1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 22 43.1 A 41 82.0 Sophomore 15 29.4 B 6 12.0 Junior 2 3.9 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 21.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.0 Pass or Audit 3 6.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 33 66.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 20.0 Required by my major 3 6.3 3 hours 2 4.0 Other (e.g. elective) 45 93.8 4 - 5 hours 4 8.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 2.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 55 0.0 0.0 30.9 69.1 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 55 1.8 9.1 56.4 32.7 3.2 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 56 0.0 1.8 62.5 35.7 3.3 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 56 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 3.7 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 56 0.0 0.0 26.8 73.2 3.7 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 56 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 56 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 3.7 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 55 0.0 0.0 47.3 52.7 3.5 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 56 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 56 0.0 0.0 19.6 80.4 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 55 0.0 0.0 23.6 76.4 3.8 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 55 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.40 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 55 0.0 1.8 34.5 63.6 3.6 0.53 14. Encouraged class participation 56 0.0 0.0 17.9 82.1 3.8 0.39 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 54 0.0 1.9 48.1 50.0 3.5 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 51 0.0 3.9 54.9 41.2 3.4 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 52 0.0 3.8 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 55 0.0 0.0 49.1 50.9 3.5 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 54 0.0 5.6 46.3 48.1 3.4 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 56 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.46 21. Overall quality of teaching 56 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 0.33 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC % % 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 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 = at least 68 Number of forms scanned = 56 Number of forms with at least one student response = 56 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 136 50.6 Sophomore 8 3.0 B 113 42.0 Junior 82 30.4 C 16 5.9 Senior 150 55.6 D 1 0.4 Graduate 28 10.4 E/Fail 1 0.4 Professional 1 0.4 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.4 Pass or Audit 2 0.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 72 26.7 Studies Program 3 1.1 2 hours 97 35.9 Required by my major 198 73.3 3 hours 58 21.5 Other (e.g. elective) 69 25.6 4 - 5 hours 31 11.5 6 - 7 hours 10 3.7 8 or more hours 2 0.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 281 0.4 3.2 49.1 47.3 3.4 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 143 7.7 16.8 49.0 26.6 2.9 0.86 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 274 1.5 9.1 52.9 36.5 3.2 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 237 1.7 5.1 52.3 40.9 3.3 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 279 0.7 3.6 49.8 45.9 3.4 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 273 1.1 10.3 47.6 41.0 3.3 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 277 2.5 10.5 45.1 41.9 3.3 0.75 8. Graded assignments included comments 275 0.4 11.3 53.5 34.9 3.2 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 274 2.2 10.2 48.9 38.7 3.2 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 274 1.1 2.9 40.5 55.5 3.5 0.61 11. Was available for consultation 272 0.0 1.1 46.3 52.6 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 279 0.4 6.8 48.0 44.8 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 273 3.7 16.1 40.3 39.9 3.2 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 278 0.0 2.5 49.6 47.8 3.5 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 248 0.0 9.7 60.1 30.2 3.2 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 274 1.1 8.4 52.2 38.3 3.3 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 272 1.5 9.9 51.5 37.1 3.2 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 275 0.7 4.0 56.7 38.5 3.3 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 270 3.0 22.6 44.4 30.0 3.0 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 280 3.2 17.9 40.4 38.6 3.1 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 279 2.2 11.8 39.4 46.6 3.3 0.76 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 28. Guided student report preparation 12 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.74 29. Students free to express opinions 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 31. Developed abil to conduct research 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 324 Number of forms scanned = 282 Number of forms with at least one student response = 281 Percent completed = 86.7 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Education SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 42 93.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 6.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 30.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 32 69.6 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 11 24.4 Studies Program 3 6.7 2 hours 15 33.3 Required by my major 35 77.8 3 hours 13 28.9 Other (e.g. elective) 7 15.6 4 - 5 hours 4 8.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 4.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 46 0.0 2.2 37.0 60.9 3.6 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 43 0.0 0.0 37.2 62.8 3.6 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 2.7 2.7 35.1 59.5 3.5 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 45 4.4 0.0 40.0 55.6 3.5 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 10.3 5.1 33.3 51.3 3.3 0.97 8. Graded assignments included comments 37 10.8 0.0 27.0 62.2 3.4 0.96 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 46 2.2 6.5 30.4 60.9 3.5 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 46 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 46 0.0 0.0 28.3 71.7 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 46 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 46 0.0 4.3 28.3 67.4 3.6 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 46 0.0 2.2 17.4 80.4 3.8 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 46 0.0 0.0 41.3 58.7 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 46 0.0 6.5 34.8 58.7 3.5 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 43 2.3 9.3 30.2 58.1 3.4 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 0.0 2.2 28.9 68.9 3.7 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 46 0.0 8.7 34.8 56.5 3.5 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 46 2.2 4.3 23.9 69.6 3.6 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 46 2.2 6.5 19.6 71.7 3.6 0.71 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Education % % 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 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 33.3 0.0 0.0 66.7 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 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 = at least 54 Number of forms scanned = 46 Number of forms with at least one student response = 46 Percent completed = 85.2 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Engineering SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 44 49.4 Sophomore 2 2.2 B 40 44.9 Junior 10 11.2 C 5 5.6 Senior 68 76.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 10.1 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 7.9 Studies Program 1 1.1 2 hours 19 21.3 Required by my major 66 75.0 3 hours 25 28.1 Other (e.g. elective) 21 23.9 4 - 5 hours 18 20.2 6 - 7 hours 10 11.2 8 or more hours 10 11.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 93 0.0 4.3 54.8 40.9 3.4 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 76 10.5 3.9 48.7 36.8 3.1 0.91 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 93 1.1 7.5 54.8 36.6 3.3 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 86 2.3 5.8 58.1 33.7 3.2 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 93 2.2 5.4 62.4 30.1 3.2 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 93 0.0 3.2 66.7 30.1 3.3 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 92 0.0 10.9 56.5 32.6 3.2 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 92 0.0 10.9 62.0 27.2 3.2 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 93 6.5 8.6 54.8 30.1 3.1 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 92 0.0 1.1 41.3 57.6 3.6 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 91 0.0 2.2 41.8 56.0 3.5 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 93 4.3 6.5 48.4 40.9 3.3 0.76 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 93 2.2 10.8 52.7 34.4 3.2 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 93 1.1 4.3 47.3 47.3 3.4 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 78 1.3 9.0 65.4 24.4 3.1 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 93 1.1 5.4 64.5 29.0 3.2 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 92 2.2 6.5 62.0 29.3 3.2 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 92 4.3 5.4 55.4 34.8 3.2 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 90 5.6 15.6 52.2 26.7 3.0 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 92 3.3 7.6 47.8 41.3 3.3 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 92 4.3 9.8 39.1 46.7 3.3 0.82 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Engineering % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 0.0 33.3 22.2 44.4 3.1 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 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 = at least 117 Number of forms scanned = 93 Number of forms with at least one student response = 93 Percent completed = 79.5 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agronomy SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 22 9.1 A 157 66.0 Sophomore 22 9.1 B 59 24.8 Junior 51 21.2 C 17 7.1 Senior 96 39.8 D 2 0.8 Graduate 47 19.5 E/Fail 1 0.4 Professional 1 0.4 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.8 Pass or Audit 2 0.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 88 36.4 Studies Program 1 0.4 2 hours 62 25.6 Required by my major 152 62.8 3 hours 40 16.5 Other (e.g. elective) 89 36.8 4 - 5 hours 21 8.7 6 - 7 hours 11 4.5 8 or more hours 20 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 264 0.0 0.8 46.6 52.7 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 156 3.8 9.0 52.6 34.6 3.2 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 249 2.0 3.2 54.6 40.2 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 171 3.5 4.1 53.8 38.6 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 259 1.5 5.4 43.6 49.4 3.4 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 252 4.0 8.7 42.5 44.8 3.3 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 245 2.4 3.7 40.8 53.1 3.4 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 236 2.1 13.6 42.4 41.9 3.2 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 264 1.5 5.3 44.7 48.5 3.4 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 263 0.0 0.0 25.1 74.9 3.7 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 252 0.8 3.6 40.9 54.8 3.5 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 265 0.8 1.9 39.6 57.7 3.5 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 265 1.1 9.4 41.5 47.9 3.4 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 264 0.4 3.8 37.5 58.3 3.5 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 221 2.3 5.0 51.1 41.6 3.3 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 259 1.2 3.1 49.4 46.3 3.4 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 253 1.2 4.3 58.5 36.0 3.3 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 265 1.1 1.9 45.3 51.7 3.5 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 258 2.3 11.6 50.0 36.0 3.2 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 261 0.8 6.5 39.1 53.6 3.5 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 262 1.1 8.4 30.9 59.5 3.5 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agronomy % % 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 39 5.1 12.8 56.4 25.6 3.0 0.78 33. Amount of work appropriate 39 20.5 15.4 43.6 20.5 2.6 1.04 34. Instructor explained expectations 39 2.6 5.1 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.66 35. Instructor helped with my problems 39 2.6 15.4 51.3 30.8 3.1 0.75 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 33 0.0 9.1 69.7 21.2 3.1 0.55 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 317 Number of forms scanned = 265 Number of forms with at least one student response = 265 Percent completed = 83.6 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Animal Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 80 19.0 A 177 42.5 Sophomore 31 7.3 B 191 45.9 Junior 100 23.7 C 47 11.3 Senior 143 33.9 D 1 0.2 Graduate 66 15.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.5 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 87 20.8 Studies Program 2 0.5 2 hours 115 27.5 Required by my major 335 79.4 3 hours 104 24.9 Other (e.g. elective) 85 20.1 4 - 5 hours 72 17.2 6 - 7 hours 33 7.9 8 or more hours 7 1.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 437 0.5 1.6 44.9 53.1 3.5 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 311 3.9 13.8 53.1 29.3 3.1 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 416 0.2 5.0 53.6 41.1 3.4 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 415 1.0 4.6 48.7 45.8 3.4 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 434 2.8 7.4 47.2 42.6 3.3 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 417 1.0 4.1 51.1 43.9 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 432 3.9 3.0 44.2 48.8 3.4 0.73 8. Graded assignments included comments 420 1.2 7.1 54.8 36.9 3.3 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 438 2.3 7.5 41.6 48.6 3.4 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 435 0.5 0.9 31.5 67.1 3.7 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 423 0.2 0.9 40.4 58.4 3.6 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 437 0.9 2.5 41.0 55.6 3.5 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 436 1.6 8.7 42.7 47.0 3.4 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 433 0.9 6.9 40.9 51.3 3.4 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 376 1.9 6.1 61.4 30.6 3.2 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 418 1.4 4.5 55.7 38.3 3.3 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 395 1.5 6.8 60.3 31.4 3.2 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 435 0.7 2.5 46.2 50.6 3.5 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 428 2.1 13.8 52.3 31.8 3.1 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 436 1.8 7.1 35.8 55.3 3.4 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 436 1.1 8.7 28.2 61.9 3.5 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Animal Sciences % % 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 16 6.3 6.3 81.3 6.3 2.9 0.62 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 16 6.3 0.0 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.68 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 16 6.3 6.3 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.77 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 8 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 177 0.6 1.7 48.0 49.7 3.5 0.56 33. Amount of work appropriate 177 0.0 13.0 49.2 37.9 3.2 0.67 34. Instructor explained expectations 177 0.0 6.2 45.8 48.0 3.4 0.61 35. Instructor helped with my problems 166 1.2 3.6 48.8 46.4 3.4 0.62 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 164 0.6 2.4 50.6 46.3 3.4 0.58 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 504 Number of forms scanned = 438 Number of forms with at least one student response = 438 Percent completed = 86.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 1.4 A 59 41.3 Sophomore 11 7.6 B 63 44.1 Junior 46 31.7 C 15 10.5 Senior 42 29.0 D 3 2.1 Graduate 43 29.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.7 Pass or Audit 3 2.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 23 16.2 Studies Program 16 11.0 2 hours 47 33.1 Required by my major 99 68.3 3 hours 37 26.1 Other (e.g. elective) 30 20.7 4 - 5 hours 23 16.2 6 - 7 hours 8 5.6 8 or more hours 4 2.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 153 0.7 5.2 52.3 41.8 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 127 4.7 17.3 47.2 30.7 3.0 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 144 2.1 2.8 58.3 36.8 3.3 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 139 1.4 7.2 50.4 41.0 3.3 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 148 2.0 9.5 50.0 38.5 3.3 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 142 0.0 3.5 54.9 41.5 3.4 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 145 2.1 1.4 46.9 49.7 3.4 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 140 1.4 14.3 57.9 26.4 3.1 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 154 0.6 13.6 37.7 48.1 3.3 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 154 0.0 1.3 31.8 66.9 3.7 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 148 0.0 0.7 45.9 53.4 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 154 1.3 4.5 46.1 48.1 3.4 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 154 1.9 16.9 43.5 37.7 3.2 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 153 2.6 5.9 52.3 39.2 3.3 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 121 1.7 14.0 65.3 19.0 3.0 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 140 2.1 6.4 62.9 28.6 3.2 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 129 2.3 14.7 60.5 22.5 3.0 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 152 0.0 4.6 57.9 37.5 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 151 3.3 28.5 45.7 22.5 2.9 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 153 0.7 13.1 41.8 44.4 3.3 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 152 0.7 17.8 32.9 48.7 3.3 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology % % 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 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 13 0.0 30.8 46.2 23.1 2.9 0.76 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 13 7.7 23.1 38.5 30.8 2.9 0.95 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 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 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 75 1.3 5.3 56.0 37.3 3.3 0.63 33. Amount of work appropriate 76 1.3 2.6 60.5 35.5 3.3 0.59 34. Instructor explained expectations 76 0.0 3.9 60.5 35.5 3.3 0.55 35. Instructor helped with my problems 75 1.3 4.0 56.0 38.7 3.3 0.62 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 73 0.0 1.4 58.9 39.7 3.4 0.52 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 194 Number of forms scanned = 155 Number of forms with at least one student response = 155 Percent completed = 79.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Forestry SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 10 4.2 A 110 46.8 Sophomore 26 10.9 B 95 40.4 Junior 64 26.8 C 27 11.5 Senior 103 43.1 D 1 0.4 Graduate 28 11.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 3 1.3 I 0 0.0 Other 5 2.1 Pass or Audit 2 0.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 57 24.5 Studies Program 10 4.2 2 hours 56 24.0 Required by my major 187 79.2 3 hours 56 24.0 Other (e.g. elective) 39 16.5 4 - 5 hours 43 18.5 6 - 7 hours 14 6.0 8 or more hours 7 3.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 262 0.0 1.1 53.8 45.0 3.4 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 211 7.6 18.0 52.6 21.8 2.9 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 218 0.9 10.1 53.7 35.3 3.2 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 219 0.9 4.6 47.9 46.6 3.4 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 255 0.8 5.9 49.4 43.9 3.4 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 230 1.7 8.7 55.7 33.9 3.2 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 254 1.6 10.2 53.5 34.6 3.2 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 231 1.3 15.2 57.1 26.4 3.1 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 262 0.4 9.2 42.0 48.5 3.4 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 262 0.0 0.0 24.4 75.6 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 248 0.8 4.0 50.4 44.8 3.4 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 259 0.4 1.5 45.9 52.1 3.5 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 262 0.4 10.3 43.5 45.8 3.3 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 254 0.4 7.9 48.4 43.3 3.3 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 220 0.9 9.1 63.6 26.4 3.2 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 256 0.8 6.3 56.6 36.3 3.3 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 244 0.8 10.2 58.2 30.7 3.2 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 260 0.4 1.9 50.4 47.3 3.4 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 258 1.6 18.6 48.4 31.4 3.1 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 261 0.0 8.8 44.1 47.1 3.4 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 261 0.4 11.1 33.3 55.2 3.4 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Forestry % % 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 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 80 2.5 8.8 53.8 35.0 3.2 0.71 33. Amount of work appropriate 82 2.4 7.3 58.5 31.7 3.2 0.67 34. Instructor explained expectations 81 2.5 9.9 56.8 30.9 3.2 0.70 35. Instructor helped with my problems 80 0.0 10.0 56.3 33.8 3.2 0.62 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 67 1.5 1.5 65.7 31.3 3.3 0.57 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 14.3 28.6 3.4 . 38. Question 38 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 28.6 14.3 3.1 . 39. Question 39 7 28.6 14.3 28.6 28.6 0.0 2.6 . 40. Question 40 7 14.3 42.9 0.0 28.6 14.3 2.9 . 41. Question 41 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 0.0 3.2 . 42. Question 42 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 3.8 . 43. Question 43 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.8 . 44. Question 44 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 3.9 . 45. Question 45 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 4.0 . 46. Question 46 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 3.9 . 47. Question 47 7 0.0 42.9 14.3 28.6 14.3 3.1 . 48. Question 48 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 42.9 14.3 3.6 . 49. Question 49 7 42.9 0.0 42.9 14.3 0.0 2.3 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 386 Number of forms scanned = 262 Number of forms with at least one student response = 262 Percent completed = 67.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 58 20.7 A 155 55.8 Sophomore 57 20.4 B 90 32.4 Junior 64 22.9 C 24 8.6 Senior 97 34.6 D 4 1.4 Graduate 4 1.4 E/Fail 1 0.4 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 4 1.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 100 35.7 Studies Program 68 24.7 2 hours 95 33.9 Required by my major 168 61.1 3 hours 54 19.3 Other (e.g. elective) 39 14.2 4 - 5 hours 27 9.6 6 - 7 hours 2 0.7 8 or more hours 2 0.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 291 1.7 4.1 51.2 43.0 3.4 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 219 5.0 23.7 47.9 23.3 2.9 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 287 3.1 9.4 55.1 32.4 3.2 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 258 1.6 12.8 45.7 39.9 3.2 0.73 5. Grading was fair and consistent 288 5.2 9.0 44.1 41.7 3.2 0.82 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 288 6.3 3.8 48.3 41.7 3.3 0.80 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 289 12.8 2.8 41.9 42.6 3.1 0.97 8. Graded assignments included comments 283 7.1 10.2 49.8 32.9 3.1 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 288 1.7 13.9 47.2 37.2 3.2 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 286 0.0 0.7 37.8 61.5 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 266 1.9 6.0 49.6 42.5 3.3 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 289 0.3 4.8 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 287 4.2 22.3 39.4 34.1 3.0 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 291 1.0 5.5 43.0 50.5 3.4 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 273 0.4 7.3 55.3 37.0 3.3 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 281 1.1 13.2 50.9 34.9 3.2 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 269 3.3 21.9 47.2 27.5 3.0 0.79 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 287 1.7 10.5 48.4 39.4 3.3 0.71 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 283 10.6 31.1 36.0 22.3 2.7 0.93 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 290 5.5 18.6 39.7 36.2 3.1 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 291 7.6 17.2 28.2 47.1 3.1 0.96 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX % % 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 52 1.9 25.0 53.8 19.2 2.9 0.72 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 74 1.4 13.5 63.5 21.6 3.1 0.64 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 64 1.6 17.2 60.9 20.3 3.0 0.67 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 38 2.6 15.8 60.5 21.1 3.0 0.70 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 55 9.1 23.6 41.8 25.5 2.8 0.92 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 9 11.1 11.1 55.6 22.2 2.9 . 28. Guided student report preparation 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 31. Developed abil to conduct research 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 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 = at least 372 Number of forms scanned = 293 Number of forms with at least one student response = 293 Percent completed = 78.8 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 1.9 A 76 28.8 Sophomore 51 19.2 B 138 52.3 Junior 61 22.9 C 32 12.1 Senior 124 46.6 D 1 0.4 Graduate 18 6.8 E/Fail 1 0.4 Professional 4 1.5 I 1 0.4 Other 3 1.1 Pass or Audit 15 5.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 24 8.9 Studies Program 4 1.5 2 hours 50 18.5 Required by my major 216 81.2 3 hours 37 13.7 Other (e.g. elective) 46 17.3 4 - 5 hours 37 13.7 6 - 7 hours 30 11.1 8 or more hours 92 34.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 288 1.7 6.6 52.8 38.9 3.3 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 237 7.6 17.3 45.6 29.5 3.0 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 272 1.8 4.4 60.3 33.5 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 145 0.7 4.1 53.8 41.4 3.4 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 266 3.4 9.8 56.4 30.5 3.1 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 273 1.1 5.9 61.5 31.5 3.2 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 261 3.8 14.6 52.5 29.1 3.1 0.77 8. Graded assignments included comments 251 2.4 12.7 56.2 28.7 3.1 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 277 1.8 6.9 53.4 37.9 3.3 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 275 0.7 0.7 32.7 65.8 3.6 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 259 0.0 2.7 49.4 47.9 3.5 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 277 2.2 5.1 44.0 48.7 3.4 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 275 2.5 9.5 42.5 45.5 3.3 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 271 0.4 4.8 47.6 47.2 3.4 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 235 1.3 4.7 56.2 37.9 3.3 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 275 0.4 6.2 57.5 36.0 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 255 1.6 8.2 58.0 32.2 3.2 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 282 0.4 2.1 50.7 46.8 3.4 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 274 2.6 11.7 48.2 37.6 3.2 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 285 3.2 10.2 43.2 43.5 3.3 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 281 3.9 7.8 37.7 50.5 3.3 0.79 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 66 4.5 10.6 47.0 37.9 3.2 0.80 33. Amount of work appropriate 68 11.8 11.8 52.9 23.5 2.9 0.91 34. Instructor explained expectations 66 6.1 15.2 43.9 34.8 3.1 0.86 35. Instructor helped with my problems 63 7.9 14.3 47.6 30.2 3.0 0.88 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 45 15.6 13.3 46.7 24.4 2.8 0.99 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 367 Number of forms scanned = 292 Number of forms with at least one student response = 290 Percent completed = 79.0 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 23 10.7 A 67 31.0 Sophomore 43 20.1 B 107 49.5 Junior 74 34.6 C 38 17.6 Senior 73 34.1 D 4 1.9 Graduate 1 0.5 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 61 28.2 Studies Program 23 10.6 2 hours 78 36.1 Required by my major 161 74.2 3 hours 47 21.8 Other (e.g. elective) 33 15.2 4 - 5 hours 18 8.3 6 - 7 hours 7 3.2 8 or more hours 5 2.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 227 0.0 0.9 58.1 41.0 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 225 10.7 20.4 41.3 27.6 2.9 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 210 1.9 11.9 58.1 28.1 3.1 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 225 2.7 9.8 52.9 34.7 3.2 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 225 0.9 8.9 50.7 39.6 3.3 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 220 0.0 2.3 60.0 37.7 3.4 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 227 1.3 7.5 55.1 36.1 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 217 0.5 6.9 53.9 38.7 3.3 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 227 2.6 14.1 42.3 41.0 3.2 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 227 0.0 0.4 35.2 64.3 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 209 0.5 0.5 53.6 45.5 3.4 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 226 0.9 8.0 43.4 47.8 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 226 4.9 17.3 41.2 36.7 3.1 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 225 1.8 12.4 48.4 37.3 3.2 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 192 1.6 12.5 54.7 31.3 3.2 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 215 0.9 13.5 58.6 27.0 3.1 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 208 1.4 17.3 60.6 20.7 3.0 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 225 0.0 7.1 59.1 33.8 3.3 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 222 5.0 25.7 42.3 27.0 2.9 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 224 3.1 14.3 43.8 38.8 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 223 4.0 13.9 30.5 51.6 3.3 0.86 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil Science % % 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 45 0.0 2.2 75.6 22.2 3.2 0.46 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 47 0.0 4.3 70.2 25.5 3.2 0.51 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 46 0.0 8.7 67.4 23.9 3.2 0.56 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 105 1.9 15.2 52.4 30.5 3.1 0.72 33. Amount of work appropriate 106 0.0 1.9 64.2 34.0 3.3 0.51 34. Instructor explained expectations 106 0.9 10.4 57.5 31.1 3.2 0.65 35. Instructor helped with my problems 98 1.0 9.2 59.2 30.6 3.2 0.64 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 95 0.0 11.6 55.8 32.6 3.2 0.63 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 25.0 8.3 3.4 0.67 38. Question 38 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 25.0 8.3 3.3 0.78 39. Question 39 12 50.0 0.0 25.0 16.7 8.3 2.3 1.50 40. Question 40 12 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 0.0 2.9 0.79 41. Question 41 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 0.0 2.8 0.87 42. Question 42 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 25.0 8.3 3.3 0.78 43. Question 43 12 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 0.0 2.5 1.00 44. Question 44 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 0.0 2.8 0.72 45. Question 45 12 16.7 58.3 25.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.67 46. Question 46 12 0.0 25.0 16.7 58.3 0.0 3.3 0.89 47. Question 47 12 16.7 16.7 25.0 41.7 0.0 2.9 1.16 48. Question 48 12 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.72 49. Question 49 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 41.7 8.3 3.4 1.00 Number of forms preslugged = at least 312 Number of forms scanned = 228 Number of forms with at least one student response = 227 Percent completed = 72.8 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 44.1 Sophomore 1 2.8 B 15 44.1 Junior 4 11.1 C 4 11.8 Senior 14 38.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 17 47.2 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 11.1 Studies Program 2 5.6 2 hours 8 22.2 Required by my major 25 69.4 3 hours 8 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 9 25.0 4 - 5 hours 10 27.8 6 - 7 hours 4 11.1 8 or more hours 2 5.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 38 0.0 5.3 39.5 55.3 3.5 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 0.0 2.6 47.4 50.0 3.5 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 38 0.0 13.2 39.5 47.4 3.3 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 2.7 2.7 48.6 45.9 3.4 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 37 0.0 2.7 43.2 54.1 3.5 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 8.3 36.1 55.6 3.5 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 37 8.1 2.7 29.7 59.5 3.4 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 10.5 21.1 68.4 3.6 0.68 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 10.8 27.0 62.2 3.5 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 2.8 11.1 27.8 58.3 3.4 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 2.8 27.8 69.4 3.7 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 36 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 38 2.6 7.9 47.4 42.1 3.3 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 38 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 0.0 13.5 35.1 51.4 3.4 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 2.6 13.2 28.9 55.3 3.4 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 10.5 5.3 7.9 76.3 3.5 1.01 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology % % 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 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 33. Amount of work appropriate 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 34. Instructor explained expectations 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 35. Instructor helped with my problems 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 23 0.0 4.3 30.4 65.2 3.6 0.58 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 45.0 40.0 4.3 0.72 38. Question 38 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 4.3 0.80 39. Question 39 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 35.0 45.0 4.3 0.79 40. Question 40 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 25.0 55.0 4.4 0.81 41. Question 41 19 10.5 5.3 5.3 42.1 36.8 3.9 1.29 42. Question 42 20 0.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 55.0 4.3 0.97 43. Question 43 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 35.0 60.0 4.6 0.60 44. Question 44 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 26.3 57.9 4.4 0.77 45. Question 45 16 6.3 18.8 31.3 18.8 25.0 3.4 1.26 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 47 Number of forms scanned = 40 Number of forms with at least one student response = 38 Percent completed = 80.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Veterinary Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 25 51.0 Sophomore 16 32.7 B 20 40.8 Junior 13 26.5 C 4 8.2 Senior 17 34.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 4.1 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 18.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 20 40.8 Required by my major 20 40.8 3 hours 13 26.5 Other (e.g. elective) 29 59.2 4 - 5 hours 5 10.2 6 - 7 hours 2 4.1 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 51 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 51 3.9 13.7 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 51 2.0 0.0 62.7 35.3 3.3 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 51 0.0 3.9 43.1 52.9 3.5 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 51 0.0 2.0 54.9 43.1 3.4 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 51 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 51 0.0 0.0 49.0 51.0 3.5 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 50 0.0 8.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 51 0.0 5.9 37.3 56.9 3.5 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 51 0.0 0.0 27.5 72.5 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 47 2.1 6.4 46.8 44.7 3.3 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 51 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 51 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 51 0.0 2.0 52.9 45.1 3.4 0.54 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 40 2.5 5.0 72.5 20.0 3.1 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 49 0.0 0.0 65.3 34.7 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 49 0.0 2.0 69.4 28.6 3.3 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 50 0.0 2.0 38.0 60.0 3.6 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 50 2.0 8.0 64.0 26.0 3.1 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 50 0.0 10.0 34.0 56.0 3.5 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 50 0.0 14.0 24.0 62.0 3.5 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Veterinary Science % % 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 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 = at least 53 Number of forms scanned = 51 Number of forms with at least one student response = 51 Percent completed = 96.2 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 548 63.1 A 377 44.4 Sophomore 220 25.3 B 341 40.1 Junior 47 5.4 C 82 9.6 Senior 30 3.5 D 8 0.9 Graduate 20 2.3 E/Fail 1 0.1 Professional 1 0.1 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.2 Pass or Audit 41 4.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 121 14.0 Studies Program 548 64.5 2 hours 281 32.6 Required by my major 95 11.2 3 hours 199 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 206 24.3 4 - 5 hours 169 19.6 6 - 7 hours 59 6.8 8 or more hours 33 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 911 1.3 5.3 55.2 38.2 3.3 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 855 4.7 9.0 46.2 40.1 3.2 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 918 4.0 9.7 48.0 38.2 3.2 0.77 4. Exams reflected what was taught 716 5.7 9.9 52.9 31.4 3.1 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 905 3.5 12.6 48.8 35.0 3.2 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 914 3.5 11.8 48.2 36.4 3.2 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 909 6.3 12.5 51.0 30.1 3.1 0.82 8. Graded assignments included comments 901 4.8 14.8 44.0 36.5 3.1 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 925 3.8 11.2 45.6 39.4 3.2 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 934 1.2 2.9 42.7 53.2 3.5 0.62 11. Was available for consultation 893 1.7 3.4 51.8 43.1 3.4 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 934 3.1 8.5 44.6 43.8 3.3 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 925 8.4 19.2 37.9 34.4 3.0 0.93 14. Encouraged class participation 927 3.7 8.2 40.6 47.6 3.3 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 859 2.2 7.2 50.3 40.3 3.3 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 904 2.8 12.4 47.7 37.2 3.2 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 842 3.1 21.0 48.3 27.6 3.0 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 884 3.8 8.5 55.0 32.7 3.2 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 888 10.0 31.8 34.6 23.6 2.7 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 920 5.4 14.5 41.1 39.0 3.1 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 917 6.1 13.6 34.2 46.0 3.2 0.89 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences % % 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 371 5.7 17.5 56.9 19.9 2.9 0.77 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 499 2.8 12.6 55.7 28.9 3.1 0.72 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 501 8.4 9.8 47.1 34.7 3.1 0.88 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 377 3.4 12.5 47.2 36.9 3.2 0.78 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 319 4.4 11.3 48.3 36.1 3.2 0.79 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 87 6.9 11.5 50.6 31.0 3.1 0.84 28. Guided student report preparation 88 4.5 20.5 46.6 28.4 3.0 0.82 29. Students free to express opinions 98 3.1 1.0 36.7 59.2 3.5 0.68 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 97 4.1 5.2 46.4 44.3 3.3 0.75 31. Developed abil to conduct research 78 12.8 10.3 48.7 28.2 2.9 0.95 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 131 7.6 16.0 50.4 26.0 2.9 0.85 33. Amount of work appropriate 134 6.0 6.7 64.2 23.1 3.0 0.73 34. Instructor explained expectations 133 6.8 18.0 51.9 23.3 2.9 0.83 35. Instructor helped with my problems 135 5.9 14.1 53.3 26.7 3.0 0.81 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 52 15.4 9.6 55.8 19.2 2.8 0.94 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 1276 Number of forms scanned = 979 Number of forms with at least one student response = 950 Percent completed = 74.5 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Anthropology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 209 12.3 A 635 37.6 Sophomore 484 28.5 B 818 48.4 Junior 532 31.3 C 219 13.0 Senior 409 24.0 D 8 0.5 Graduate 61 3.6 E/Fail 1 0.1 Professional 2 0.1 I 1 0.1 Other 4 0.2 Pass or Audit 8 0.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 602 35.6 Studies Program 1,206 71.5 2 hours 521 30.8 Required by my major 287 17.0 3 hours 324 19.2 Other (e.g. elective) 193 11.4 4 - 5 hours 161 9.5 6 - 7 hours 45 2.7 8 or more hours 37 2.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,813 0.7 3.0 63.7 32.6 3.3 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,738 2.7 10.9 60.4 26.0 3.1 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,806 1.3 10.0 63.8 24.9 3.1 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,740 2.2 11.1 60.2 26.4 3.1 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,794 2.0 7.1 63.1 27.8 3.2 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,803 1.1 4.0 66.7 28.2 3.2 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,792 1.5 8.2 63.4 27.0 3.2 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,697 3.0 14.1 59.6 23.3 3.0 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,818 2.5 12.4 56.8 28.3 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,820 0.5 1.2 50.3 47.9 3.5 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 1,612 0.9 3.7 62.0 33.4 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,749 1.4 3.5 60.3 34.8 3.3 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,796 7.0 23.4 46.8 22.8 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 1,765 3.3 18.6 47.0 31.1 3.1 0.79 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,720 1.5 6.4 62.1 30.0 3.2 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,662 2.2 17.3 60.7 19.7 3.0 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,438 3.6 30.1 51.9 14.4 2.8 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,785 1.3 5.0 67.3 26.4 3.2 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,782 8.9 34.1 40.9 16.2 2.6 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,802 3.9 21.3 52.3 22.5 2.9 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,795 3.7 15.0 46.1 35.2 3.1 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Anthropology % % 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 598 4.7 24.7 59.0 11.5 2.8 0.71 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 870 3.8 15.4 66.0 14.8 2.9 0.67 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 881 4.7 13.2 64.8 17.4 2.9 0.70 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 842 2.4 4.3 58.8 34.6 3.3 0.65 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 452 3.3 12.6 61.3 22.8 3.0 0.70 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 99 4.0 11.1 59.6 25.3 3.1 0.73 28. Guided student report preparation 113 4.4 11.5 70.8 13.3 2.9 0.65 29. Students free to express opinions 126 0.8 8.7 55.6 34.9 3.2 0.64 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 130 2.3 3.8 56.2 37.7 3.3 0.65 31. Developed abil to conduct research 118 4.2 12.7 69.5 13.6 2.9 0.66 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 584 1.9 6.3 55.8 36.0 3.3 0.66 33. Amount of work appropriate 584 1.9 4.1 59.4 34.6 3.3 0.63 34. Instructor explained expectations 586 1.7 5.8 58.0 34.5 3.3 0.64 35. Instructor helped with my problems 547 2.9 10.8 57.8 28.5 3.1 0.70 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 169 4.1 5.9 56.2 33.7 3.2 0.73 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 2543 Number of forms scanned = 1836 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1828 Percent completed = 71.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 344 11.8 A 1,072 37.3 Sophomore 722 24.7 B 1,240 43.2 Junior 658 22.5 C 492 17.1 Senior 1,001 34.3 D 55 1.9 Graduate 136 4.7 E/Fail 5 0.2 Professional 6 0.2 I 2 0.1 Other 53 1.8 Pass or Audit 6 0.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 678 23.3 Studies Program 609 21.0 2 hours 744 25.5 Required by my major 1,719 59.3 3 hours 804 27.6 Other (e.g. elective) 573 19.8 4 - 5 hours 462 15.9 6 - 7 hours 135 4.6 8 or more hours 90 3.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 3,075 0.7 2.6 56.4 40.3 3.4 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2,932 5.6 13.0 52.7 28.6 3.0 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2,648 2.8 10.3 60.0 26.8 3.1 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2,980 3.6 11.1 51.3 34.0 3.2 0.75 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3,073 1.9 7.0 56.7 34.5 3.2 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2,639 2.0 6.3 59.6 32.1 3.2 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3,000 2.4 8.9 57.0 31.7 3.2 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 2,398 5.1 25.1 48.0 21.8 2.9 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 3,083 2.8 10.6 48.1 38.5 3.2 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 3,122 0.6 2.2 40.5 56.8 3.5 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 2,709 0.9 3.3 56.6 39.2 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3,112 1.0 5.2 51.1 42.7 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 3,061 5.3 16.1 45.4 33.2 3.1 0.84 14. Encouraged class participation 3,044 2.3 9.3 50.0 38.4 3.2 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2,397 2.4 12.0 63.2 22.4 3.1 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 2,907 2.0 10.5 61.1 26.4 3.1 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 2,680 2.6 15.6 58.0 23.8 3.0 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3,044 1.4 4.7 59.5 34.4 3.3 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 2,937 6.4 25.8 46.0 21.8 2.8 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 3,112 3.3 14.7 50.2 31.8 3.1 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 3,092 3.4 12.9 38.4 45.3 3.3 0.81 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences % % 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 669 3.1 7.9 62.0 26.9 3.1 0.68 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 657 2.3 14.2 60.1 23.4 3.0 0.68 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 545 3.9 14.5 59.3 22.4 3.0 0.72 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 217 3.7 20.7 53.9 21.7 2.9 0.75 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 217 3.2 12.4 56.7 27.6 3.1 0.72 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 116 4.3 7.8 38.8 49.1 3.3 0.80 28. Guided student report preparation 108 2.8 3.7 50.0 43.5 3.3 0.69 29. Students free to express opinions 129 3.1 1.6 38.8 56.6 3.5 0.69 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 129 3.9 5.4 34.1 56.6 3.4 0.77 31. Developed abil to conduct research 100 3.0 12.0 45.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 734 4.4 12.5 53.8 29.3 3.1 0.77 33. Amount of work appropriate 743 8.3 16.4 51.0 24.2 2.9 0.86 34. Instructor explained expectations 747 2.3 9.1 49.4 39.2 3.3 0.71 35. Instructor helped with my problems 719 2.4 8.3 51.9 37.4 3.2 0.70 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 627 1.8 5.1 56.6 36.5 3.3 0.64 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 4.0 . 38. Question 38 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 . 39. Question 39 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 40. Question 40 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 41. Question 41 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 43. Question 43 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . 44. Question 44 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 . 45. Question 45 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 4.0 . 46. Question 46 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 4.5 . 47. Question 47 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 40.0 3.8 . 48. Question 48 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 . 49. Question 49 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 5533 Number of forms scanned = 3238 Number of forms with at least one student response = 3166 Percent completed = 57.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Chemistry SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 544 30.8 A 599 34.6 Sophomore 522 29.6 B 755 43.6 Junior 334 18.9 C 306 17.7 Senior 275 15.6 D 55 3.2 Graduate 73 4.1 E/Fail 9 0.5 Professional 2 0.1 I 0 0.0 Other 15 0.8 Pass or Audit 8 0.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 170 9.7 Studies Program 143 8.2 2 hours 361 20.6 Required by my major 1,437 82.7 3 hours 515 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 157 9.0 4 - 5 hours 436 24.9 6 - 7 hours 145 8.3 8 or more hours 123 7.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,920 0.7 3.8 56.1 39.4 3.3 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,928 2.9 11.8 55.8 29.5 3.1 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,874 2.1 8.1 60.1 29.7 3.2 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,900 5.9 17.2 53.2 23.7 2.9 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,931 2.8 10.7 56.8 29.7 3.1 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,831 1.3 5.6 63.7 29.3 3.2 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,800 1.2 5.7 53.2 40.0 3.3 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,393 8.8 27.0 42.6 21.5 2.8 0.89 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,943 2.4 10.0 49.8 37.8 3.2 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,963 0.8 2.2 38.9 58.1 3.5 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 1,837 0.7 3.2 51.2 45.0 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,945 1.6 7.1 48.0 43.2 3.3 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,911 6.1 23.5 43.6 26.8 2.9 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 1,867 2.5 15.9 48.0 33.6 3.1 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,272 2.3 19.8 59.4 18.6 2.9 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,873 1.4 6.9 62.4 29.4 3.2 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,876 1.6 7.6 61.2 29.6 3.2 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,899 1.5 5.8 62.1 30.6 3.2 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,825 11.0 39.6 35.9 13.5 2.5 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,929 3.9 18.0 53.4 24.7 3.0 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,923 3.1 12.6 38.6 45.8 3.3 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Chemistry % % 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 254 2.0 8.3 65.4 24.4 3.1 0.63 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 246 4.9 17.1 63.8 14.2 2.9 0.70 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 145 4.8 19.3 60.7 15.2 2.9 0.72 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 50 8.0 24.0 54.0 14.0 2.7 0.80 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 48 8.3 12.5 64.6 14.6 2.9 0.77 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 31 3.2 19.4 54.8 22.6 3.0 0.75 28. Guided student report preparation 25 8.0 16.0 48.0 28.0 3.0 0.89 29. Students free to express opinions 27 0.0 29.6 44.4 25.9 3.0 0.76 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 29 6.9 10.3 58.6 24.1 3.0 0.80 31. Developed abil to conduct research 31 16.1 25.8 35.5 22.6 2.6 1.02 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 448 5.1 12.5 54.9 27.5 3.0 0.78 33. Amount of work appropriate 459 6.1 10.7 58.6 24.6 3.0 0.77 34. Instructor explained expectations 453 4.9 10.4 54.1 30.7 3.1 0.77 35. Instructor helped with my problems 443 3.8 13.5 53.0 29.6 3.1 0.76 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 457 9.8 16.2 47.7 26.3 2.9 0.90 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 3690 Number of forms scanned = 2039 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1984 Percent completed = 53.8 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 6.0 A 41 50.0 Sophomore 20 23.8 B 31 37.8 Junior 23 27.4 C 5 6.1 Senior 26 31.0 D 1 1.2 Graduate 5 6.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 5 6.0 Pass or Audit 4 4.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 3.6 Studies Program 20 24.4 2 hours 10 11.9 Required by my major 33 40.2 3 hours 24 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 29 35.4 4 - 5 hours 29 34.5 6 - 7 hours 10 11.9 8 or more hours 8 9.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 91 0.0 1.1 30.8 68.1 3.7 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 92 2.2 10.9 39.1 47.8 3.3 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 92 0.0 5.4 44.6 50.0 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 86 0.0 0.0 37.2 62.8 3.6 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 90 0.0 1.1 35.6 63.3 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 92 1.1 2.2 48.9 47.8 3.4 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 90 1.1 4.4 38.9 55.6 3.5 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 89 0.0 1.1 40.4 58.4 3.6 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 91 0.0 1.1 33.0 65.9 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 92 0.0 0.0 16.3 83.7 3.8 0.37 11. Was available for consultation 82 0.0 2.4 43.9 53.7 3.5 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 92 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 91 1.1 3.3 37.4 58.2 3.5 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 92 0.0 4.3 18.5 77.2 3.7 0.54 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 61 3.3 3.3 55.7 37.7 3.3 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 82 1.2 4.9 45.1 48.8 3.4 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 63 3.2 6.3 54.0 36.5 3.2 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 88 1.1 2.3 40.9 55.7 3.5 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 86 1.2 17.4 40.7 40.7 3.2 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 92 2.2 1.1 34.8 62.0 3.6 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 92 0.0 0.0 19.6 80.4 3.8 0.40 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics % % 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 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 120 Number of forms scanned = 92 Number of forms with at least one student response = 92 Percent completed = 76.7 % 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 from VIEW on the IB