PANG S (ME)

Grading History

The grades listed below are the actual grades assigned by this instructor over the last few semesters, based on official records from LSU.

TIP: Click a course number below to see how other instructors scored.

Course Average W A B C D F Enrolled
ME 4244 C (2.481) 2% 19% 27% 40% 10% 4% 52

Review Summary

0% recommended (0 of 1 reviews)

Category Average A B C D F Reviews
Overall Instructor D (1.000) 0 0 0 1 0 1
Overall Course B (3.000) 0 1 0 0 0 1
Communication Skills F (0.000) 0 0 0 0 1 1
Personality D (1.000) 0 0 0 1 0 1
Course Content A+ (4.000) 1 0 0 0 0 1
Exams and Grading D (1.000) 0 0 0 1 0 1
Time Required A+ (4.000) 1 0 0 0 0 1
Grade You Earned C (2.000) 0 0 1 0 0 1

Courses Taught in Spring 2010

Section Course Days Start End Enrolled Avail Type Average W-Rate Distro Instructor Room/Building
1 ME 4183-1 TBA TBA 1 0 PANG S
1 ME 4244-1 MWF 10:40a 12:30p 77 13 2.481 2% PANG S 0152 COATES
15 ME 8000-15 TBA TBA 2 97 RES PANG S
14 ME 9000-14 TBA TBA 2 97 RES PANG S

Reviews

Not Recommended/D Instructor
Recommended/B Course
F Communication Skills
D Personality
A+ Course Content
D Exams and Grading
A+ Time Required
F Grade You Earned
Review #1 / Course: ME 4244 / Instructor: PANG S
Machine Design 2 is a great course with valuable information. I actually enjoyed the curriculum and felt it was one of the more enjoyable engineering classes. Pang is awful. His lecture is terrible and completely useless. I am enraged that I actually paid for him to teach this course. You can find his old test, and they're pretty much the same year to year. He doesn't give partial credit. Any minor mistake and you lose 75% of the points. I lost 12 points per test for minor mistakes that had nothing to do with the engineering concepts. I despise Pang and am completely disappointed in LSU for letting this man teach.
Posted: 5/16/2011 10:16:56 AM

These reviews are the subjective opinions of UniversityTools.com users and not the opinions of UniversityTools.com or Velocity Squared, LLC. The original submitter of the review is solely responsible for the review contents.