1. STUDENTS' RATINGS ON TEACHER
Notes:
1. A 5-point scale is used for the scores. The higher the score, the better the rating.
2. Fac. Member Avg Score: The mean of all the scores for each question for the faculty member.
3. Fac. Member Avg Score Std. Dev: A measure of the range of variability. It measures the extent to which a
faculty member's Average Score differs from all the scores in the faculty member's evaluation. The smaller the
standard deviation, the greater the robustness of the number given as average.
4. Dept Avg Score :
(a) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial) within the department.
(b) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial), at the same module level ( level 2000 ) within the
department.
5. Fac. Avg Score :
(c) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial) within the faculty.
(d) the mean score of same activity type (Tutorial), at the same module level ( level 2000 ) within the
faculty.
Faculty Member: WANG JIE
Department: POLITICAL SCIENCE Academic Year: 2014/2015
Faculty: ARTS & SOCIAL SCIENCES Semester: 1
Module: CHINESE POLITICS - PS2248
Activity Type: TUTORIAL
Class Size/Response Size/Response Rate : 32 / 19 / 59.38%
Contact Session/Teaching Hour : 8 / 16
Qn Items Evaluated
Fac.
Member Avg
Score
Fac.
Member Avg
Score Std.
Dev
Dept Avg
Score
Fac. Avg
Score
(a) (b) (c) (d)
1
The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability. 4.053 0.179
4.204
( 4.113)
4.146
( 4.133)
2 The teacher has increased my interest in the
subject.
4.105 0.186
4.040
( 3.950)
4.045
( 4.018)
3
The teacher provided timely and useful feedback. 4.294 0.166
4.129
( 3.993)
4.160
( 4.159)
Average Q1 to Q3 4.145 0.163
4.124
( 4.019)
NA (NA)
Computed Overall Effectiveness of the Teacher. 4.186 0.161
4.189
( 4.088)
4.174
( 4.159)
Page 1 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

2. FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES ON TEACHER
Frequency Distribution of responses (Qn 1: The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability.)
Faculty Member: WANG JIE
Department: POLITICAL SCIENCE Academic Year: 2014/2015
Faculty: ARTS & SOCIAL SCIENCES Semester: 1
Module: CHINESE POLITICS - PS2248
Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)
|
ITEMSCORE | 5 4 3 2 1
|
Self | 6 (31.58%) 8 (42.11%) 5 (26.32%) 0 (.00%) 0 (.00%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Department
| 136 (30.77%) 235 (53.17%) 60 (13.57%) 7 (1.58%) 4 (.90%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Faculty
|
1959
(33.14%)
3012
(50.96%)
757 (12.81%) 135 (2.28%) 48 (.81%)
1 2 3 4 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Self
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within
Department
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within Faculty
31.58
42.11
26.32
0.000.00
30.77
53.17
13.57
1.580.90
33.14
50.96
12.81
2.280.81
Page 2 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

3. Frequency Distribution of responses (Qn 2: The teacher has increased my interest in the subject.)
Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)
|
ITEMSCORE | 5 4 3 2 1
|
Self | 7 (36.84%) 7 (36.84%) 5 (26.32%) 0 (.00%) 0 (.00%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Department
| 109 (24.72%) 226 (51.25%) 86 (19.50%) 15 (3.40%) 5 (1.13%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Faculty
|
1761
(29.80%)
2817
(47.67%)
1073
(18.16%)
194 (3.28%) 64 (1.08%)
1 2 3 4 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Self
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within
Department
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within Faculty
36.8436.84
26.32
0.000.00
24.72
51.25
19.50
3.401.13
29.80
47.67
18.16
3.281.08
Page 3 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

4. Frequency Distribution of responses (Qn 3: The teacher provided timely and useful feedback.)
Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents)
|
ITEMSCORE | 5 4 3 2 1
|
Self | 7 (41.18%) 8 (47.06%) 2 (11.76%) 0 (.00%) 0 (.00%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Department
| 116 (26.48%) 226 (51.60%) 78 (17.81%) 13 (2.97%) 5 (1.14%)
Teachers teaching all Modules of the
Same Activity Type (Tutorial), at the
same level within Faculty
|
2104
(35.76%)
2834
(48.17%)
771 (13.11%) 122 (2.07%) 52 (.88%)
1 2 3 4 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Self
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within
Department
Teachers teaching all Modules of the Same Activity Type (Lecture), at the same level within Faculty
41.18
47.06
11.76
0.000.00
26.48
51.60
17.81
2.971.14
35.76
48.17
13.11
2.070.88
Page 4 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

5. STUDENTS' COMMENTS ON TEACHER
Faculty Member: WANG JIE
Department: POLITICAL SCIENCE Academic Year: 2014/2015
Faculty: ARTS & SOCIAL SCIENCES Semester: 1
Module: CHINESE POLITICS - PS2248
Activity Type: TUTORIAL
What are the teacher's strengths? (15 comments)
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.5 for the computed
overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. Good presentation on theory after every discussion
2. She brought up supplementary theories and important information to help us better understand the module.
3. She is knowledgable about her concepts
4. She provides very useful guidance in facilitating class discussions. She is also knowledgeable about what she
is teaching and gives very relevant insights to enhance students' understanding about the topic.
5. She was very patient in answering queries and gave useful feedback after each student's presentation. She
was also knowledgeable about the subject and could answer students' questions very effectively.
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.0 and less than 4.5 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. - approachable and friendly - knowledgeable - patient
2. Helpful and resourceful.
3. Presentation slides and what she taught us after we had our discussions were useful
4. Provides useful summary of the lectures by using power-point slides.
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 3.5 and less than 4.0 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. She injects fresh insights into each lesson and is very encouraging. She also tries to explain what we are
unsure of
2. She is encouraging and takes the effort to come up with slides and useful additional material for every lesson.
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 3.0 and less than 3.5 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. Moderate class discussions effectively.
2. Tries her best to stimulate discussion in class. Gives good review of discussed ideas with her short, personal
presentations to reinforce concepts
3. Tries to use Theory too make topics link
Other Comments from students
1. tries to consolidate each week's presentations into concepts and theories for us to understand, clarifies
presentation points, uploads ppt slides after each tutorial
What improvements would you suggest to the teacher? (13 comments)
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 3.0 and less than 3.5 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. Need to be clearer on content of the class. Lack of class discussions as the tutorial focuses too much on
Page 5 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

6. presentation.
2. Perhaps more time instead of doing presentations all the time
3. nil
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 3.5 and less than 4.0 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. Do more to stimulate discussion amongst students and to sharpen view points by engaging them.
2. She can be a bit more specific of what she expects from us for presentatiom
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.0 and less than 4.5 for
the computed overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. Her tutorial presentations were at times unclear in certain aspects.
2. NIL
3. To challenge students more intellectually and elicit greater responses from the class.
4. To expand our learning, I suggest that we can have different essay questions from the presentation so that
we can learn to apply the information in different ways and under different questions.
Comments from students who gave an average score greater than or equal to 4.5 for the computed
overall effectiveness of the teacher
1. -
2. I feel that it is useful to have a short review of the lecture content at the start of every tutorial session so as to
have a smoother flow during class discussions.
3. Speak slower
Other Comments from students
1. maybe other than just talking about theories and concepts in powerpoint slides, can try to consolidate tutorial
mate's presentations also because sometimes the presentations tend to vary a lot in terms of content and
arguments, can be confusing.
Page 6 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415

7. Page 7 of 7TEACHER PERFORMANCE REPORT
13/1/2015https://myaces.nus.edu.sg/nce/1415/adminproca1415