[CS Dept logo]

[back] Com Sci 221 Archive of Course Evaluations

Copyright information

Last modified: Fri Oct 13 14:10:08 1995

The remaining course evaluations are copied by the instructor from various issues of Student Course Evaluations, written by the Student Advisory Committee of the Dean of the College of the University of Chicago. The only deliberate change was the correction of obvious spelling errors. The evaluations are in reverse chronological order.

Winter 1995
All the students who returned evaluations for this class liked Mr. O'Donnell. His lectures were reported to be "easy to follow and understand." He reportedly answered questions well. He was reported to very accessible outside of class with office hours and "via on-line discussion." The students thought he had a very good attitude towards them. They also believed he had a good attitude towards the subject matter. He assigned weekly problem sets consisting of problems and computer programs (worth 40% of the grade). Most students thought the homework was reasonable and appropriate. The exam was reported to be reasonable by the students. The textbook for the class was Programming Languages, Concepts and Constructs by Ravi Sethi. The students seemed to vary in their opinions of the book, but none were overly pleased with it.
Winter 1994
Most of the students who returned evaluations were not very satisfied with this course, although many of them liked the text and thought it was helpful. Many students thought Mr. O'Donnell was boring and was not clear enough in presenting the material. He was accessible outside the classroom and liked both the students and the material he taught. People reported that they had no contact with the T.A. and never saw her. Most students who took the course were 3rd or 4th year Math/ComSci concentrators and seemed to like what they were doing but did not know the aim of this course. They said they spent about 10 hours weekly studying for the class, which was very reasonable. The coursework included weekly homework (40%) and 2 exams (60%). [13 evaluations returned; 19 students registered]
Winter 1993
Students Registered: 8 --- Evaluations Returned: 7

The aims of this course were "to understand the principles that affect the design of programming languages, and to reason effectively about them." Students were third and fourth year math, math/CS, and physics majors, taking it for their concentration or just to learn the material. They felt that Mr. O'Donnell was a clear, organized, interesting and often humorous lecturer, he responded to questions directly and fully, and was accessible by appointment, e-mail, and on the CS 221 newsgroup. He had a helpful, concerned and friendly attitude towards students, and really wanted them to learn. He was enthusiastic and interested in the material. Students also liked his good use of examples, his explanations, and the thought he put into lectures. All would recommend him to others.

All students said the course had increased their interest in the subject. Students learned the "thought behind language design," evaluation of arguments, "tools to program more effectively," and more --- students learned a great deal, often more than they expected.

The six homework assignments (40% of course grade) were given about every week and a half, and included programming in various languages, calculations, and brief essays. One student said they "were very comprehensive and well thought out ... I enjoyed doing them and thinking about them." Students found them very useful for understanding the material, integrated well, with the course, and mostly of reasonable difficulty. Many felt they were sometimes too long. Students also complained of minimal comments on homeworks; according to Mr. O'Donnell, this will be remedied in the future by the addition of a TA.

The text was "Programming Languages" by Ravi Sethi. Most students found it useful as a reference. There were also a take-home midterm and final (60% together). All but one student felt the midterm was very good and graded well. Students spent an average of nine hours on this course each week, which they felt was "very; very reasonable for a CS course."

One student raved, "This is really a gem of a class ... I would make it part of the Common Core!" Overall, students liked the texts, material, and especially the teaching, and all learned a lot.

Winter 1992
Students Registered: 3 --- Evaluations Returned: 3 --- TA: Hong, J.

This course deals with various programming languages, and the strengths of each for handling different problems. All the students agreed that Michael O'Donnell had a clear, organized, interesting, and humorous presentation, and that he answered questions directly and fully. The course was seen as "Mr. O'Donnell's perfect forum," because of his great interest in the subject and in passing it along to his students. They enjoyed learning about his peronal experiences with the topic. Students recommend the class to people who are interested in this topic.

The class members though that the homework was difficult and long, but useful, even essential, for understanding the material. They also thought that the exams were "exhausting," much like the homework, and that the grading was stricter than expected. No one spent less than six hours a week preparing for class. The textbook for the class, "Programming Languages," by Sethi, was considered to be useful and interesting. [The] TA was described as "very helpful."

Winter 1991
Students Registered: 8 --- Evaluations Returned: 6 --- TA: Hong, J.

The professor aimed to teach the students "to understand the principles affecting the design, implementation, and use of programming languages." Most students seem to have enjoyed his enthusiasm, and half reported increased interest in the course material. "He makes the subject very interesting," one reported. The main complaint was that the lectures sometimes digressed too far off-track. Three students said tha professor had good office hours while one said he was impossible to track down when needed.

The text, R. Sethi's "Programming Languages," got "solid" to "fantastic" reviews from all respondents. 40% of the course grade was based on weekly homeworks assignments including problem solving, programming, and "brief essays," and 60% upon the midterm and final. One student said, "The homeworks killed me," and another noted that they seemed intended for "weeding out the wimps," especially at the beginning of the class. The class agreed that they were useful, however. Some students though the take-home midterm quite difficult while others found it reasonable or easy.

Two students said tha TA was helpful and "conscientious," while two complained of language problems. Most students spent between 5 and 12 hours on the class per week.

Winter 1990
Students Registered: ? --- Evaluations Returned: 10 --- TA: Sellie, L.

Students were somewhat divided on Michael O'Donnell's teaching ability. About half of them considered his presentation to be satisfactory. Although he was very interested in the subject and friendly, he often rambled and didn't always understand students' questions. Many students expected a less theoretical emphasis than was given.

The weekly homework assignments were quite difficult, and required more time than expected. Most students suggested that the workload should be cut in the future. However, the assignments, requiring much programming and essay work, were helpful for understanding and for the midterm, an open book, open notes test which required "unique thought." The grading was rated as fair to severe.

The text was Ravi Sethi's PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES: CONCEPTS AND CONSTRUCTS, which most students liked a lot. The TA was helpful for most students.

Winter 1989
Students Registered: ? --- Evaluations Returned: 4

All the students felt Mr. O'Donnell's presentation of the material was satisfactory. They felt he answered questions directly and fully. He was also very accessible outside the classroom. Three-fourths of the responding students felt he increased their interest in the subject matter. They also liked his attitude towards the students.

All the students considered the homeworks challenging but reasonable. They felt it was helpful in understanding the course material and in preparation for the exam. The exam was considered "doable" but a bit too long by some students. The grading was considered fair and reasonable by all the studetns.

The text, Sethi's "Programming Languages," was considered useful. The students all felt they spent a reasonable amount of time in preparation for this class.