1. COURSE SUMMARY REPORT
Numeric Responses
Univ. of Washington, Tacoma
Institute of Technology
Term: Winter 2016
TCSS 390 A
Undergraduate Seminar In Css
Course type: Face-to-Face
Online
C
7/16 ( 43%)
Evaluation Delivery:
Evaluation Form:
Responses:
Taught by: Donald Chinn
Instructor Evaluated: Donald Chinn-Assoc Prof
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
Overall Summative Rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative
items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class's quality:
Combined
Median
Adjusted
Combined
Median
4.5 4.7
(0=lowest; 5=highest)
Challenge and Engagement Index (CEI) combines student responses to several IASystem items relating
to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were:
CEI: 5.9
(1=lowest; 7=highest)
98806 98806
SUMMATIVE ITEMS
N
Excellent
(5)
Very
Good
(4)
Good
(3)
Fair
(2)
Poor
(1)
Very
Poor
(0) Median
Adjusted
Median
The course as a whole was: 7 43% 14% 43% 4.0 4.2
The course content was: 7 43% 14% 43% 4.0 4.1
The instructor's contribution to the course was: 7 57% 14% 29% 4.6 4.8
The instructor's effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was: 7 57% 14% 29% 4.6 4.8
Relative to other college courses you have taken: N
Much
Higher
(7) (6) (5)
Average
(4) (3) (2)
Much
Lower
(1) Median
Do you expect your grade in this course to be: 7 14% 29% 57% 4.4
The intellectual challenge presented was: 7 29% 43% 14% 14% 6.0
The amount of effort you put into this course was: 7 29% 29% 29% 14% 5.8
The amount of effort to succeed in this course was: 7 29% 29% 43% 5.8
Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.)
was:
7 29% 29% 29% 14% 5.8
On average, how many hours per week have you spent on this course,
including attending classes, doing readings, reviewing notes, writing
papers and any other course related work?
Class median: 12.5 Hours per credit: 6.2 (N=6)
Under 2 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-21 22 or more
50% 50%
From the total average hours above, how many do you consider were
valuable in advancing your education?
Class median: 12.5 Hours per credit: 6.2 (N=6)
Under 2 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15 16-17 18-19 20-21 22 or more
50% 50%
What grade do you expect in this course? Class median: 3.7 (N=6)
A
(3.9-4.0)
A-
(3.5-3.8)
B+
(3.2-3.4)
B
(2.9-3.1)
B-
(2.5-2.8)
C+
(2.2-2.4)
C
(1.9-2.1)
C-
(1.5-1.8)
D+
(1.2-1.4)
D
(0.9-1.1)
D-
(0.7-0.8)
E
(0.0) Pass Credit No Credit
17% 33% 17% 33%
In regard to your academic program, is this course best described as: (N=6)
In your major
A core/distribution
requirement An elective In your minor A program requirement Other
33% 17% 50%
Printed: 3/22/16
Page 1 of 3
© 2014, IASystem, University of Washington
Survey no: 98806

2. COURSE SUMMARY REPORT
Numeric Responses
Univ. of Washington, Tacoma
Institute of Technology
Term: Winter 2016
STANDARD FORMATIVE ITEMS
N
Excellent
(5)
Very
Good
(4)
Good
(3)
Fair
(2)
Poor
(1)
Very
Poor
(0) Median
Relative
Rank
Course organization was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 3
Instructor's preparation for class was: 7 43% 14% 29% 14% 4.0 18
Instructor as a discussion leader was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 14
Instructor's contribution to discussion was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 16
Conduciveness of class atmosphere to student learning was: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 9
Quality of questions or problems raised was: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 11
Student confidence in instructor's knowledge was: 7 71% 14% 14% 4.8 1
Instructor's enthusiasm was: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 15
Encouragement given students to express themselves was: 7 57% 14% 29% 4.6 2
Instructor's openness to student views was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 17
Interest level of class sessions was: 7 43% 14% 43% 4.0 12
Use of class time was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 10
Instructor's interest in whether students learned was: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 13
Amount you learned in the course was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 6
Relevance and usefulness of course content were: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 8
Evaluative and grading techniques (tests, papers, projects, etc.) were: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 5
Reasonableness of assigned work was: 7 43% 29% 29% 4.2 7
Clarity of student responsibilities and requirements was: 7 43% 43% 14% 4.3 4
Printed: 3/22/16
Page 2 of 3
© 2014, IASystem, University of Washington
Survey no: 98806

3. COURSE SUMMARY REPORT
Student Comments
Univ. of Washington, Tacoma
Institute of Technology
Term: Winter 2016
TCSS 390 A
Undergraduate Seminar In Css
Course type: Face-to-Face
Online
C
7/16 ( 43%)
Evaluation Delivery:
Evaluation Form:
Responses:
Taught by: Donald Chinn
Instructor Evaluated: Donald Chinn-Assoc Prof
98806 98806
STANDARD OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
Was this class intellectually stimulating? Did it stretch your thinking? Why or why not?
1. It really did making think of computer science differently than I ever did. It made me practice more so I can understand the concept more.
2. Yes, this class was intellectually stimulating. This seminar is connected to the Java 143 class, and the questions and worksheets we did in this class
were helpful and different and stretched my thinking!!
3. It's a great opportunity for students to recap on what they have learned in order to retain the information better.
4. The practice questions
5. This class was intellectually stimulating and really helped me new concepts.
What aspects of this class contributed most to your learning?
1. Problem solving and team work.
3. It is difficult to identify specific aspects that contributed to this.
4. Group work
5. The worksheets and discussions were great, everything was broken down into steps so it really helped me to understand concepts.
What aspects of this class detracted from your learning?
1. n/a
3. The only thing - it's pretty minor - is a lack of coordination with the instructor of the class with which this seminar is paired. More often than not, we
were presented with material we had not yet covered.
4. nothing
What suggestions do you have for improving the class?
1. I think its good but have more small groups working together
2. Definitely continue having students work on problems in RANDOM groups(of 3) and have students write their answers on the board. I saw more of
the random groups toward the second half of the quarter, and it really helped my learning and pushed me to work and think harder especially since I was
working with different people.
3. I would encourage a coordination with the material covered by the instructor of the class with which this seminar is paired.
4. kEPP IT UP
Printed: 3/22/16
Page 3 of 3
© 2014, IASystem, University of Washington
Survey no: 98806