Comments Report for Fall 2011, MATH 5040 Stoch ProcSimultn
I Section 1
Instructor: Georgiou, Nicos (Primary)
Results rolled up with child course(s): MATH 6810 1
Instructor
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Georgiou
Student
Text Responses
disposition
Question: List two things about the course content, materials or design that were effective for
your learning, or make constructive suggestions for improvement.
1) Nicos is very pro-active in meeting the needs of the students and building upon what the students
V. satisfied previously knew. He provided questions that were difficult but not impossible. 2) The course material
was not complex. It was simple if the student put the time into learning and really tried.
The course materials were good, but I think the test didn’t always cover exactly what was covered in
V. satisfied
the course. Good stuff overall.
V. satisfied More time on exams!
This was en excellent course. I learned a lot and it involved a fair amount of thinking and reasoning. The
homework was always entertaining and at the same time challenging, with some problems being really
straightforward, others being a bit tricky, and others being legitimately difficult. What I did find offputting is that sometimes the class built on knowledge that we did not have or were vaguely aware of. In
V. satisfied
this respect, I think the book was of little help. I only opened it once or twice to check for formulas and
some homework problems. However, it was tiresome to follow the book when the class and the notes
Nicos posted made a lot of sense and were much easier to follow and understand (and they had more
thorough proofs and examples).
V. satisfied Take a closer look at the pre-reqs for this course. Consider making ODE’s a pre-req
V. satisfied The homework to test material was very well layed out.
Question: List two things about this instructor that were effective for your learning, or make
constructive suggestions for improvement.
1) He didn’t make it easy. He literally made some problems so we had to think outside the box to
V. satisfied accomplish. 2) It was fun. Nicos made the class fun and exciting which I feel is the sign of a good
instructor
Needs to do a better job of giving ALL students a chance to come to his office hours. I felt like he
V. satisfied definitely had favorites (it was clear during class). It seemed like it affected their grades. Also, needed to
have a better grasp of the materials.
While the instructor made office hours available, they were nearly always swamped with 1/4 to 1/3 of
the class in a room the size of a large closet. I don’t know if this was a reflection on the lack of
V. satisfied
understanding from lecture on the part of a large segment of the class, but it discouraged a meaningful
consultation. If anything, a larger room would have been a great advantage.
Nicos was very fun, very knowledgeable, and very understanding. In fact, he probably was more patient
than he might have liked to be; in this respect he always explained things very thoroughly even when he
V. satisfied
felt we should already know something. Further, it is very obvious he is very excited about math and
likes it immensely. This is a very good quality because it makes his explanations very entertaining.
I believe, eventually, the instructor will be an excellent contribution to the Universities’ math department.
The most frustrating part of the course, for me, was the proofs the professor presented in class. I
would’ve better benefited from the professor presenting the relevant theorems and perhaps proving only
V. satisfied
one or two definitions (per exam). This would’ve allowed more time for examples. More examples
would’ve been really key for me in this course. I did greatly appreciate his willingness to meet during
office hours to go over any material that was difficult to understand.
The organization of material was very helpful. The examples given and information presented on the
V. satisfied
board was clear and concise.
Page # 1 of 1