****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 634 001L1 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Abu-Lebdeh, Ghassan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 88.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 11.1 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 11.1 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 44.4 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 3 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 4 44.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 22.2 11.1 44.4 22.2 2.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 33.3 44.4 11.1 11.1 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 33.3 33.3 11.1 22.2 2.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 40.0 0.0 40.0 20.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 44.4 22.2 11.1 22.2 2.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 33.3 22.2 22.2 22.2 2.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 33.3 33.3 22.2 11.1 2.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 33.3 22.2 33.3 11.1 2.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 33.3 11.1 22.2 33.3 2.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 22.2 22.2 22.2 33.3 2.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 22.2 33.3 11.1 33.3 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 22.2 33.3 33.3 11.1 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 22.2 11.1 55.6 11.1 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 22.2 11.1 44.4 22.2 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 22.2 22.2 22.2 33.3 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 62.5 0.0 37.5 0.0 1.8 . . % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 331 001L1 TRANSPORTATION ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 47.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 18 45.0 Junior 28 70.0 C 3 7.5 Senior 12 30.0 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 3 7.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 14 35.0 Required by my major 41 100.0 3 hours 13 32.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 2.5 8 or more hours 1 2.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 41 0.0 0.0 78.0 22.0 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 13.0 17.4 34.8 34.8 2.9 1.04 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 40 0.0 2.5 80.0 17.5 3.2 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 0.0 7.3 70.7 22.0 3.1 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 41 0.0 7.3 78.0 14.6 3.1 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 41 0.0 2.4 75.6 22.0 3.2 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 41 0.0 4.9 70.7 24.4 3.2 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 41 0.0 36.6 51.2 12.2 2.8 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 41 2.4 31.7 39.0 26.8 2.9 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 41 0.0 12.2 63.4 24.4 3.1 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 41 0.0 0.0 75.6 24.4 3.2 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 41 0.0 14.6 68.3 17.1 3.0 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 41 2.4 22.0 61.0 14.6 2.9 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 40 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 37 0.0 13.5 73.0 13.5 3.0 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 40 0.0 7.5 75.0 17.5 3.1 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 0.0 2.4 73.2 24.4 3.2 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 0.0 2.5 82.5 15.0 3.1 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 41 2.4 24.4 61.0 12.2 2.8 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 40 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 3.1 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 40 2.5 27.5 50.0 20.0 2.9 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 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 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 = 47 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 43 Percent completed = 91.5 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 58.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 12 100.0 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 16.7 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 6 50.0 Required by my major 11 91.7 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 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 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 58.3 33.3 0.0 2.3 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49. % % 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 11 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.40 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 35. Instructor helped with my problems 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G003A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 36.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 63.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 100.0 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 4 36.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 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 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 27.3 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 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 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 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 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 54.5 45.5 0.0 2.5 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 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 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 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . % 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 = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 679 001L1 GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 100.0 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 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 37.5 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % 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 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 12.5 62.5 12.5 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 12.5 62.5 25.0 0.0 2.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 75.0 12.5 12.5 2.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 62.5 25.0 12.5 2.5 . . % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 582 001L1 ADV STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 23.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 70.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 5.9 Senior 14 77.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 5.6 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 5.6 Studies Program 1 5.6 2 hours 4 22.2 Required by my major 13 72.2 3 hours 3 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 22.2 4 - 5 hours 10 55.6 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 18 5.6 11.1 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 5.6 0.0 94.4 0.0 2.9 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 11.8 29.4 52.9 5.9 2.5 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 5.6 83.3 11.1 3.1 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 22.2 72.2 5.6 2.8 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 27.8 61.1 5.6 2.7 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 94.4 5.6 3.1 0.24 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 5.6 88.9 5.6 3.0 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 94.1 0.0 2.9 0.24 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53. % % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 682 001L1 ADV STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 40.0 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 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 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 20.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 40.0 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 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 2.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . . % % 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 = 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 004L1 TOPICS CE:MICROBIOLOGY IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGR. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 57.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 42.9 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 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 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . . % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 001S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 78.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 21.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 19 100.0 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 16 84.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 15.8 Required by my major 18 100.0 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 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 0.0 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 5.6 83.3 11.1 3.1 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 0.0 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 5.6 0.0 83.3 11.1 3.0 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 29.4 64.7 5.9 2.8 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 5.6 5.6 61.1 27.8 3.1 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 11.1 61.1 22.2 3.0 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 5.6 72.2 22.2 3.2 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 23.5 64.7 11.8 2.9 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 15.8 47.4 36.8 3.2 0.71. % % 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 0.0 100.0 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 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 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 002S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 25 86.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 13.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 28 96.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.4 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 72.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 24.1 Required by my major 29 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.4 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 29 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 6.9 6.9 65.5 20.7 3.0 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 6.9 62.1 31.0 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 3.4 10.3 65.5 20.7 3.0 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 0.0 69.0 31.0 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 10.3 55.2 34.5 3.2 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 0.0 7.1 75.0 17.9 3.1 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 3.4 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 6.9 58.6 34.5 3.3 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 3.6 14.3 67.9 14.3 2.9 0.66 % % % % 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 50.0 32.1 3.1 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62. % % 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 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 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 = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 482 001L1 ELEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 10.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 42.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 9 47.4 Senior 19 100.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 10.5 Required by my major 18 94.7 3 hours 7 36.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.3 4 - 5 hours 8 42.1 6 - 7 hours 1 5.3 8 or more hours 1 5.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 5.3 84.2 10.5 3.1 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 84.2 5.3 2.9 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 26.3 36.8 36.8 0.0 2.1 0.81 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 5.3 5.3 78.9 10.5 2.9 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 84.2 15.8 3.2 0.37 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 5.3 73.7 21.1 3.2 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 10.5 31.6 47.4 10.5 2.6 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 15.8 10.5 73.7 0.0 2.6 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 19 5.3 10.5 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 5.3 0.0 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 31.6 52.6 5.3 2.5 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 19 5.3 15.8 63.2 15.8 2.9 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 0.89 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 5.3 10.5 68.4 15.8 2.9 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 5.3 5.3 84.2 5.3 2.9 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 10.5 42.1 47.4 0.0 2.4 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 5.3 47.4 47.4 0.0 2.4 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 10.5 21.1 57.9 10.5 2.7 0.82. % % 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 76.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 486G001L1 REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 46.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 46.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 15 100.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 2 13.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 7 46.7 6 - 7 hours 6 40.0 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 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 7.1 78.6 14.3 3.1 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 26.7 26.7 40.0 6.7 2.3 0.96 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 26.7 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70. % % 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 505 001L1 CONSTRUCT PROJ PLAN/MGMT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hancher, Donn E. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 40.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 16 59.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 23 85.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 14.8 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 5 18.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 12 44.4 Required by my major 14 51.9 3 hours 7 25.9 Other (e.g. elective) 13 48.1 4 - 5 hours 2 7.4 6 - 7 hours 1 3.7 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 27 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 7.4 63.0 29.6 3.2 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 7.4 59.3 33.3 3.3 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 7.4 66.7 25.9 3.2 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 25.9 63.0 11.1 2.9 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 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 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 19.2 57.7 23.1 3.0 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58. % % 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 90.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G001L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- 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 9 100.0 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 22.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 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 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 8.3 Senior 12 100.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 33.3 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 1 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 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 16.7 50.0 16.7 16.7 2.3 0.98 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 12 8.3 25.0 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.94 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 41.7 58.3 0.0 2.6 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 0.0 45.5 45.5 3.3 0.90. % % 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G003L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 60.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 10.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 30.0 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 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 0.0 1.6 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 30.0 60.0 10.0 2.8 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 50.0 40.0 10.0 2.6 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82. % % 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 90.9 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G004L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 64.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 100.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 14.3 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 8 57.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 21.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 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 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 40.0 26.7 26.7 6.7 2.0 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 6.7 73.3 13.3 2.9 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 2.9 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 3.0 0.38 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 6.7 40.0 46.7 6.7 2.5 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 20.0 73.3 6.7 2.9 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 53.3 33.3 6.7 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 15 6.7 20.0 60.0 13.3 2.8 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 6.7 20.0 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.83. % % 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 = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 671 001L1 ADVANCED SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 88.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 100.0 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 10.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 20.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 70.0 4 - 5 hours 4 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 4 40.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 10.0 0.0 70.0 20.0 3.0 0.82 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 3.1 0.88 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70. % % 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 = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 784 001L1 SHELL STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harik, Issam E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 40.0 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 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 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 3 60.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0