Rutgers University Student Instructional Rating
(Online Survey)
Clark
Fall 2013, 14:332:363:03 — Electron Devices Lab (index #25120)
Enrollment= 25, Responses= 14

Part A: University-wide Questions:
Student Responses Weighted Means
Strong
Disagree
1
Strong
Agree
5
No response
 
Section Course Level Dept
1. The instructor was prepared for class and presented the material in an organized manner. 0 1 2 3 5 3 4.09 3.82 4.24 3.99
2. The instructor responded effectively to student comments and questions. 1 0 2 3 7 1 4.15 3.82 4.10 3.95
3. The instructor generated interest in the course material. 0 1 4 2 6 1 4.00 3.68 3.89 3.76
4. The instructor had a positive attitude toward assisting all students in understanding course material. 0 0 2 5 6 1 4.31 3.71 4.18 4.02
5. The instructor assigned grades fairly. 0 1 2 4 6 1 4.15 3.72 4.14 3.97
6. The instructional methods encouraged student learning. 0 2 1 6 3 2 3.83 3.57 3.84 3.66
7. I learned a great deal in this course. 0 2 1 6 4 1 3.92 3.79 3.91 3.80
8. I had a strong prior interest in the subject matter and wanted to take this course. 0 1 2 5 4 2 4.00 3.71 3.64 3.73
 PoorExcellent 
9. I rate the teaching effectiveness of the instructor as: 0 1 2 2 7 2 4.25 3.53 3.82 3.66
10. I rate the overall quality of the course as: 0 3 2 5 3 1 3.62 3.37 3.70 3.58
Part B: Questions Added by Department or Instructor
11. I was satisfied with the degree of utilization and the quality of the Sakai or course web page in this course. 1 0 0 3 8 2 4.42 3.57 3.92 3.77
12. The computer resources were adequate and sufficiently available for the needs of this course. 0 0 1 5 7 1 4.46 4.03 4.10 3.91
13. If a lab course: the necessary equipment to do the work assigned were adequate and sufficiently available. 0 1 0 6 6 1 4.31 4.05 4.22 4.03
14. If a lab course: the experiments were relevant and the laboratory manual was helpful. 1 3 2 4 3 1 3.38 3.54 3.89 3.86
15. If software was used: I was well prepared to complete the assignments using the required software. (e.g., spice, vhdl, matlab, xlinx logi works, etc.) Comment in question #23, below. 0 1 2 3 6 2 4.17 3.75 3.88 3.78
16. Rate the relative difficulty of this course compared with other engineering courses of similar level. 0 0 5 5 3 1 3.85 3.60 3.62 3.62
17. Indicate the degree of your satisfaction with the MODE of presentation of the material (e.g., traditional chalk-and-blackboard, Powerpoint, etc.) Commment in question #23, below. 1 0 3 2 3 5 3.67 3.35 3.67 3.51
18. If a design course: rate the percentage of the content of this course occupied by the design component. Comment in question #23, below. 0 1 1 4 1 7 3.71 3.50 3.51 3.59
19. If the course had prerequisites: rate the degree of preparation these prerequisites gave you for this course. Comment in question #23, below. 1 1 3 5 1 3 3.36 3.58 3.48 3.41

What do you like best about this course?:

Learned a lot

Gradeigh

p spice tutarial and ever present of the TA

Most of the stuff

making circuits


In what ways, if any, has this course or the instructor encouraged your intellectual growth and progress?:

it has made me want to really learn this material

Design and understand different circuit element not yet used in previous courses


If you were teaching this course, what would you do differently?:

grade a little lighter

Help people in section A of labs a bit more because sometimes lecture fall behind


Other comments or suggestions::

Question 14 has two parts. The experiments are great however the lab manual should be updated. So that it does not look like it has been copied several times.

Principles of Engineering 1 and 2 were the worst classes ever and that's partially my fault and partially the instructors'. The class really shouldn't have been that hard.

The lab and lecture didn't line up, so we were required to do labs on material we hadn't learned yet.

None