1****************************************************************************** * * * 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). * * * ****************************************************************************** 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 251 201L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baldwin, Donna J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 2 14.3 B 7 50.0 Junior 2 14.3 C 1 7.1 Senior 7 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 7.1 I 0 0.0 Other 2 14.3 Pass or Audit 1 7.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 46.7 Studies Program 2 13.3 2 hours 8 53.3 Required by my major 2 13.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 11 73.3 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 0.0 66.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 46.7 40.0 6.7 2.5 0.74 % % % % 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 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 251 201L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baldwin, Donna J % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 57.7 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 501 001L1 SYSTEMIC FAMILY DEVELOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 61.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 38.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 15.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 84.6 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 15.4 Required by my major 8 61.5 3 hours 5 38.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 38.5 4 - 5 hours 4 30.8 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 8 or more hours 1 7.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 23.1 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 501 001L1 SYSTEMIC FAMILY DEVELOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R % % 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 252 001L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 40 31.0 A 27 20.8 Sophomore 40 31.0 B 72 55.4 Junior 29 22.5 C 25 19.2 Senior 20 15.5 D 5 3.8 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 0.8 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 8.5 Studies Program 67 52.3 2 hours 38 29.2 Required by my major 32 25.0 3 hours 45 34.6 Other (e.g. elective) 29 22.7 4 - 5 hours 31 23.8 6 - 7 hours 4 3.1 8 or more hours 1 0.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 131 0.8 3.8 74.0 21.4 3.2 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 131 3.8 8.4 62.6 25.2 3.1 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 129 17.1 36.4 40.3 6.2 2.4 0.84 4. Exams reflected what was taught 132 25.8 42.4 28.0 3.8 2.1 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 132 10.6 43.2 41.7 4.5 2.4 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 132 6.8 25.8 61.4 6.1 2.7 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 130 0.0 10.8 73.1 16.2 3.1 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 122 13.9 57.4 24.6 4.1 2.2 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 131 14.5 42.7 38.9 3.8 2.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 132 0.8 1.5 73.5 24.2 3.2 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 113 0.0 4.4 78.8 16.8 3.1 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 132 3.8 23.5 62.1 10.6 2.8 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 133 10.5 36.1 45.1 8.3 2.5 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 133 0.8 4.5 60.2 34.6 3.3 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 129 1.6 8.5 72.1 17.8 3.1 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 127 4.7 27.6 59.1 8.7 2.7 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 116 5.2 44.8 46.6 3.4 2.5 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 131 5.3 15.3 72.5 6.9 2.8 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 132 15.9 54.5 25.8 3.8 2.2 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 133 13.5 33.1 45.1 8.3 2.5 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 133 21.1 50.4 26.3 2.3 2.1 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 252 001L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W % % 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 33 6.1 51.5 42.4 0.0 2.4 0.60 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 55 1.8 23.6 67.3 7.3 2.8 0.59 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 57 17.5 33.3 42.1 7.0 2.4 0.86 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 21 14.3 23.8 57.1 4.8 2.5 0.81 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 15 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.83 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 29. Students free to express opinions 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 31. Developed abil to conduct research 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 9 22.2 44.4 22.2 11.1 2.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 33.3 11.1 44.4 11.1 2.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 286 Number of forms scanned = 138 Number of forms with at least one student response = 133 Percent completed = 46.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 003S1 PROS MARR & FAM THERAPY: RELATIONSHIP ENHANCE TH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 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 6 60.0 Studies Program 2 20.0 2 hours 4 40.0 Required by my major 5 50.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 30.0 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 20.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 33.3 0.0 0.0 66.7 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 2.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 % % % % 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 003S1 PROS MARR & FAM THERAPY: RELATIONSHIP ENHANCE TH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 787 001L1 SUPERVISED EXP PRACTICE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 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 2 25.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 75.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 50.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 4 50.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . % % % % 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 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 12.5 0.0 0.0 87.5 3.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 787 001L1 SUPERVISED EXP PRACTICE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W % % 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 252 201L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burchfield, Meredith H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 9.5 A 13 65.0 Sophomore 4 19.0 B 6 30.0 Junior 6 28.6 C 1 5.0 Senior 7 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 4.8 I 0 0.0 Other 1 4.8 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 23.8 Studies Program 8 38.1 2 hours 9 42.9 Required by my major 2 9.5 3 hours 6 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 11 52.4 4 - 5 hours 1 4.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 4.5 0.0 36.4 59.1 3.5 0.74 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 9.1 59.1 27.3 3.1 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 4.5 4.5 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 4.5 0.0 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 9.1 0.0 18.2 72.7 3.5 0.91 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 9.1 0.0 31.8 59.1 3.4 0.91 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 4.5 0.0 31.8 63.6 3.5 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 0.0 18.2 77.3 3.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 4.8 33.3 61.9 3.6 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 13.6 36.4 50.0 3.4 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 27.3 68.2 3.6 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 0.0 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 4.5 0.0 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 4.5 4.5 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 4.5 45.5 50.0 3.5 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 4.5 36.4 59.1 3.5 0.60 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 252 201L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burchfield, Meredith H % % 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 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 7 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 29 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 75.9 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 552 001L1 ADMIN & SUPERVISION IN EARLY CHILDHOOD ED PROGS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crum, Ruth A 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 3 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 22.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 44.4 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 1 11.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 55.6 Required by my major 6 66.7 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 3 33.3 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . % % % % 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 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 552 001L1 ADMIN & SUPERVISION IN EARLY CHILDHOOD ED PROGS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crum, Ruth A % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 255 201L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crump, Jennifer SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 9.1 A 6 54.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 45.5 Junior 5 45.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 45.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 18.2 Studies Program 1 9.1 2 hours 5 45.5 Required by my major 7 63.6 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 27.3 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 9.1 9.1 81.8 3.7 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 % % % % 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 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 255 201L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crump, Jennifer % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 61.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 255 401L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crump, Jennifer SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 20.0 Junior 8 40.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 30.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 4 20.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 10.0 Pass or Audit 1 5.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 35.0 Required by my major 6 30.0 3 hours 2 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 14 70.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 0.0 9.5 90.5 3.9 0.30 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 4.8 19.0 76.2 3.7 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 28.6 66.7 3.6 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 5.0 5.0 90.0 3.9 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 4.8 14.3 81.0 3.8 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 4.8 14.3 81.0 3.8 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 5.0 25.0 70.0 3.7 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 17.6 76.5 3.7 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 5.3 5.3 89.5 3.8 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 4.5 22.7 72.7 3.7 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 10.0 25.0 65.0 3.6 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 19.0 42.9 38.1 3.2 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 27.8 27.8 44.4 3.2 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 9.5 14.3 76.2 3.7 0.66 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 20.0 25.0 55.0 3.4 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0 3.9 0.37 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 255 401L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crump, Jennifer % % 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 = 27 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 81.5 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 256 001L1 GUID STRATEGIES-WORKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Devine, Carol SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 8 66.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 25.0 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 16.7 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 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 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 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 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 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 12 8.3 16.7 25.0 50.0 3.2 1.03 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 50.0 3.3 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 12 8.3 0.0 25.0 66.7 3.5 0.90 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 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 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 50.0 3.3 0.89 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 256 001L1 GUID STRATEGIES-WORKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Devine, Carol % % 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 = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 63.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 250 001L1 CONSUMER ISSUES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Forgue, Raymond E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 28.8 Sophomore 9 13.6 B 34 51.5 Junior 29 43.9 C 13 19.7 Senior 28 42.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 25.8 Studies Program 2 3.0 2 hours 24 36.4 Required by my major 61 92.4 3 hours 11 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 4.5 4 - 5 hours 11 16.7 6 - 7 hours 3 4.5 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 72 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 72 0.0 4.2 61.1 34.7 3.3 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 68 2.9 5.9 67.6 23.5 3.1 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 72 0.0 4.2 59.7 36.1 3.3 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 72 0.0 1.4 59.7 38.9 3.4 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 70 0.0 4.3 52.9 42.9 3.4 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 72 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 69 0.0 5.8 60.9 33.3 3.3 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 72 0.0 2.8 43.1 54.2 3.5 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 72 0.0 0.0 19.4 80.6 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 65 0.0 0.0 49.2 50.8 3.5 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 70 0.0 0.0 32.9 67.1 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 71 1.4 12.7 50.7 35.2 3.2 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 71 0.0 1.4 40.8 57.7 3.6 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 67 0.0 4.5 64.2 31.3 3.3 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 68 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 67 0.0 7.5 59.7 32.8 3.3 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 70 0.0 0.0 61.4 38.6 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 72 4.2 23.6 52.8 19.4 2.9 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 69 1.4 4.3 52.2 42.0 3.3 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 69 0.0 1.4 30.4 68.1 3.7 0.50 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 250 001L1 CONSUMER ISSUES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Forgue, Raymond E % % 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 = 121 Number of forms scanned = 72 Number of forms with at least one student response = 72 Percent completed = 59.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 304 201L1 PERSONAL AND FAMILY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hansen, Gary SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 60.0 Junior 1 6.7 C 3 20.0 Senior 14 93.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 6.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 40.0 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 7 46.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 1 6.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 94.1 5.9 3.1 0.24 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 17.6 76.5 0.0 2.7 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 35.3 64.7 0.0 2.6 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 35.3 35.3 29.4 0.0 1.9 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 12.5 18.8 62.5 6.3 2.6 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 11.8 82.4 5.9 2.9 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 5.9 0.0 88.2 5.9 2.9 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 17.6 17.6 58.8 5.9 2.5 0.87 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 23.5 35.3 35.3 5.9 2.2 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 5.9 0.0 52.9 41.2 3.3 0.77 11. Was available for consultation 15 20.0 13.3 46.7 20.0 2.7 1.05 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 5.9 23.5 52.9 17.6 2.8 0.81 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 58.8 35.3 0.0 2.3 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 28.6 64.3 7.1 2.8 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 11.8 23.5 52.9 11.8 2.6 0.86 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 5.9 23.5 64.7 5.9 2.7 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 11.8 47.1 41.2 0.0 2.3 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 17.6 35.3 35.3 11.8 2.4 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 35.3 23.5 29.4 11.8 2.2 1.07 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 304 201L1 PERSONAL AND FAMILY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hansen, Gary % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 251 001L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 7.3 A 12 29.3 Sophomore 7 17.1 B 23 56.1 Junior 14 34.1 C 2 4.9 Senior 16 39.0 D 1 2.4 Graduate 1 2.4 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 3 7.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 11 26.8 Studies Program 2 4.9 2 hours 15 36.6 Required by my major 16 39.0 3 hours 9 22.0 Other (e.g. elective) 23 56.1 4 - 5 hours 3 7.3 6 - 7 hours 2 4.9 8 or more hours 1 2.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 44 0.0 4.5 59.1 36.4 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 44 0.0 15.9 65.9 18.2 3.0 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 4.5 11.4 52.3 31.8 3.1 0.78 4. Exams reflected what was taught 44 0.0 4.5 61.4 34.1 3.3 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 43 0.0 2.3 53.5 44.2 3.4 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 43 0.0 4.7 53.5 41.9 3.4 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 44 2.3 2.3 52.3 43.2 3.4 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 44 4.5 9.1 47.7 38.6 3.2 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 44 6.8 9.1 61.4 22.7 3.0 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 44 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 41 0.0 0.0 58.5 41.5 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 44 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 7.1 19.0 54.8 19.0 2.9 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 43 2.3 16.3 60.5 20.9 3.0 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 0.0 15.2 66.7 18.2 3.0 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 41 4.9 2.4 68.3 24.4 3.1 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 40 2.5 12.5 67.5 17.5 3.0 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 41 2.4 9.8 56.1 31.7 3.2 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 42 9.5 35.7 33.3 21.4 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 43 0.0 14.0 53.5 32.6 3.2 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 43 4.7 11.6 48.8 34.9 3.1 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 251 001L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia % % 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 66.7 0.0 33.3 0.0 1.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 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 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 73 Number of forms scanned = 48 Number of forms with at least one student response = 44 Percent completed = 60.3 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 402 001L1 FAM ECO & MGT ISSUES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 18.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 63.6 Junior 1 9.1 C 2 18.2 Senior 10 90.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 18.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 8 72.7 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 27.3 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 23.1 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 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 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 402 001L1 FAM ECO & MGT ISSUES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia % % 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 0.0 100.0 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 255 001L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Jaesook SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 47.6 Sophomore 4 19.0 B 10 47.6 Junior 10 47.6 C 1 4.8 Senior 7 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 23.8 Studies Program 1 4.8 2 hours 9 42.9 Required by my major 7 33.3 3 hours 6 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 13 61.9 4 - 5 hours 1 4.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 0.0 36.4 59.1 3.5 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 4.5 4.5 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 4.5 31.8 63.6 3.6 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 0.0 22.7 77.3 3.8 0.43 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 13.6 68.2 18.2 3.0 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 18.2 40.9 40.9 3.2 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 13.6 27.3 59.1 3.5 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 4.5 18.2 45.5 31.8 3.0 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 18.2 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.71 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 255 001L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Jaesook % % 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 28 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 78.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 690 401L1 FAM/DEV RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = McCulloch, Jan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 46.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 53.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 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 3 21.4 2 hours 1 7.1 Required by my major 11 78.6 3 hours 5 35.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 21.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 8 or more hours 4 28.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 16.7 75.0 3.7 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 0.76 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 76.9 3.7 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 21.4 28.6 21.4 28.6 2.6 1.16 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 690 401L1 FAM/DEV RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = McCulloch, Jan % % 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 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 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 390 001L1 INTRO TO RESEARCH IN FAM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = O'Malley, Angela SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 32.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 48.0 Junior 4 16.0 C 5 20.0 Senior 21 84.0 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 8 32.0 Studies Program 2 8.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 23 92.0 3 hours 6 24.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.0 6 - 7 hours 1 4.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 11.1 18.5 51.9 18.5 2.8 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 19.2 57.7 23.1 3.0 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 3.7 14.8 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.78 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 3.8 69.2 26.9 3.2 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 70.4 29.6 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 11.1 59.3 29.6 3.2 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 25.9 40.7 33.3 3.1 0.78 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 40.7 44.4 14.8 2.7 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 3.8 76.9 19.2 3.2 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 14.8 55.6 18.5 11.1 2.3 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 27 7.4 25.9 55.6 11.1 2.7 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 8.0 76.0 16.0 3.1 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 3.7 7.4 70.4 18.5 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 3.7 18.5 59.3 18.5 2.9 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 3.7 11.1 66.7 18.5 3.0 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 14.8 51.9 18.5 14.8 2.3 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 11.1 37.0 40.7 11.1 2.5 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 37.0 51.9 11.1 2.7 0.66 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 390 001L1 INTRO TO RESEARCH IN FAM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = O'Malley, Angela % % 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 81.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 357 001L1 CONTEMPORARY ADOLESCENCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ortwein, Mary SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 63.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 23.7 Junior 7 18.4 C 3 7.9 Senior 30 78.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 5.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 13 35.1 Studies Program 1 2.6 2 hours 7 18.9 Required by my major 14 36.8 3 hours 9 24.3 Other (e.g. elective) 23 60.5 4 - 5 hours 5 13.5 6 - 7 hours 1 2.7 8 or more hours 2 5.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 39 0.0 0.0 51.3 48.7 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 2.6 7.9 65.8 23.7 3.1 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 39 5.1 5.1 56.4 33.3 3.2 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 5.1 2.6 71.8 20.5 3.1 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 5.1 0.0 64.1 30.8 3.2 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 39 12.8 12.8 48.7 25.6 2.9 0.95 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 5.1 33.3 43.6 17.9 2.7 0.82 8. Graded assignments included comments 39 2.6 7.7 64.1 25.6 3.1 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 39 7.7 10.3 59.0 23.1 3.0 0.81 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 39 0.0 2.6 43.6 53.8 3.5 0.56 11. Was available for consultation 34 2.9 2.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 2.6 5.1 64.1 28.2 3.2 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 7.7 15.4 48.7 28.2 3.0 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 39 0.0 7.7 64.1 28.2 3.2 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 38 2.6 7.9 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 38 5.3 13.2 65.8 15.8 2.9 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 36 2.8 16.7 66.7 13.9 2.9 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 38 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 39 7.7 28.2 43.6 20.5 2.8 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 39 2.6 23.1 51.3 23.1 2.9 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 39 5.1 12.8 53.8 28.2 3.1 0.79