****************************************************************************** * * * Please note that these results DO NOT INCLUDE: * * * * * Course sections taught by a TA * * * Discussion, Laboratory, Independent Study, Practicum, or * * Residency course sections (results contain only LECTURES * * and SEMINARS) * * * Any course section with fewer than 5 evaluations returned * * * * Given for each item are the number responding (N), the percentage that * * strongly disagreed, the percentage that disagreed, the percentage that * * agreed, the percentage that strongly agreed, the mean, and the standard * * deviation (SD). * * * * To view a specific course or instructor, plese use the FIND feature on * * your web browser. * * * ****************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 101 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Collins, Glenn B ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 32 91.4 A 32 91.4 Sophomore 1 2.9 B 1 2.9 Junior 2 5.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 5.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 23 65.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 28.6 Required by my major 33 94.3 3 hours 2 5.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 5.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 40 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 20.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 0.0 2.6 57.9 39.5 3.4 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 40 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 38 0.0 2.6 44.7 52.6 3.5 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 38 0.0 5.3 50.0 44.7 3.4 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 39 0.0 2.6 28.2 69.2 3.7 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 40 0.0 0.0 17.5 82.5 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 2.6 17.9 79.5 3.8 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 40 0.0 2.5 22.5 75.0 3.7 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 40 0.0 5.0 25.0 70.0 3.7 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 40 0.0 2.5 20.0 77.5 3.8 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 38 0.0 2.6 52.6 44.7 3.4 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 38 0.0 7.9 57.9 34.2 3.3 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 5.7 62.9 31.4 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 0.0 2.5 25.0 72.5 3.7 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 40 0.0 2.5 37.5 60.0 3.6 0.55 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 0.0 7.9 28.9 63.2 3.6 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 0.0 2.6 21.1 76.3 3.7 0.50. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 43 Number of forms scanned = 40 Number of forms with at least one student response = 40 Percent completed = 93.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 201 001L1 SCIENTIFIC METHOD IN BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Houtz, Robert L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 95.5 Sophomore 9 40.9 B 1 4.5 Junior 8 36.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 22.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 21 95.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 4.5 Required by my major 23 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 1.23 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 21.1 42.1 36.8 3.2 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 8.3 8.3 37.5 45.8 3.2 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 43 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 55.8 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 401 001L1 TECHNICAL WRITING AND PRESENTATIONS IN BIOTECH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Strobel, Herbert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 5 45.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 54.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 27.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 9.1 36.4 36.4 18.2 2.6 0.92 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 25.0 37.5 12.5 25.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 36.4 18.2 45.5 3.1 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 9.1 36.4 45.5 3.2 0.98. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 28. Guided student report preparation 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 29. Students free to express opinions 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 78.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 201 001L1 INTRO TO FARM & NATURAL RESOURCE FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debertin, David L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 1 14.3 B 4 57.1 Junior 4 57.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 28.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 57.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 28.6 Required by my major 6 85.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 57.1 28.6 14.3 2.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 14.3 0.0 57.1 28.6 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 53.8 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 620 001L1 ADV PRODUCTION ECO I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debertin, David L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 50.0 Required by my major 4 66.7 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 33.3 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 33.3 16.7 33.3 16.7 2.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 2.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 14.3 0.0 28.6 57.1 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 14.3 0.0 57.1 28.6 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 14.3 0.0 28.6 57.1 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 42.9 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 63.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = AEC 324 401L1 AGRICULTURAL LAW INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Foree, Robert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 39.3 Junior 6 21.4 C 4 14.3 Senior 21 75.0 D 1 3.6 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.6 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 19 67.9 Required by my major 7 25.9 3 hours 2 7.1 Other (e.g. elective) 20 74.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 32 0.0 0.0 53.1 46.9 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 0.0 6.5 61.3 32.3 3.3 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 32 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 3.6 42.9 53.6 3.5 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 0.0 0.0 58.1 41.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 32 3.1 0.0 37.5 59.4 3.5 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 32 0.0 0.0 34.4 65.6 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 29 3.4 3.4 44.8 48.3 3.4 0.73 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 0.0 0.0 34.4 65.6 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 32 3.1 0.0 34.4 62.5 3.6 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 32 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 0.0 0.0 43.3 56.7 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 0.0 3.2 51.6 45.2 3.4 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 32 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 32 0.0 0.0 53.1 46.9 3.5 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 0.0 0.0 29.0 71.0 3.7 0.46 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 0.0 0.0 9.7 90.3 3.9 0.30. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 32 Number of forms with at least one student response = 32 Percent completed = 94.1 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 441G001L1 AG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ibendahl, Gregory A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 27.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 54.5 Junior 2 20.0 C 2 18.2 Senior 7 70.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 10.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 18.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 8 72.7 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 27.3 4 - 5 hours 3 27.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 18.2 27.3 45.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 18.2 9.1 36.4 36.4 2.9 1.14 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 2.9 0.94 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 27.3 18.2 45.5 9.1 2.4 1.03 14. Encouraged class participation 11 9.1 9.1 72.7 9.1 2.8 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 18.2 18.2 54.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 18.2 9.1 27.3 45.5 3.0 1.18 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 18.2 0.0 45.5 36.4 3.0 1.10 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 18.2 0.0 45.5 36.4 3.0 1.10 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 27.3 27.3 27.3 18.2 2.4 1.12 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 18.2 18.2 54.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 18.2 18.2 45.5 18.2 2.6 1.03. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 61.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 001L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Isaacs, Steven ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 40.7 Junior 7 25.9 C 1 3.7 Senior 20 74.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 14.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 40.7 Required by my major 22 81.5 3 hours 10 37.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 18.5 4 - 5 hours 2 7.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 11.1 14.8 40.7 33.3 3.0 0.98 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 3.7 7.4 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.78 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 7.4 0.0 55.6 37.0 3.2 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 7.4 7.4 37.0 48.1 3.3 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 3.7 0.0 44.4 51.9 3.4 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 3.7 7.4 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 0.0 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 3.7 3.7 40.7 51.9 3.4 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 7.7 42.3 50.0 3.4 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 3.7 44.4 48.1 3.4 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 7.4 37.0 55.6 3.5 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 3.7 0.0 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 3.7 3.7 51.9 40.7 3.3 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 3.7 3.7 51.9 40.7 3.3 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 3.7 0.0 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 3.7 7.4 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 0.0 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 3.7 0.0 29.6 66.7 3.6 0.69. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 27 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 002L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Isaacs, Steven ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 40.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 40.9 Junior 8 36.4 C 3 13.6 Senior 14 63.6 D 1 4.5 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 18.2 Studies Program 1 4.5 2 hours 10 45.5 Required by my major 20 90.9 3 hours 4 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.5 4 - 5 hours 1 4.5 6 - 7 hours 2 9.1 8 or more hours 1 4.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 4.2 45.8 41.7 8.3 2.5 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 0.0 16.0 64.0 20.0 3.0 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 8.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 4.0 16.0 52.0 28.0 3.0 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 4.0 56.0 40.0 3.4 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 4.0 40.0 56.0 3.5 0.59. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 101 003L1 ECO OF FOOD & AGRICUL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marchant, ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 15.2 A 28 84.8 Sophomore 8 24.2 B 4 12.1 Junior 10 30.3 C 1 3.0 Senior 10 30.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 11 33.3 Studies Program 22 66.7 2 hours 9 27.3 Required by my major 9 27.3 3 hours 10 30.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 6.1 4 - 5 hours 3 9.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 36 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 0.0 0.0 30.6 69.4 3.7 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 0.0 2.8 19.4 77.8 3.8 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 0.0 2.9 31.4 65.7 3.6 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 0.0 2.8 38.9 58.3 3.6 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 0.0 32.4 67.6 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 2.8 36.1 61.1 3.6 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 34 2.9 8.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 36 2.8 2.8 25.0 69.4 3.6 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 0.0 20.0 56.7 23.3 3.0 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 5.7 62.9 31.4 3.3 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 12.1 60.6 27.3 3.2 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 5.7 22.9 60.0 11.4 2.8 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 36 0.0 8.3 44.4 47.2 3.4 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 2.8 0.0 16.7 80.6 3.8 0.60. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 23 0.0 8.7 87.0 4.3 3.0 0.37 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 28 0.0 7.1 75.0 17.9 3.1 0.50 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 27 0.0 0.0 59.3 40.7 3.4 0.50 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 27 3.7 18.5 66.7 11.1 2.9 0.66 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 36 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 101 004L1 ECO OF FOOD & AGRICUL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marchant, ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 20.0 A 18 60.0 Sophomore 8 26.7 B 11 36.7 Junior 10 33.3 C 1 3.3 Senior 6 20.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 14 46.7 Studies Program 21 70.0 2 hours 11 36.7 Required by my major 8 26.7 3 hours 3 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.3 4 - 5 hours 2 6.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 10.3 13.8 44.8 31.0 3.0 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 3.6 3.6 50.0 42.9 3.3 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 3.3 36.7 60.0 3.6 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 6.7 50.0 43.3 3.4 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 3.3 50.0 46.7 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 34.5 48.3 17.2 2.8 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 20.8 66.7 12.5 2.9 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 30.0 46.7 23.3 2.9 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 0.0 76.7 23.3 3.2 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 3.4 48.3 31.0 17.2 2.6 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 23.3 43.3 33.3 3.1 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 3.3 36.7 60.0 3.6 0.57. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 22 0.0 31.8 45.5 22.7 2.9 0.75 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 25 0.0 16.0 56.0 28.0 3.1 0.67 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 0.0 8.7 56.5 34.8 3.3 0.62 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 16 12.5 25.0 43.8 18.8 2.7 0.95 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 42 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 Percent completed = 71.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 300 001L1 TOPS AEC:SENIOR SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 12.5 Senior 16 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 37.5 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 1 6.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 31.3 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 1 6.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 5.6 0.0 61.1 33.3 3.2 0.73 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 6.3 6.3 56.3 31.3 3.1 0.81 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 5.9 5.9 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 2.7 0.97 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 5.9 17.6 52.9 23.5 2.9 0.83 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 5.9 35.3 52.9 3.4 0.86 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 5.6 5.6 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 5.6 5.6 22.2 66.7 3.5 0.86. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 7 14.3 0.0 28.6 57.1 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 81.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 300 002L1 TOPS AEC:SENIOR SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 70.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 10 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 10.0 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 6 60.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 17 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 64.7 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 001L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 2.5 A 4 10.0 Sophomore 1 2.5 B 27 67.5 Junior 22 55.0 C 9 22.5 Senior 16 40.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 2.5 Studies Program 1 2.5 2 hours 13 32.5 Required by my major 29 72.5 3 hours 16 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 10 25.0 4 - 5 hours 8 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 5.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 45 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 45 2.2 11.1 64.4 22.2 3.1 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 0.0 2.3 61.4 36.4 3.3 0.53 4. Exams reflected what was taught 45 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 45 2.2 8.9 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 45 0.0 4.4 64.4 31.1 3.3 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 45 24.4 37.8 22.2 15.6 2.3 1.01 8. Graded assignments included comments 44 2.3 11.4 61.4 25.0 3.1 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 45 0.0 2.2 51.1 46.7 3.4 0.55 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 45 0.0 0.0 37.8 62.2 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 45 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 45 2.2 0.0 48.9 48.9 3.4 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 44 0.0 6.8 54.5 38.6 3.3 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 45 0.0 0.0 37.8 62.2 3.6 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 42 0.0 2.4 64.3 33.3 3.3 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 45 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 44 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 45 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 45 0.0 4.4 66.7 28.9 3.2 0.53 21. Overall quality of teaching 45 2.2 0.0 57.8 40.0 3.4 0.61. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 48 Number of forms scanned = 45 Number of forms with at least one student response = 45 Percent completed = 93.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 311 001L1 LIVESTOCK/MEAT MARKETING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Meyer, Alphonse L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 29.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 62.5 Junior 5 20.8 C 1 4.2 Senior 19 79.2 D 1 4.2 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 12 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 41.7 Required by my major 10 41.7 3 hours 2 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 14 58.3 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 8.7 4.3 56.5 30.4 3.1 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 5.6 5.6 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.79 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 4.2 4.2 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.72 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 4.2 4.2 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 4.2 4.2 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 4.2 0.0 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 23 4.3 0.0 73.9 21.7 3.1 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 4.2 4.2 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 24 4.2 0.0 50.0 45.8 3.4 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 4.3 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 4.2 4.2 54.2 37.5 3.3 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 4.2 4.2 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 4.2 0.0 54.2 41.7 3.3 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 4.3 8.7 52.2 34.8 3.2 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 21.7 52.2 26.1 3.0 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 13.0 52.2 34.8 3.2 0.67. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 92.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 545 001L1 RESOURCE AND ENVIRON ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pagoulatos, Angelos ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 11.1 Junior 4 22.2 C 1 5.6 Senior 11 61.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 16.7 Required by my major 14 77.8 3 hours 3 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 22.2 4 - 5 hours 2 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 11.1 50.0 33.3 5.6 2.3 0.77 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 22.2 33.3 38.9 3.1 0.94 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 22.2 61.1 16.7 2.9 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 27.8 55.6 16.7 2.9 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 16.7 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 22.2 61.1 16.7 2.9 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 5.6 27.8 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 16.7 61.1 22.2 3.1 0.64. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 94.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 645 001L1 NATURAL RESOURCE ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pagoulatos, Angelos ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 20.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 20.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 313 001L1 TOBACCO MARKETING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Snell, Will ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 68.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 31.6 Junior 2 11.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 16 88.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 52.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 36.8 Required by my major 6 33.3 3 hours 2 10.5 Other (e.g. elective) 12 66.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.31. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 445G401L1 INTRO RESOURCE/ENVIR ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Szymanski, Marcella ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 1 11.1 C 4 44.4 Senior 8 88.9 D 1 11.1 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0