Evaluation Comments
Course:Object-Oriented Software Development

Quarter:Winter 07/08
Time: Tu 17:45 - 21:00
Location: Loop Campus
James Riely PhD

Associate Professor
Instructor homepage

Select a Page:  
Summary     1       2       3       4       5       

What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the instructor?

1.   He knows programming like no other. I like the examples he uses and how he is willing to go through multiple examples of how to do things.
3.   - I felt the instructor just assumed that most students were experienced professionals. Not much attention was paid towards explaining the tools used during the course.- I also felt that often times the instructor just breezed through the course material. The textbook(s) were not that helpful either.- I didn't feel that the instructor was very approachable after class.
4.   Strengths: Organization, presentation, and dissemination of relevant material.Weaknesses: Too much work to cover in one quarter.
5.   The pace at which the class moved was quick enough to keep everyone interested, but also left time for in depth looks at issues that were confusing or important.

What aspects of this course were most beneficial to you?

1.   The UML modeling and code correspondence is a nice new level of understanding for me. I like to see code in a picture form.
3.   - I liked the more practical application of most of the concepts we have been learning so far -- especially data strs in java.- It was also interesting learning about the s/w patterns - the final project provided ample opportunity to apply these concepts.
4.   Course Content
5.   The subject material as a whole is very beneficial and has already come into play in my job.

What do you suggest to improve this course?

1.   nothing.
3.   - I feel the progress on the final project should be closely monitored by the professor.- The course could be structured a little better. We were expected to apply new concepts directly to the project (which was not very closely monitored) before using them in hw assignments.
4.   Split work across two quarters - maybe have homework and exams in the first course and work on the project in the second course.
5.   Nothing.

Comment on the grading procedures and exams

1.   Good stuff. Could have been a bit more prompt.
3.   The grading procedures were fine. There was too much packed into a period of 10 weeks with two exams and a huge project.
5.   Grading seems weighted a little heavily towards the midterm and final. I agree that the project should be a big chunk though, since that is where the bulk of the time is spent working. It should be more important than the final though.

Other comments?

1.   This course makes me want to take so many other courses relating to the subject. I'm really glad I had this course.
2.   Question #12. The assignments for this course was:is poor English - I would have lost an entire letter grade in my undergrad English class for this. It should read Assignments - Where not Assignments... was