course
4
3
3
7
3
2
3.10
3.46
3.68
3.70
13. If a lab course: the necessary equipment to do the work assigned were adequate and
sufficiently available
7
3
4
4
3
1
2.67
3.34
3.56
3.75
14. If a lab course: the experiments were relevant and the laboratory manual was helpful
1
2
7
7
4
1
3.52
3.88
3.74
3.80
15. If software was used: I was well prepared to complete the assignments using the required
software
2
1
5
9
4
1
3.57
3.81
3.47
3.43
1
3.24
3.52
3.75
3.59
1
3.71
3.96
3.73
3.75
12
3.40
3.93
3.59
3.62
3
3.32
3.54
3.49
3.50
Part B: Questions Added by Department or Instructor
Easy
16. Rate the relative difficulty of this course compared with other engineering courses of similar
level
0
Hard
5
7
8
Overhaul
Completely
17. Indicate the degree of your satisfaction with the MODE of presentation of the material
1
Do not
change
1
5
10
0
4
4
2
5
8
Low
18. If a design course: rate the percentage of the content of this course occupied by the design
component
1
2
4
High
Poor
19. If the course had prerequisites: rate the degree of preparation these prerequisites gave you
for this course
1
1
Excellent
2
Rutgers University Student Instructional Rating
Electrical and Computer Engineering (Online Survey)
Ashok Ashwin (Teaching Assistant)
Spring 2010
14:332:226:01 — PROBABLTY (index #70050)
Enrollment= 42, Responses= 16
Student Responses
Weighted Means
Strongly
Disagree
1
No
response
4
Strongly
Agree
5
2
3
1. The instructor was prepared for class and presented the material in an organized manner
0
1
2. The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions
0
2
5
5
5
3
5
6
3. The instructor generated interest in the course material
2
4. The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course
material
0
0
6
3
0
3
5
5. The instructor assigned grades fairly
6. The instructional methods encouraged student learning
0
0
3
2
0
5
7. I learned a great deal in this course
2
0
8. I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course
0
1
Section
Course
Level
Dept
0
3.88
4.22
4.10
4.18
0
3.94
4.31
4.08
4.12
5
0
3.56
4.08
3.78
3.86
7
1
4.27
4.33
4.09
4.21
4
9
0
4.38
4.26
3.98
4.03
4
4
1
3.53
3.99
3.73
3.76
4
4
6
0
3.75
3.92
3.81
3.81
6
4
5
0
3.81
3.45
3.68
3.71
Part A: University-wide Questions:
Poor
Excellent
9. I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as
1
1
5
4
5
0
3.69
3.99
3.76
3.81
10. I rate the overall quality of the course as
0
2
4
5
5
0
3.81
3.82
3.61
3.70
11. I was satisfied with the degree of utilization and the quality of the WebCT or course web
page in this course
0
1
6
3
5
1
3.80
3.90
3.77
3.84
12. The computer resources were adequate and sufficiently available for the needs of this course
0
0
5
1
3
7
3.78
3.76
3.80
3.88
13. If a lab course: the necessary equipment to do the work assigned were adequate and
sufficiently available
0
0
4
0
1
11
3.40
3.70
3.88
4.01
14. If a lab course: the experiments were relevant and the laboratory manual was helpful
0
0
4
0
1
11
3.40
3.70
3.66
3.86
15. If software was used: I was well prepared to complete the assignments using the required
software
0
0
4
0
1
11
3.40
3.53
3.58
3.72
0
3.88
3.70
3.61
3.53
0
3.56
3.79
3.59
3.64
11
3.00
3.30
3.36
3.59
3
3.31
3.42
3.45
3.57
Part B: Questions Added by Department or Instructor
Easy
16. Rate the relative difficulty of this course compared with other engineering courses of similar
level
0
Hard
1
5
5
Overhaul
Completely
17. Indicate the degree of your satisfaction with the MODE of presentation of the material
0
Do not
change
1
9
2
0
5
0
0
6
2
Low
18. If a design course: rate the percentage of the content of this course occupied by the design
component
0
2
4
High
Poor
19. If the course had prerequisites: rate the degree of preparation these prerequisites gave you
for this course
5
0
Excellent
3
Rutgers University Student Instructional Rating
Electrical and Computer Engineering (Online Survey)
Ashok Ashwin (Teaching Assistant)
Spring 2010
14:332:226:04 — PROBABLTY (index #70506)
Enrollment= 38, Responses= 14
Student Responses
Weighted Means
Strongly
Disagree
1
No
response
4
Strongly
Agree
5
2
3
1. The instructor was prepared for class and presented the material in an organized manner
1
5
2. The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions
1
4
4
3
1
3
5
1
3. The instructor generated interest in the course material
3
4. The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course
material
2
4
3
3
2
4
4
5. The instructor assigned grades fairly
6. The instructional methods encouraged student learning
2
2
3
3
4
4
7. I learned a great deal in this course
3
1
8. I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course
2
4
Section
Course
Level
Dept
0
2.86
4.22
4.10
4.18
0
3.07
4.31
4.08
4.12
1
0
2.64
4.08
3.78
3.86
1
1
3.00
4.33
4.09
4.21
4
1
2
3.00
4.26
3.98
4.03
1
1
1
2.46
3.99
3.73
3.76
5
2
2
1
2.92
3.92
3.81
3.81
3
2
2
1
2.85
3.45
3.68
3.71
Part A: University-wide Questions:
Poor
Excellent
9. I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as
3
3
3
3
1
1
2.69
3.99
3.76
3.81
10. I rate the overall quality of the course as
3
2
4
3
1
1
2.77
3.82
3.61
3.70
11. I was satisfied with the degree of utilization and the quality of the WebCT or course web
page in this course
1
4
4
3
0
2
2.75
3.90
3.77
3.84
12. The computer resources were adequate and sufficiently available for the needs of this course
1
3
4
3
0
3
2.82
3.76
3.80
3.88
13. If a lab course: the necessary equipment to do the work assigned were adequate and
sufficiently available
1
1
3
0
0
9
2.40
3.70
3.88
4.01
14. If a lab course: the experiments were relevant and the laboratory manual was helpful
1
1
2
1
0
9
2.60
3.70
3.66
3.86
15. If software was used: I was well prepared to complete the assignments using the required
software
1
3
2
0
0
8
2.17
3.53
3.58
3.72
1
3.31
3.70
3.61
3.53
1
3.31
3.79
3.59
3.64
8
2.67
3.30
3.36
3.59
5
2.78
3.42
3.45
3.57
Part B: Questions Added by Department or Instructor
Easy
16. Rate the relative difficulty of this course compared with other engineering courses of similar
level
1
Hard
1
5
5
Overhaul
Completely
17. Indicate the degree of your satisfaction with the MODE of presentation of the material
1
Do not
change
2
5
2
1
3
1
3
3
1
Low
18. If a design course: rate the percentage of the content of this course occupied by the design
component
1
1
3
High
Poor
19. If the course had prerequisites: rate the degree of preparation these prerequisites gave you
for this course
1
0
Excellent
1