****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 506 001L1 PRODUCTIV/QUAL CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 20 95.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 4.8 Junior 3 14.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 17 81.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.8 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 6 28.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 33.3 Required by my major 19 90.5 3 hours 4 19.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 9.5 4 - 5 hours 1 4.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 3 14.3 % % 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 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 11.1 50.0 38.9 3.3 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 3.8 0.41 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 17.4 82.6 3.8 0.39 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 17.4 82.6 3.8 0.39. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 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 = 45 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 53.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 600 401L1 PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 26 100.0 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 25 92.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 2 7.4 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 6 23.1 Studies Program 1 3.8 2 hours 11 42.3 Required by my major 25 96.2 3 hours 8 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.8 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 31 3.2 16.1 71.0 9.7 2.9 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 30.8 15.4 53.8 0.0 2.2 0.91 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 9.7 16.1 67.7 6.5 2.7 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 3.2 0.0 77.4 19.4 3.1 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 0.0 0.0 74.2 25.8 3.3 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 3.2 83.9 12.9 3.1 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 3.2 0.0 67.7 29.0 3.2 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 10.0 50.0 36.7 3.3 2.3 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 19.4 38.7 38.7 3.2 2.3 0.82 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 3.2 0.0 35.5 61.3 3.5 0.68 11. Was available for consultation 20 15.0 5.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.85 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 6.5 16.1 71.0 6.5 2.8 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 22.6 29.0 45.2 3.2 2.3 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 31 3.2 9.7 71.0 16.1 3.0 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 13.6 68.2 13.6 2.9 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 10.0 23.3 56.7 10.0 2.7 0.80 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 10.0 23.3 60.0 6.7 2.6 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 12.9 19.4 58.1 9.7 2.6 0.84 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 16.1 54.8 29.0 0.0 2.1 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 25.8 41.9 32.3 0.0 2.1 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 29.0 29.0 35.5 6.5 2.2 0.95. % % 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 = 37 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 83.8 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = DIS 300 401L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hauser, Karina ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 45.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 50.0 Junior 7 29.2 C 1 4.2 Senior 17 70.8 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 7 30.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 43.5 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 5 21.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 1 4.3 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 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 7.7 0.0 69.2 23.1 3.1 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 4.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 0.0 8.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 4.0 12.0 60.0 24.0 3.0 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 8.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 11.5 46.2 42.3 3.3 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 32.0 36.0 28.0 2.9 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 0.0 72.7 22.7 3.1 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 4.0 8.0 60.0 28.0 3.1 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 4.0 12.0 60.0 24.0 3.0 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 4.0 12.0 60.0 24.0 3.0 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 4.0 24.0 48.0 24.0 2.9 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 3.8 23.1 57.7 15.4 2.8 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 4.3 26.1 43.5 26.1 2.9 0.85. % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 40 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 65.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 002L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lederer, Al ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 85.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 15.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 20 100.0 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 2 10.0 Studies Program 1 5.0 2 hours 7 35.0 Required by my major 15 75.0 3 hours 3 15.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 20.0 4 - 5 hours 5 25.0 6 - 7 hours 3 15.0 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 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 22.7 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 13.6 63.6 22.7 3.1 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 4.5 4.5 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 22.7 54.5 22.7 3.0 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 4.5 13.6 54.5 27.3 3.0 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 4.5 0.0 31.8 63.6 3.5 0.74 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 13.6 59.1 27.3 3.1 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 9.1 4.5 45.5 40.9 3.2 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 4.8 4.8 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 4.5 63.6 27.3 3.1 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 4.5 4.5 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 4.5 4.5 63.6 27.3 3.1 0.71 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 9.1 9.1 54.5 27.3 3.0 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 9.1 13.6 50.0 27.3 3.0 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 9.1 9.1 40.9 40.9 3.1 0.94. % % 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 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 88.0 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 003L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lederer, Al ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 84.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 16.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 25 100.0 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 6 24.0 Studies Program 2 8.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 23 92.0 3 hours 5 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 4.0 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 26 0.0 0.0 65.4 34.6 3.3 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 3.8 30.8 61.5 3.8 2.7 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 3.8 19.2 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 30.8 61.5 7.7 2.8 0.59 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 3.8 73.1 23.1 3.2 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 11.5 65.4 23.1 3.1 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 0.0 65.4 34.6 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 11.5 69.2 19.2 3.1 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 0.0 38.5 42.3 19.2 2.8 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 3.8 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 15.4 50.0 34.6 3.2 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 36.0 44.0 16.0 2.7 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 9.1 77.3 13.6 3.0 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 29.2 62.5 8.3 2.8 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 43.5 47.8 8.7 2.7 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 11.5 76.9 11.5 3.0 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 56.0 36.0 8.0 2.5 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 3.8 34.6 42.3 19.2 2.8 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 3.8 30.8 46.2 19.2 2.8 0.80. % % 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 26 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 89.7 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 300 006L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 64.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 25.0 Junior 5 17.9 C 3 10.7 Senior 23 82.1 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 17 60.7 Studies Program 2 7.1 2 hours 8 28.6 Required by my major 26 92.9 3 hours 3 10.7 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 29 3.4 3.4 65.5 27.6 3.2 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 10.3 31.0 51.7 6.9 2.6 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 3.4 6.9 65.5 24.1 3.1 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 3.4 6.9 55.2 34.5 3.2 0.73 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 7.1 60.7 28.6 3.1 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 3.6 60.7 35.7 3.3 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 0.0 51.7 48.3 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 3.4 24.1 44.8 27.6 3.0 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 3.4 20.7 58.6 17.2 2.9 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 20.7 51.7 27.6 3.1 0.70 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 7.7 57.7 34.6 3.3 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 6.9 24.1 51.7 17.2 2.8 0.82 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 14.3 35.7 42.9 7.1 2.4 0.84 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 10.7 67.9 21.4 3.1 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 4.2 20.8 62.5 12.5 2.8 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 3.4 6.9 72.4 17.2 3.0 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 3.4 3.4 65.5 27.6 3.2 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 3.4 13.8 55.2 27.6 3.1 0.75 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 10.7 46.4 32.1 10.7 2.4 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 10.3 20.7 55.2 13.8 2.7 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 10.3 17.2 55.2 17.2 2.8 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 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 = 51 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 56.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 611 401L1 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTER INTEGRATED MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 44.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 55.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 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 5 55.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 3 33.3 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 6 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 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 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 44.4 22.2 33.3 0.0 1.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 11.1 0.0 44.4 44.4 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 12.5 0.0 75.0 12.5 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 44.4 22.2 22.2 11.1 2.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 33.3 22.2 33.3 11.1 2.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 0.0 2.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 11.1 77.8 11.1 0.0 2.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 22.2 55.6 22.2 0.0 2.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 44.4 33.3 22.2 0.0 1.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 44.4 33.3 11.1 11.1 1.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 44.4 11.1 33.3 11.1 2.1 . . % % 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 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 64.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 001L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 58.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 41.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 29 96.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.3 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 7 23.3 Studies Program 3 10.0 2 hours 11 36.7 Required by my major 26 86.7 3 hours 6 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.3 4 - 5 hours 5 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.3 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 31 3.2 12.9 61.3 22.6 3.0 0.71 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 38.7 32.3 25.8 3.2 1.9 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 6.5 12.9 64.5 16.1 2.9 0.75 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 3.2 9.7 71.0 16.1 3.0 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 6.5 6.5 67.7 19.4 3.0 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 6.5 29.0 48.4 16.1 2.7 0.82 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 3.2 64.5 32.3 3.3 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 3.2 45.2 48.4 3.2 2.5 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 3.3 3.3 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 0.0 51.6 48.4 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 29 0.0 3.4 62.1 34.5 3.3 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 3.2 12.9 54.8 29.0 3.1 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 3.3 36.7 43.3 16.7 2.7 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 8.0 28.0 56.0 8.0 2.6 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 6.5 9.7 51.6 32.3 3.1 0.83 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 3.2 9.7 54.8 32.3 3.2 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 3.2 12.9 54.8 29.0 3.1 0.75 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 10.3 37.9 48.3 3.4 2.4 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 9.7 6.5 58.1 25.8 3.0 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 6.5 9.7 61.3 22.6 3.0 0.77. % % 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 = 38 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 81.6 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 002L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 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 2 12.5 Studies Program 4 25.0 2 hours 1 6.3 Required by my major 12 75.0 3 hours 6 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 18.8 6 - 7 hours 4 25.0 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 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 53.3 26.7 13.3 2.5 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 12.5 68.8 18.8 3.1 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 6.7 0.0 66.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 12.5 31.3 43.8 12.5 2.6 0.89 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 33.3 53.3 6.7 2.6 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 37.5 31.3 31.3 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 2.6 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 18.8 43.8 37.5 3.2 0.75. % % 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 76.2 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 401L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 25.0 Sophomore 1 4.2 B 17 70.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 4.2 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 23 95.8 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 2 8.3 2 hours 5 20.8 Required by my major 22 91.7 3 hours 9 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 20.8 6 - 7 hours 3 12.5 8 or more hours 2 8.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 3.7 3.7 70.4 22.2 3.1 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 7.4 51.9 40.7 0.0 2.3 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 7.4 81.5 11.1 3.0 0.44 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 3.7 11.1 63.0 22.2 3.0 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 3.7 7.4 74.1 14.8 3.0 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 3.7 29.6 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 7.4 18.5 66.7 7.4 2.7 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 3.7 7.4 63.0 25.9 3.1 0.70 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 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 3.7 0.0 74.1 22.2 3.1 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 11.1 81.5 3.7 2.9 0.53 14. Encouraged class participation 26 3.8 11.5 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 3.7 0.0 55.6 40.7 3.3 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 3.8 3.8 65.4 26.9 3.2 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 3.7 0.0 74.1 22.2 3.1 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 8.0 48.0 44.0 0.0 2.4 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 14.8 44.4 37.0 3.1 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 3.7 7.4 48.1 40.7 3.3 0.76. % % 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 = 40 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 67.5 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = DIS 320 003L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Newkirk, Henry ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 26.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 68.4 Junior 3 15.8 C 1 5.3 Senior 16 84.2 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 9 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 10 52.6 3 hours 2 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 47.4 4 - 5 hours 1 5.6 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 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 21 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 15.8 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 23.8 61.9 14.3 2.9 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 28.6 47.6 23.8 3.0 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 9.5 76.2 14.3 3.0 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 9.5 71.4 19.0 3.1 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 19.0 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 5.0 45.0 40.0 10.0 2.6 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 20.0 25.0 50.0 5.0 2.4 0.88 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 5.0 30.0 60.0 5.0 2.7 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 5.3 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 10.5 21.1 52.6 15.8 2.7 0.87 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 15.0 50.0 30.0 5.0 2.3 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 85.0 10.0 3.1 0.39 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 11.1 27.8 50.0 11.1 2.6 0.85 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 15.0 30.0 45.0 10.0 2.5 0.89 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 15.0 25.0 55.0 5.0 2.5 0.83 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 9.5 28.6 52.4 9.5 2.6 0.80 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 19.0 47.6 28.6 4.8 2.2 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 9.5 42.9 38.1 9.5 2.5 0.81 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 23.8 33.3 38.1 4.8 2.2 0.89. % % 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 72.4 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 520 001L1 ADV BUS DATA PROCSS/INFO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pakath, Ramakrishnan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 23 71.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 28.1 Junior 3 9.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 21 67.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 22.6 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 9.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 31.3 Required by my major 26 81.3 3 hours 10 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 18.8 4 - 5 hours 5 15.6 6 - 7 hours 2 6.3 8 or more hours 2 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 35 0.0 0.0 34.3 65.7 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 2.9 40.0 57.1 3.5 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 35 0.0 8.6 37.1 54.3 3.5 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 8.8 20.6 41.2 29.4 2.9 0.93 8. Graded assignments included comments 32 12.5 12.5 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.94 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 0.0 5.7 54.3 40.0 3.3 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 11. Was available for consultation 32 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 2.9 40.0 57.1 3.5 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 0.0 17.1 37.1 45.7 3.3 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 17.1 51.4 31.4 3.1 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 0.0 6.9 62.1 31.0 3.2 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 2.9 61.8 35.3 3.3 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 0.0 14.7 50.0 35.3 3.2 0.69 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 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 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 35 0.0 5.7 34.3 60.0 3.5 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 2.9 37.1 60.0 3.6 0.56. % % 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 37. Question 37 31 3.2 0.0 16.1 80.6 0.0 3.7 0.63 38. Question 38 31 3.2 0.0 25.8 71.0 0.0 3.6 0.66 39. Question 39 30 3.3 6.7 23.3 66.7 0.0 3.5 0.78 40. Question 40 31 3.2 0.0 29.0 67.7 0.0 3.6 0.67 41. Question 41 31 3.2 0.0 22.6 74.2 0.0 3.7 0.65 42. Question 42 28 3.6 10.7 35.7 50.0 0.0 3.3 0.82 43. Question 43 31 9.7 0.0 51.6 38.7 0.0 3.2 0.87 44. Question 44 30 3.3 13.3 43.3 40.0 0.0 3.2 0.81 Number of forms preslugged = 45 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 77.8 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 001L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 53.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 34.6 Junior 6 22.2 C 3 11.5 Senior 21 77.8 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 37.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 40.7 Required by my major 16 59.3 3 hours 5 18.5 Other (e.g. elective) 11 40.7 4 - 5 hours 1 3.7 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 28 0.0 3.6 42.9 53.6 3.5 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 7.1 28.6 50.0 14.3 2.7 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 10.7 57.1 32.1 3.2 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 7.1 60.7 28.6 3.1 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 3.6 3.6 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 0.0 10.7 50.0 39.3 3.3 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 3.6 46.4 50.0 3.5 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 26 3.8 0.0 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 3.6 21.4 28.6 46.4 3.2 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 4.0 20.0 52.0 24.0 3.0 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 7.1 53.6 39.3 3.3 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 7.1 46.4 46.4 3.4 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 17.9 46.4 35.7 3.2 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 14.3 39.3 46.4 3.3 0.72. % % 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 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 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 = 34 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 82.4 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 001L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 72.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 27.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 30 100.0 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 6 20.0 Studies Program 2 6.7 2 hours 13 43.3 Required by my major 26 86.7 3 hours 7 23.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 6.7 4 - 5 hours 3 10.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 3.3 % % 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 23.3 50.0 26.7 3.0 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 6.7 56.7 36.7 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 3.7 77.8 18.5 3.1 0.46 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 3.6 71.4 25.0 3.2 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 6.7 63.3 30.0 3.2 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 10.3 58.6 31.0 3.2 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 15.4 65.4 19.2 3.0 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 10.0 56.7 33.3 3.2 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 24.1 55.2 20.7 3.0 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 33.3 43.3 23.3 2.9 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 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 = 34 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = B&E 300 001L1 CAREER DEVELOPMENT IN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hawkins, Julia L. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 12.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 8 100.0 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 3 37.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 62.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 1 12.5 3 hours 1 12.5 Other (e.g. elective) 7 87.5 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 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . . % % 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 80.0 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 391 005L1 ECON & BUS STATISTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ali, Mukhtar M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 60.0 Sophomore 2 6.7 B 7 23.3 Junior 12 40.0 C 5 16.7 Senior 16 53.3 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 5 16.7 Studies Program 1 3.3 2 hours 14 46.7 Required by my major 29 96.7 3 hours 9 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 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 34 2.9 2.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 2.9 29.4 50.0 17.6 2.8 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 8.8 50.0 41.2 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 5.9 55.9 38.2 3.3 0.59 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 5.9 17.6 47.1 29.4 3.0 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 0.0 67.6 32.4 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 2.9 26.5 44.1 26.5 2.9 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 33 9.1 6.1 45.5 39.4 3.2 0.91 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 33 0.0 3.0 48.5 48.5 3.5 0.56 11. Was available for consultation 29 3.4 0.0 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 33 6.1 9.1 60.6 24.2 3.0 0.77 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 33 12.1 39.4 30.3 18.2 2.5 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 33 6.1 12.1 60.6 21.2 3.0 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 3.7 11.1 66.7 18.5 3.0 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 2.9 2.9 70.6 23.5 3.1 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 8.8 2.9 67.6 20.6 3.0 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 9.1 3.0 60.6 27.3 3.1 0.83 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 32 25.0 37.5 28.1 9.4 2.2 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 11.8 20.6 50.0 17.6 2.7 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 5.9 17.6 41.2 35.3 3.1 0.89. % % 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 = 41 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 82.9 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 706 001L1 INTRO ECONOMETRICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ali, Mukhtar M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 1 7.1 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 6.7 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 10 66.7 3 hours 7 46.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 26.7 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 13.3 8 or more hours 3 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 0.34 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 6.3 56.3 31.3 3.1 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52. % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 88.9 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 731 001L1 LABOR ECONOMICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berger, Mark C ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 60.0 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 1 20.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 20.0 % % 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 391 001L1 ECON & BUS STATISTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bollinger, Christopher ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 50.0 Junior 11 55.0 C 0 0.0 Senior