8/12/2019 S4 A

1/6

Name of Staff

Name of SubjectClass

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

o n avour

of Credit Marks

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 1 3 3

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 0 0 0

No 33 10 330

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfactory 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0Just right 32 10 320

Too fast 1 2 2

Too slow 0 2 0

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250

Indifferent 5 2 10

Unpleasant 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely uses 2 3 6

Not at all uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Too liberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite prompt 32 10 320

Not prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 0 3 0

Poor 0 0 0

4258

92.16

NOORUL ISLAM CENTRE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report-II

Mr.R.Donald Tony

CV210,Transpottation Engineering I

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

2Clarity and understandability of teachers

explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

4 Regularity in engaging classes

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

10 Use of Black Board

11 Sincerity of the teacher

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

8/12/2019 S4 A

2/6

Name of StaffName of Subject

Class

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

o n avour

of Credit Marks

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 0 0 0

No 33 10 330

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfactory 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0Just right 31 10 310

Too fast 2 2 4

Too slow 0 2 0

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250

Indifferent 5 2 10

Unpleasant 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely uses 2 3 6

Not at all uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Too liberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite prompt 32 10 320

Not prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 25 10 250

Good 5 6 30

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

4213

91.19

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

10 Use of Black Board

11 Sincerity of the teacher

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

4 Regularity in engaging classes

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

2

Clarity and understandability of teachers

explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

Mr.D.Allwin

CV209,Applied Hydraulic Engineering

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

NOORUL ISLAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report-II

8/12/2019 S4 A

3/6

Name of StaffName of Subject

Class

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

o n avour

of Credit Marks

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 1 3 3

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 0 0 0

No 33 10 330

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfactory 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0Just right 32 10 320

Too fast 1 2 2

Too slow 0 2 0

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250

Indifferent 5 2 10

Unpleasant 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely uses 2 3 6

Not at all uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Too liberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite prompt 32 10 320

Not prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 0 3 0

Poor 0 0 0

4258

92.16

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

10 Use of Black Board

11 Sincerity of the teacher

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

4 Regularity in engaging classes

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

2

Clarity and understandability of teachers

explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

Mr.S.Mathan Kumar

CV208/Surveying for Construction II

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

NOORUL ISLAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report-II

8/12/2019 S4 A

4/6

Name of StaffName of Subject

Class

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

o n avour

of Credit Marks

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 1 3 3

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 8 0 0

No 25 10 250

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfactory 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0Just right 32 10 320

Too fast 1 2 2

Too slow 0 2 0

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250

Indifferent 5 2 10

Unpleasant 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely uses 2 3 6

Not at all uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Too liberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite prompt 32 10 320

Not prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 0 3 0

Poor 0 0 0

4178

90.43

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

10 Use of Black Board

11 Sincerity of the teacher

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

4 Regularity in engaging classes

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

2

Clarity and understandability of teachers

explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

Mr.Y.Stalin Jose

CV207/Advanced Strenght of materials

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

NOORUL ISLAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report -II

8/12/2019 S4 A

5/6

Name of StaffName of Subject

Class

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

o n avour

of Credit Marks

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 1 3 3

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 0 0 0

No 33 10 330

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfactory 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0Just right 25 10 250

Too fast 5 2 10

Too slow 3 2 6

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250

Indifferent 5 2 10

Unpleasant 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely uses 2 3 6

Not at all uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Too liberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite prompt 32 10 320

Not prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 0 3 0

Poor 0 0 0

4202

90.95

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

10 Use of Black Board

11 Sincerity of the teacher

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

4 Regularity in engaging classes

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

2

Clarity and understandability of teachers

explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

Ms.R.Roselin

CV206/Geotechnical Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

NOORUL ISLAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report-II

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

8/12/2019 S4 A

6/6

Name of Staff

Name of SubjectClass

No of students Evaluated 33 Out of 47

No infavour of Credit Marks

Excellent 25 10 250

Good 5 6 30

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Excellent 28 10 280

Good 2 6 12

Fair 3 3 9

Poor 0 0 0

Regular 33 10 330

Irregular 0 0 0

Yes 0 0 0

No 33 10 330

Excellent 2 10 20

Satisfacto

ry 31 5 155

Poor 0 0 0

Just right 32 10 320

Too fast 1 2 2

Too slow 0 2 0

Yes 33 10 330

No 0 0 0

Pleasant 25 10 250Indifferen

t 5 2 10

Unpleasan

t 3 0 0

Effective 29 10 290

Rarely

uses 2 3 6Not at all

uses 0 0 0

Sincere 33 10 330

Not

Sincere 0 0 0

Too strict 0 3 0

Tooliberal 2 3 6

Just right 33 10 330

Quite

prompt 32 10 320

Not

prompt 1 0 0

Excellent 30 10 300

Good 2 6 12

Fair 0 3 0

Poor 0 0 0

4232

91.60

14 Overall teaching effectiveness of the teacher

Total Marks

Weighted Points:

11 Sincerity of the teacher

12 Norms of valuation of tests and assignments

13 Promptness in valuation tests and assignments

8 Does the teacher encourage Questioning

9 Behaviour of the teacher

10 Use of Black Board

5Wether the Teacher dictates notes only without

explanation

6 Teachers ability to organize Lectures.

7 Speed of Presentation

2 Clarity and understandability of teachers explanation

3 Teachers willingness to help

4 Regularity in engaging classes

S4A, B.E.Civil Engineering

Evaluated on16/04/2014

1 Knowledge of Teacher in the Subject

NOORUL ISLAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Dept of Civil EngineeringStaff Evaluation Report-II

Ms.M.Deva Saroja

MA203/Numerical methods