|
Course:Object-Oriented Software Development (SE-450-910) Quarter:Spring 10/11 Time: ::: - ::: Location: Distance Learning |
James Riely PhD Associate Professor jriely@cs.depaul.edu Instructor homepage
|
Select a Page:
Summary 1 2 3 4 5 6
What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the instructor?
1. Dr. Riely, is a fantastic teacher and presents the subject in a very easy to understand way.
2. Strength .. he presented the material in a fun way that made me want to keep focused.
3. Very helpful, and well organized. Dr. Riely is always willing to help and willing to answer questions. However, I feel that his lectures are not as relevant to the assigned material as it could be. I would like to see more discussion in class about code and less discussion about theory. This is the type of class where the concepts are easy, but implementing them gets tricky, so I would like to see more discussion dedicated to code.
4. Top notch instructor.
5. Very well organized! Up-to-date and relevant! Expectations were generally clear, although they deviated from what was documented at times. Too much time spent in class trying to fix problems in Eclipse. Just let it go...
6. He is very energetic and enthusiastic about the topic, and it helps keep things interesting.
What aspects of this course were most beneficial to you?
2. All aspects were beneficial. Being a web developer, my everyday programming does not require object oriented patterns. Professor Riley met with me and discussed an exam that was dismal at best. He gave me encouragement and explained a few things that slipped my mind on the exam.
3. Direct work with code and Dr. Riely's help outside of class.
4. Learning design patterns, test driven/agile development.
5. Howework assignments were great exercises - very appropriate.
6. All of the example code given helped to solidify the concepts in my mind.
What do you suggest to improve this course?
3. The homework for this course is way too long and not specific enough. I don't feel the homework really helped my understanding because I spent more time trying to figure out what I was supposed to do as opposed to why I was doing it. The homework needs to have more specific objectives. In addition, the assignments take way too long. I don't have 10+ hours a week to spend on homework for one class.
4. Get a new primary text book. I didn't really like Horstman and don't feel that I learned much from the few chapters I read. Learned more from the lectures, extra readings, and supplemental books: GOF and Headfirst. Although difficult, I think GOF is more appropriate for a masters level class.
5. Other than noted elsewhere... beer?
6. I think the homework came with too much pre-canned code - I would have preferred more freedom/play time with my own code instead.
Comment on the grading procedures and exams
2. It was helpful that we got our midterm exam back. I was able to see what I did wrong.
3. I felt the grading was fair and appropriate, and Dr. Riely did a nice job explaining his rationale for grading.
4. Fair
5. It all seemed to work fine. I would have liked more emphasis on homework grades. The points for the class are VERY end-of-term heavy.
Other comments?
2. I hope to take Riley again .... he is the best instructor I've had thus far. I've liked just about all of the instructors, but Riley really kept the topic interesting by keeping it fun.
4. Very well organized and instructional course. Professor Reily is excellent.
5. The guest lecture was OK, I guess, but the recording format was not nearly as helpful as the regular class. Next time do the recording in a classroom that has full COL recording capability.