Download Fall 2020 SEAS Final Evaluation for Operating Systems I at Columbia University: School of Engineering and more Study notes Operating Systems in PDF only on Docsity!
1 - Course: Amount Learned
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 0 0.00%
Fair (2) 4 8.89%
Good (3) 3 6.67%
Very Good (4) 7 15.56%
Excellent (5) 31 68.89%
0 25 50 100 Question Response Rate Mean STD Median 45/68 (66.18%) 4.44 0.97 5.
2 - Course: Appropriateness of Workload
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 8 17.78%
Fair (2) 4 8.89%
Good (3) 12 26.67%
Very Good (4) 11 24.44%
Excellent (5) 10 22.22%
0 25 50 100 Question Response Rate Mean STD Median 45/68 (66.18%) 3.24 1.38 3.
3 - Course: Fairness of Grading Process
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 2 4.44%
Fair (2) 7 15.56%
Good (3) 9 20.00%
Very Good (4) 9 20.00%
Excellent (5) 18 40.00%
0 25 50 100 Question Response Rate Mean STD Median 45/68 (66.18%) 3.76 1.26 4.
4 - Course: Overall Quality
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 2 4.44%
Fair (2) 3 6.67%
Good (3) 9 20.00%
Very Good (4) 6 13.33%
Excellent (5) 25 55.56%
0 25 50 100 Question Response Rate Mean STD Median 45/68 (66.18%) 4.09 1.20 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
5 - Enter any additional comments here
Response Rate 17/68 (25%)
- I really appreciated how organized and clear the assignments were. Also not having to compile a kernel on the midterm was chef's kiss.
- Maybe reduce some workloads as they are quite heavy.
- this course teaches us the basic of operating system (linux/unix), it help us to understand how our computer works under the hood. it is hard but the contents are rich. by doing the homework, we can learn how to write simple network socket, scheduler, filesystem etc.
- The course contents are very outdated. The course slides were repeatedly mentioned to be from the very past. For example, some slides were even taken from the previous textbook, which is not even used anymore by the instructor himself. An important note would be that the current textbooks are considered old, also by himself. The main defending argument can be considered studying the history of a topic to understand what happens under the hood, but that shouldn't be a reason to have such an outdated course content. For instance, in storage topics, SSDs were not even mentioned other than letting students know that they can read about it. SSDs are obviously the way storage technology is headed, and a comparison or brief introduction could simply keep the course content updated.
- The best course I've taken at Columbia. Excellent course with materials presented in a very clear and logical order, as well as very large scale but well thought out assignments that perfectly supplements course materials without being too hand-holding or too difficult. Workload is high, but it is necessary to achieve the higher understanding and appreciation for operating systems this course instills.
- Great course! I believe I will not be afraid to face any challenges after this course because if you really pay attentions and focus on the project, you will find the river to the success. Although the workload is higher than any other CS courses I taken, it is still one of the best CS courses!
- Best course in Columbia that I have taken by far. Only complaint is that OS is not suitable for people taking 4 classes in a semester, i.e. workload is way too heavy
- Highly structured course. Maximal Learning. Simply loved it.
- I find the grading scheme really harsh. Our group spent 40+ hrs on most homeworks (probably more, up to 70hrs on two of them) to get a poor grade (around the average). It is a little bit defeating spending so much time on a class to get such a poor looking grade. The grading rubrics can be a little harsh and have dependency issues. What I mean by this is: if you fail the first test case, you're probably not going to get credit for the second test case on the rubric either. This seems like double punishment for the same mistake.
- This course has group-oriented homeworks which account for the majority of your grade. During a pandemic with students living across multiple timezones this can make it very complicated to complete the homeworks. I'd suggest skipping this course until you are able to take it in person.
- I'm not a CS student, but I decided to take this course because I think it's one of the most important fundamental courses in CS. And during the semester, I do learn a lot about operating system. Since I learned some basic concepts by myself before, the lectures give me an opportunity to have a good review and deeper exploration. I would also like to share my idea of the assignments. It's much more difficult than I imagined, but I never thought that I could really finish all of them with my teammates, and I learn a lot from it. And I really hope that for some assignments, a little more hints on how the program will be tested by TA would be much better. In our assignment 5, we spent plenty of time using lots of complex locks to satisfy the requirements, and we did test our program with the sample test files, but we still failed to consider some special situations which could be solved with functions like "up_write" and so on, so we are deducted for so many credits. But no worries at all, I'm not complaining about this, we changed our strategies in the following assignments, we spent much more time talking with TAs in the office hours when we are confused about the requirements and found that if we could follow the correct direction at the beginning, things would be much better, and we had a progress in our assignments 6 and 7! Anyway, it's a great course for me, not only do I learn a lot of knowledge on OS, but also learn how to work with others, how to finish a project by reading materials and how to strictly and fully follow the rules. Thank you for the professor's guidance and the TA's hard work!
- Lectures did not feel nearly as useful as book readings. I did very well in the course and I feel that the lectures were mostly for students who were newer to C and needed more explanation.
- The course would benefit from redesigning the homework assignments. In lecture, we learn about both simple and advanced methods and algorithms in operating systems, but in the homework we are told only to implement the simplest of the methods discussed in lecture. The instructions and materials for the homework do not adequately prepare us for the assignments, leaving out many of the linux structures and functions we need to implement the functionality required. As a result, most of the homework is spent trying to decipher existing kernel implementations, which have massive complexity and pertain very little to what we are actually trying to implement, only to search for the specific function or structure we need in order to make progress. Moreover, these functions and structures are quite poorly documented: only a comment above the definition of the function, which you will only find if by some miracle you actually know which function to look for. The homework should be redesigned to provide more information on the linux structures that we need to actually complete our tasks, and the tasks should consist of the more advanced algorithms and methods that we actually learn about in the lecture. In addition, there need to be better methods for forming teams for projects.
- The only other class I've ever taken where I learned/grew a comparable amount to OS was Advanced Programming.
- I hope this class could be more considerate of students in different time zones. That being said, I do understand Jae's concern about plagiarism. Overall it is great!
- While I do think that the content that was covered was appropriate for an introductory operating systems class, I think that the first half of the semester focused far too much on general Unix programming. Personally, I would've liked to spend more time with kernel modules in the first half of the semester instead of writing a semi-complicated TCP server. As for the assignments in general, I found this course to be an exercise in keeping a virtual machine running, and spending endless hours compiling the linux kerrnel after small modifications to any core header file. I guess that's just how linux kernel development works in the real world. There must be a better way to cover the same concepts more efficiently, but I guess that problem is only solvable in exponential time. Overall, I enjoyed the class and learned a lot (which is kind of the point, isn't it?)
- Workload was very high, but understandably. Jae really summarized well the most important topics in OS and delivered them in a compact, concise manner and assigned appropriate assignments where we got to fill in any necessary remaining gaps. Perhaps this was the best CS class I took at Columbia, both in terms of amount learned and fun I had. (it was fun only looking back... freezer was NOT fun.)
6 - Instructor: Organization and Preparation
Jae Lee
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 2 4.44%
Fair (2) 3 6.67%
Good (3) 5 11.11%
Very Good (4) 6 13.33%
Excellent (5) 29 64.44%
0 25 50 100 Instructor Response Rate Mean STD Median 45/68 (66.18%) 4.27 1.18 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
11 - If so, please explain why
Jae Lee
Response Rate 13/68 (19.12%)
- The instructor's wording is always strict in a way that puts pressure on students, such as repeatedly saying, "if you don't know this...", "you should already be aware of that..." and so on. In the first lecture, he introduced himself to be a very experienced instructor, not a researcher on the topic, where in almost every lecture, there is at least one outdated course slide that he mentions. The course content is outdated, and it is very obvious. I consider this to be a significant demotivation. For each group assignment, he always said, "you should begin early," whereas there have been many times he published the homework and covered the related topics days later. Based on these concrete examples and many more.
- Overall great class, but the homeworks and exam are graded rigidly, it's either full scores or zero for each question without any partial credit, no credit if not sticking to the one specific concept even though the program works.
- The best course I've taken at Columbia. Excellent course with materials presented in a very clear and logical order, as well as very large scale but well thought out assignments that perfectly supplements course materials without being too hand-holding or too difficult.
- Jae's quality/depth of the course and his dedication to teaching is second to none.
- Jae is highly organized and structured. He clearly lays out his plans for the lecture, follows them and gives reading assignment beforehand to make the lecture easier to understand. He makes effort to make the class interesting through various demos, animations and illustrations. He not only teaches concepts, but also runs live demo to drive his point home. He very wisely teaches fundamentals in the class and leaves few things here and there for us to discover by ourselves through assignments. When we do that, we are better able to appreciate the nuances of those subtle concepts. Furthermore, he is appreciative, friendly and very approachable. One of the very best faculties I have been taught by!
- Jae is knowledgable and his class is very inspiring.
- The lecture is highly organized and I think this course is the best course among all the CS courses. He is kind and thoughtful. It was my first time I fully understood all the materials by the end of semester.
- For the lectures, I really enjoys his courses for mainly three reasons. The first one is that he's good at explaining the contents in his notes in an easy-to-understand way, which could be acceptable for the students in other majors. The second one is that he uses some coding examples in his courses to explain some concepts, which could strongly attract my attentions and make the concepts more concrete. The last one is that he could speak clearly and at an appropriate speed that helps me a lot to catch up with him in his live lecture. Though I don't know the extracurricular situation of this professor, but he does have good performance in this course.
- He's Jae, surely the SEAS faculty awards committee has heard of him by now
- I wouldn't describe Jae Woo Lee as the best SEAS professor I've ever had.
- It's a very well construct course. Jae did a good job presenting the material during the lectures.
- The way that Jae structures a course, you're really forced to understand the material - skating by is impossible. It won't always be fun, and you might fall flat on your face a couple times throughout the semester, but if you put in an honest effort the rewards you get out of taking his courses are undoubtedly worth the occasional long night.
- Jae has a high expectation for his students, and truly wants you to learn, not just a thing or two, but every nitty gritty detail. You don't see this quality from a lot of other professors.
12 - Overall Quality
Dave Dirnfeld
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 3.85%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 3.85%
Very Good (4) 4 15.38%
Excellent (5) 20 76.92%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 26/68 (38.24%) 4.62 0.90 5.
12 - Overall Quality
Evan Mesterhazy
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.56%
Fair (2) 1 5.56%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 4 22.22%
Excellent (5) 12 66.67%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 18/68 (26.47%) 4.39 1.14 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
12 - Overall Quality
Hans Montero
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 2.63%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 3 7.89%
Very Good (4) 4 10.53%
Excellent (5) 30 78.95%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 38/68 (55.88%) 4.63 0.85 5.
12 - Overall Quality
John Hui
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 14.29%
Fair (2) 1 14.29%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 2 28.57%
Excellent (5) 3 42.86%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 7/68 (10.29%) 3.71 1.60 4.
12 - Overall Quality
Kent Hall
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 4.76%
Fair (2) 1 4.76%
Good (3) 1 4.76%
Very Good (4) 2 9.52%
Excellent (5) 16 76.19%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 21/68 (30.88%) 4.48 1.12 5.
12 - Overall Quality
Lucie Le Blanc
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.88%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 5.88%
Very Good (4) 2 11.76%
Excellent (5) 13 76.47%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 17/68 (25.00%) 4.53 1.07 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
13 - Knowledgeability
Dave Dirnfeld
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 3.85%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 3.85%
Very Good (4) 5 19.23%
Excellent (5) 19 73.08%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 26/68 (38.24%) 4.58 0.90 5.
13 - Knowledgeability
Evan Mesterhazy
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.56%
Fair (2) 1 5.56%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 3 16.67%
Excellent (5) 13 72.22%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 18/68 (26.47%) 4.44 1.15 5.
13 - Knowledgeability
Hans Montero
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 2.70%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 3 8.11%
Very Good (4) 4 10.81%
Excellent (5) 29 78.38%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 37/68 (54.41%) 4.62 0.86 5.
13 - Knowledgeability
John Hui
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 14.29%
Fair (2) 1 14.29%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 2 28.57%
Excellent (5) 3 42.86%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 7/68 (10.29%) 3.71 1.60 4.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
13 - Knowledgeability
Kent Hall
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 4.76%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 4.76%
Very Good (4) 3 14.29%
Excellent (5) 16 76.19%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 21/68 (30.88%) 4.57 0.98 5.
13 - Knowledgeability
Lucie Le Blanc
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.88%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 5.88%
Very Good (4) 3 17.65%
Excellent (5) 12 70.59%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 17/68 (25.00%) 4.47 1.07 5.
13 - Knowledgeability
Matthew Broughton
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
13 - Knowledgeability
Stanley Yu
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
14 - Approachability
Hans Montero
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 2.70%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 2 5.41%
Very Good (4) 5 13.51%
Excellent (5) 29 78.38%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 37/68 (54.41%) 4.65 0.82 5.
14 - Approachability
John Hui
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 14.29%
Fair (2) 1 14.29%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 14.29%
Excellent (5) 4 57.14%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 7/68 (10.29%) 3.86 1.68 5.
14 - Approachability
Kent Hall
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 0 0.00%
Fair (2) 1 4.76%
Good (3) 1 4.76%
Very Good (4) 2 9.52%
Excellent (5) 17 80.95%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 21/68 (30.88%) 4.67 0.80 5.
14 - Approachability
Lucie Le Blanc
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.88%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 5.88%
Excellent (5) 15 88.24%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 17/68 (25.00%) 4.71 0.99 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
14 - Approachability
Matthew Broughton
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
14 - Approachability
Stanley Yu
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
14 - Approachability
Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
14 - Approachability
Dave Dirnfeld, Evan Mesterhazy, Hans Montero, John Hui, Kent Hall, Lucie Le Blanc, Matthew Broughton, Stanley Yu, Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 8 5.56%
Fair (2) 6 4.17%
Good (3) 4 2.78%
Very Good (4) 18 12.50%
Excellent (5) 108 75.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 4.47 1.11 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
15 - Availability
Kent Hall
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 0 0.00%
Fair (2) 2 9.52%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 3 14.29%
Excellent (5) 16 76.19%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 21/68 (30.88%) 4.57 0.93 5.
15 - Availability
Lucie Le Blanc
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.88%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 5.88%
Very Good (4) 3 17.65%
Excellent (5) 12 70.59%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 17/68 (25.00%) 4.47 1.07 5.
15 - Availability
Matthew Broughton
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
15 - Availability
Stanley Yu
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 0 0.00%
Fair (2) 2 33.33%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.83 1.47 4.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
15 - Availability
Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
15 - Availability
Dave Dirnfeld, Evan Mesterhazy, Hans Montero, John Hui, Kent Hall, Lucie Le Blanc, Matthew Broughton, Stanley Yu, Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 4 2.76%
Fair (2) 11 7.59%
Good (3) 8 5.52%
Very Good (4) 23 15.86%
Excellent (5) 99 68.28%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 4.39 1.07 5.
16 - Communication
Dave Dirnfeld
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 3.85%
Fair (2) 0 0.00%
Good (3) 1 3.85%
Very Good (4) 4 15.38%
Excellent (5) 20 76.92%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 26/68 (38.24%) 4.62 0.90 5.
16 - Communication
Evan Mesterhazy
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 5.88%
Fair (2) 1 5.88%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 2 11.76%
Excellent (5) 13 76.47%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 17/68 (25.00%) 4.47 1.18 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
16 - Communication
Matthew Broughton
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
16 - Communication
Stanley Yu
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
16 - Communication
Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 1 16.67%
Fair (2) 1 16.67%
Good (3) 0 0.00%
Very Good (4) 1 16.67%
Excellent (5) 3 50.00%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 6/68 (8.82%) 3.67 1.75 4.
16 - Communication
Dave Dirnfeld, Evan Mesterhazy, Hans Montero, John Hui, Kent Hall, Lucie Le Blanc, Matthew Broughton, Stanley Yu, Zachary Schuermann
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Poor (1) 8 5.63%
Fair (2) 5 3.52%
Good (3) 5 3.52%
Very Good (4) 18 12.68%
Excellent (5) 106 74.65%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 4.47 1.10 5.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
17 - Does this TA communicate effectively in English?
Dave Dirnfeld
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 24 92.31%
No (2) 1 3.85%
N/A (3) 1 3.85%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 26/68 (38.24%) 1.12 0.43 1.
17 - Does this TA communicate effectively in English?
Evan Mesterhazy
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 16 88.89%
No (2) 0 0.00%
N/A (3) 2 11.11%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 18/68 (26.47%) 1.22 0.65 1.
17 - Does this TA communicate effectively in English?
Hans Montero
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 36 94.74%
No (2) 1 2.63%
N/A (3) 1 2.63%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 38/68 (55.88%) 1.08 0.36 1.
17 - Does this TA communicate effectively in English?
John Hui
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 5 71.43%
No (2) 0 0.00%
N/A (3) 2 28.57%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 7/68 (10.29%) 1.57 0.98 1.
17 - Does this TA communicate effectively in English?
Kent Hall
Response Option Weight Frequency Percent Percent Responses Means
Yes (1) 20 95.24%
No (2) 0 0.00%
N/A (3) 1 4.76%
0 25 50 100 TA Response Rate Mean STD Median 21/68 (30.88%) 1.10 0.44 1.
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
18 - Comments
Dave Dirnfeld
Response Rate 4/68 (5.88%)
- Seems to really care and it shows!
- Very funny and humorous
- Thanks Dave for all the help!
- Thanks for all your help!
18 - Comments
Evan Mesterhazy
Response Rate 2/68 (2.94%)
- Great!
- Thanks Evan for the help!
18 - Comments
Hans Montero
Response Rate 6/68 (8.82%)
- Very approachable and helpful TA, only contacted him once and he was very supportive.
- Patient and very good at explaining things.
- Great TA.
- Brilliant! I'm not sure how deep he has dived into this field, but it seems he could answer almost all kinds of questions we put up with. I heard that he's been the head TA for several semester. Yeah, he definitely worths that and he's qualified to organize the assignments and TA teams. Good jobs!
- Very nice guy and knowledgable
- Thanks Hans! You did a very good job!
18 - Comments
John Hui
Response Rate 0/68 (0%)
18 - Comments
Kent Hall
Response Rate 1/68 (1.47%)
- Thanks Kent for all the help.
18 - Comments
Lucie Le Blanc
Response Rate 2/68 (2.94%)
- Patient and very good at explaining things.
- Thanks Lucie for helping answering the question in the office hours.
18 - Comments
Matthew Broughton
Response Rate 0/68 (0%)
18 - Comments
Stanley Yu
Response Rate 0/68 (0%)
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
18 - Comments
Zachary Schuermann
Response Rate 0/68 (0%)
18 - Comments
Dave Dirnfeld, Evan Mesterhazy, Hans Montero, John Hui, Kent Hall, Lucie Le Blanc, Matthew Broughton, Stanley Yu, Zachary Schuermann
Response Rate
- Very approachable and helpful TA, only contacted him once and he was very supportive.
- Patient and very good at explaining things.
- Patient and very good at explaining things.
- Great TA.
- Seems to really care and it shows!
- Brilliant! I'm not sure how deep he has dived into this field, but it seems he could answer almost all kinds of questions we put up with. I heard that he's been the head TA for several semester. Yeah, he definitely worths that and he's qualified to organize the assignments and TA teams. Good jobs!
- Very nice guy and knowledgable
- Very funny and humorous
- Great!
- Thanks Lucie for helping answering the question in the office hours.
- Thanks Kent for all the help.
- Thanks Hans! You did a very good job!
- Thanks Dave for all the help!
- Thanks Evan for the help!
- Thanks for all your help!
Instructor: Jae Lee *
Course: COMSW4118_001_2020_3 - OPERATING SYSTEMS I
Fall 2020 SEAS Final EvaluaƟon
Response Rate: 45/68 (66.18 %)
MaƩhew Broughton,Dave Dirnfeld,Kent Hall,John Hui,Lucie Le Blanc,Evan Mesterhazy,Hans Montero,Zachary
Schuermann,Stanley Yu
