COURSE EVALUATION MANAGER C S 200-1 Foundations Of Computer Scienc - Spring 2003 INSTRUCTORS: Evans, David Respondents: 19

1. How challenging was the subject matter? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 19 4.37 0.96 10 (52.63%) 8 (42.11%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%) 1 (5.26%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 965 3.78 0.81 167 (17.31%) 473 (49.02%) 277 (28.70%) 38 (3.94%) 10 (1.04%) 2. How well were the objectives of the course accomplished? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 19 4.32 0.75 9 (47.37%) 7 (36.84%) 3 (15.79%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 961 3.74 0.92 207 (21.54%) 390 (40.58%) 292 (30.39%) 54 (5.62%) 18 (1.87%) 3. How reasonable was the required level of effort for the credit hours received? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 3.94 1.00 6 (33.33%) 7 (38.89%) 3 (16.67%) 2 (11.11%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 960 3.41 0.94 127 (13.23%) 289 (30.10%) 419 (43.65%) 99 (10.31%) 26 (2.71%) 4. How useful were the homework assignments in helping you learn the course subject matter? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.56 0.62 11 (61.11%) 6 (33.33%) 1 (5.56%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 948 3.70 0.94 195 (20.57%) 378 (39.87%) 285 (30.06%) 75 (7.91%) 15 (1.58%) 5. How helpful was the textbook in increasing your understanding of the material? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 3.06 0.87 1 (5.56%) 4 (22.22%) 8 (44.44%) 5 (27.78%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 935 3.14 1.09 96 (10.27%) 259 (27.70%) 348 (37.22%) 145 (15.51%) 87 (9.30%) 6. How well was the course material organized and developed? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.22 0.73 7 (38.89%) 8 (44.44%) 3 (16.67%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1094 3.71 1.03 282 (25.78%) 372 (34.00%) 307 (28.06%) 107 (9.78%) 26 (2.38%) 7. How knowledgeable of the subject matter was the instructor? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.83 0.38 15 (83.33%) 3 (16.67%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1091 4.18 0.89 480 (44.00%) 383 (35.11%) 185 (16.96%) 29 (2.66%) 14 (1.28%) 8. How prepared for class was the instructor? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.78 0.43 14 (77.78%) 4 (22.22%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1097 4.08 0.97 465 (42.39%) 335 (30.54%) 228 (20.78%) 57 (5.20%) 12 (1.09%) 9. How accessible for individual assistance was the instructor (excluding Teaching Assistants)? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.44 0.78 11 (61.11%) 4 (22.22%) 3 (16.67%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1079 3.70 0.96 261 (24.19%) 336 (31.14%) 402 (37.26%) 60 (5.56%) 20 (1.85%) 10. How fair was the grading policy? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.33 0.59 7 (38.89%) 10 (55.56%) 1 (5.56%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1093 3.49 0.96 169 (15.46%) 362 (33.12%) 436 (39.89%) 92 (8.42%) 34 (3.11%) 11. How adequate in response to in-class questions was the instructor? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.39 0.85 11 (61.11%) 3 (16.67%) 4 (22.22%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1096 3.86 0.96 313 (28.56%) 429 (39.14%) 259 (23.63%) 78 (7.12%) 17 (1.55%) 12. How representative of the major points of the course were the quizzes? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 17 3.88 0.70 3 (17.65%) 9 (52.94%) 5 (29.41%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1039 3.53 0.89 151 (14.53%) 360 (34.65%) 433 (41.67%) 75 (7.22%) 20 (1.92%) 13. How do you rate this instructor as a teacher, relative to others in this School? ~ Question Type: Likert ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science   Results for C S-200-0001 Evans, David Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 18 4.61 0.78 14 (77.78%) 1 (5.56%) 3 (16.67%) 0 (0.00%) 0 (0.00%)   Results for SEAS, 200-level courses Total Mean Std Dev Well above average (5) Above average (4) Average (3) Below average (2) Well below average (1) 1097 3.80 1.08 340 (30.99%) 368 (33.55%) 263 (23.97%) 82 (7.47%) 44 (4.01%) 14. Write any general comments in the space below: ~ Question Type: Short Answer ~ 1 answer(s) allowed; contributed by Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science    C S-200-0001 Total Individual Answers 13 CS200 is one of the best courses I have taken at UVA, and David Evans is a titan among men. I really enjoyed this class. It was very differnt from almost any other class I have taken at the University. It promoted lots of hands on experinece and learning by doing. Although I confess to feeling very confused at some points in the course I think this course has really challenged me and changed the way I think. I am very happy I was able to take a class like this, if only for a change to read GEB. I was very glad that the instructor took effort into consideration, as I did not do particularly well on the tests, however, I put a lot of effort into the class, and about 20 hours on average per problem set great class, should be taught again great class! Great Class, I would like to see more like it. Dave Evans is incredibly knowledgable of the subject matter taught in this class, and is available for outside help always. However, the subject matter of the course was much too theoretical. With abstract concepts such as these, it is usually useful for a professor to teach/explain the subject matter in different ways so that students with different learning styles can grasp the concepts. for this course it seemed like the concepts were repeated over and over the same way, when just making an analogy or teaching a different way would have worked better. For this reason,(different learning styles), especially in a class such as computer science, it would help to have a book with detailed instruction, instead of having the class be dependent on the professor as their only source of information. The text book in this class was hardly helpful. Despite these things though, the class was interesting. Dave Evans is the most dedicated professor I have ever had. It is clear that he enjoys teaching and enjoys the material. His love and interest in computer science is contagious. Best and most worthwhile course I have taken in my four years of college. Class was extremely interesting. Dave was awesome at explaining everything. Overall a class i am very glad i took. This course should definitely be offered again. It is a dynamic introduction to computer science. This class is too much work for the number of credits it is alotted. It should be 4 credits worth. (Rather than less work given.) great class! I got a lot out of it, and i probably wouldn't have it weren't presented in a fun, interactive manner. Problem sets helped w/ understanding a lot, but sometimes were just too time consuming (especially for those of us that had never done anything like this before). Lab hours helped a ton. The final problem set could've been explained a little better. I'm not really sure how the grading will work, but I'm assuming it will be done in away that reflects the amount of effort we put into the course. Overall it is a great class and I would recommend it to anyone. The material of the class was extremely challenging, and seemed overwhelming at the beginning of the course, but the professor was very eager to help me understand the material that I found confusing.

The Instructional Toolkit is maintained by itc-toolkit@virginia.edu © 1996-2003 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia