Skip to main content

Survey Results



Course Survey Results


Carleton   Moore
  TA: ${survey.ta} :
  ICS314, Spring 2023

Campus: University of Hawaii at Manoa Course: ICS 314 - Software Engineering I
Department:   Information& Computer Sciences Crn (Section):   83173 (002)    
TA: Ana Oliveira Araujo


1.   Global appraisal: Overall how would you rate this INSTRUCTOR?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor (1)  Poor (2)  Average (3)  Good (4)  Very Good (5) 
4.47 30 0.57   0(0%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 14(47%) 15(50%)
2.   Considering everything, how would you rate the GA/TA’s sections of this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor (1)  Poor (2)  Average (3)  Good (4)  Excellent (5) 
3.9 30 0.84   0(0%) 1(3%) 9(30%) 12(40%) 8(27%)
3.   Considering everything, how would you rate the LAB for this course?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor (1)  Poor (2)  Average (3)  Good (4)  Excellent (5) 
4.1 30 0.76   0(0%) 0(0%) 7(23%) 13(43%) 10(33%)

4.   What did you find most valuable and helpful about the instructor?
weekly quiz(WOD) and homework(EE)
He teaches you instead of reading off a slide / droning on about a topic.
great teacher, one of my favorite classes
It was good
I found the professors technical know how made understanding how we as software developers should properly code our software. Also with the technology we use the professor was very knowledgeable on problems.
The instructor explain things in a clear manner when asked for assistance with coding.
The instructor has in-depth knowledge and expertise in the field
Very knowledgeable and does his best to help us when we need it.
Provided a lot of resources to help with assignments and in-class assessments. Lots of study material was required assignments so it was a lot more streamlined than looking online for scattered notes to help with assignments and assessments. In-person was very useful in this class as I got to properly communicate with classmates and work together to find solutions.
I liked Dr. Moore's enthusiasm for the course and good sense of humor. These things made the classroom experience very enjoyable. He was also very accommodating and made himself available for students to meet with him.
He has good insight on the topics and can answer deeper questions past just the content of the class.
He gives good feedback
He is very knowledgeable and open to questions.
various exercises provided by the instructor.
almost always available for questions
It was very helpful to see and compare the instructor's WOD solution with our own.
I think that the instructor allowed us to learn on our own time and helped us along the way.
I felt that the most valuable part is the availability outside of class. Being able to answer questions through a medium like discord made it convenient to reach him.
Explained expectations of assignments well.
What I found the most valuable was how knowledgeable he was in the subject, that for every error I encountered, he had the solution to the error.
The WODs make sure you are prepared for the upcoming week, certain assignments are really helpful.
The provision of video tutorials that walked the student through new and complicated concepts. The instructor was also understanding of the circumstances of students, and encouraged students to complete work in a manner that actually facilitated learning.
Very enthusiastic and available to help.
Course material integrates well together
Practical coursework
The instructors and screen casts were very knowledgeable in their fields with a wealth of experience to draw from, which made the course content very dependable. I enjoyed the online videos and modules and the high stakes WODs really forced students to learn the material.
When I get stuck on something, such as homework, or when I don't know the cause, I will work with you to solve the cause.
Instructor is willing to help and is knowledgeable about the subject.
Wod is the most valuable for getting imporvement of my development


5.   What did you find least valuable and helpful about the instructor?
some of the in-class lecture
N/a
Everything was great. One of my favorite classes.
It was good
Somewhat of a good/bad but the very open ended nature of how the professor taught the class. For this class, the reverse classroom worked, but sometimes it was a little frustrating, that a quick question to the professor could fix.
None
The class lectures are mostly conducted online
None
I really have no complaints.
Since the class is reversed, he doesn't explain much (except for in screencasts sometimes).
none
Sometimes class would end very early, which made fighting traffic to town not worthwhile.
I understand that we need constructive feedback for our projects, but sometimes his feedback felt repetitive and judgy sometimes. For example, based on the feedback from the other groups we know that we also need to fix our issues, but he kept on repeating what he had said in a judgy manner.
I think the least valuable is the fact that we are expected to do a lot more of the studying by ourselves at home. Of course, there are many courses structured in this fashion, but for this course specifically, it is quite difficult to do everything outside of class and in our own time.
Didn't really go over material from the screencasts.
n/a
The screencasts are a hard way to learn, especially at the end where we have to connect the front end and back end.
The structure of the course website was unnecessarily convoluted. Assignments were due at inconsistent times. It was often difficult to find the necessary resources to complete an assignment. Many assignments required the student to read through entire docs of a framework and install software on their own, and often the instructions were limited or designed for MAC users only. This lead to many hours spent on simply installing some program with faulty instructions, rather than actually learning.
None.
I feel like difficulty of assignments is a little exaggerated
I did not like the presentation style in the videos. The content on the slides were important and what the professor was talking about was important, but they were often unrelated to one another. I found myself having to pause the video, copy the slides down then listen to the professor talk. This wasn't terrible, but a suggested area to improve is sync the slides up with the talking a little better. (I was given the impression someone else made the slides and the presenter was just eyeballing them as they were talking and drawing talking points form their own experience.)
nothing
He shows how to find the figure out the solution of the problem by myself.

6.   The instructor is fair and objective in evaluating students.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.73 30 0.45   0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 8(27%) 22(73%)
7.   The instructor is well prepared and organized.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.6 30 0.56   0(0%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 10(33%) 19(63%)

8.   Which aspect of the course were most valuable?
WOD and practice WOD
Learning about web development
learning react
It was good
Being able to actually go into make an application and actually feeling the building blocks getting stacked was very rewarding.
The WODs were very helpful for solidifying one's understanding of the material.
WODS
learning about software engineering and all its framework and making cool webpages.
Learning about Javascript, Software Engineering, and how to work in a team to create a project
I think the regular exercises were definitely the most valuable. The WODs were also very good incentive to practice applying the material learned in class.
The final project at the end
Learning how to work in a group and with a deadline
various exercises
the constant reminders of where weʻre at in the semester and what assignments were coming up
The In-Class WODs. They force you to understand the material.
I really liked the group-based project, I think it really showed us what it's like to work on a team on a real-life project and this is extremely valuable in the field of computer science.
I like that it slowly built up, and covered everything from Javascript, html, CSS, Bootstrap, React, etc.
The assignments were achievable and easy to understand.
The most valuable thing about the course was the amount of work per class. There was not a lot of dead time and we work in every class.
The WOD, tested how well you understood the topics.
The use of Github, the creation of a professional portfolio, and the final project allowed students to apply programming in a practical manner that matched real-life scenarios. The athletic software engineering style of the WODs also provided a new sense of rigor that I assume would replicate the time intensive requirements of a real job.
Everything.
I feel like the material in the class is very applicable especially the final project
The hands off approach where students learned the material on their own, and collaborated in person was superb. Some teachers try this but it is not well executed. This class had a great synergy where students could collaborate on the things they learned on their own everyday in class.
Do assignments multiple time to increase knowledge and could prepare for WOD to write programming in time.
Weekly practices (WODs) are helpful to reinforce student’s learning.
The way I can survive as a competitive developer


9.   Which aspect of the course were least valuable?
Nothing
The short amount of time that we spent on some subjects, finishing them in 1 class or so.
maybe use something more updated than meteor but nothing too crazy.
It was good
Not really least valuable as its still important but the covering of ethics in software engineering. I know not everyone has taken ICS 390, but it felt like a repeat of that class for that one day.
The lack of in-class lectures.
All aspects of the course are valuable
TA WODs, only because I was able to do 90% of the WODs based off the information I learned from the homeworks. It may have been valuable to other people.
While I did like the experiences, there were also a lot of them. Having assignments due nearly every night can be really hard on students with a full schedule, plus extracurricular commitments.
Personally, the screencasts were not valuable
the screencasts
none
the amount of assignments even though they do help sometimes it was overwhelming
The Scheduled TA WODs. They only posted the link to the WOD. There were no comments, feedback, or hints to the participants when no one finished. It was a waste of time to be paired with (usually) silent partners at such a late time in the day. The value was in the WOD itself. It was also difficult to get useful help from the TA. Any time I asked a question, the answer made me more confused. It was more useful to use Google. At least one TA WOD provided an outdated template which made completing the actual WOD impossible if you did not participate in the previous WOD. They should have attempted the WOD themself to make sure it was doable.
I think some of the practice WOD homework were too much for one week sometimes, but the WOD's were super beneficial overall.
What was least valuable was the time we spent dedicated to in-class assessments. We only have two classes, one on Tuesday and one on Thursday, and for a majority of the weeks, we would have a test called a 'WOD' on Thursday. Thus, we practically spend all of our "learning" classtime on Tuesdays, and only a few Thursdays during the very beginning and very end of the semester.
There were a lot of assignments given daily that made me stressed out sometimes.
It's hard to find an aspect that was "least valuable." Probably the screencasts.
The screencasts were a hard way to learn and I preferred watching a different Youtube video.
The assignment of reading numerous extensive entire docs of a framework as a prerequisite to any new framework, with no summarized list of the main concept we should know. It is unrealistic to assume students have the time or ability to absorb hundred of pages of documents.
None.
The essays
The ICS website which gave all assignments needs some polishing up, some sections weren't present that were in the videos. I also think the content needs to be modernized. Generative AI is a crazy new tool that was released in 2023 and its going to change the way coders do things.
Skip what you don't understand with not asking questions will leads to when it same problem happen it cannot deals with that problem.
Daily assignment might be a little overwhelming, maybe one in every other day would be better.
Too strict for some in-person challenging assignment, and homework


10.   Other comments?
None
Overall great class!
It was good
None
None
None
No other comments
No other comments
None.
N/A
It's easy to imitate, but you get nothing out of it.

11.   The instructor was open to comments and questions.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Rarely (1)  Sometimes (2)  Frequently (3)  Generally (4)  Almost Always (5) 
4.63 30 0.72   0(0%) 1(3%) 1(3%) 6(20%) 22(73%)
12.   The course was a valuable contribution to my education.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.67 30 0.66   0(0%) 1(3%) 0(0%) 7(23%) 22(73%)
13.   I learned a lot in this course.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.73 30 0.64   0(0%) 1(3%) 0(0%) 5(17%) 24(80%)
14.   The instructor treated students with respect.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.77 30 0.5   0(0%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 5(17%) 24(80%)
15.   The instructor demonstrated knowledge of the course content.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.79 29 0.41   0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 6(21%) 23(79%)
16.   This course challenged me intellectually.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.53 30 0.86   1(3%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 8(27%) 20(67%)
17.   The instructor both sets high standards and helps students achieve them.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.53 30 0.63   0(0%) 0(0%) 2(7%) 10(33%) 18(60%)
18.   The instructor was available for consultation.

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Strongly Disagree (1)  Disagree (2)  Neutral (3)  Agree (4)  Strongly Agree (5) 
4.7 30 0.53   0(0%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 7(23%) 22(73%)
19.   Considering everything, how would you rate this COURSE?

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Very Poor (1)  Poor (2)  Average (3)  Good (4)  Excellent (5) 
4.67 30 0.55   0(0%) 0(0%) 1(3%) 8(27%) 21(70%)
20.   What was the format of this class? online synchronous (class scheduled for particular days and times) online asynchronous (class conducted online - no scheduled class meeting)

Mean N-Size Std Dev   Online Synchronous ()  Online Asynchronous ()  In Person ()  Hybrid: In Person and Online Synchronous ()  Hybrid: In Person and Online Asynchronous ()  Hybrid: Online Synchronous and Asynchronous ()  Other () 
0.0 30 0.0   0(0%) 0(0%) 28(93%) 1(3%) 1(3%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

21.   If you answered 'Other' for the question above, please specify.
None