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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 212 001L1 CULT/POL IN THIRD WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aziabu, Yao E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 18.4 A 7 18.9 Sophomore 12 31.6 B 20 54.1 Junior 12 31.6 C 9 24.3 Senior 7 18.4 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 1 2.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 15.8 Studies Program 28 73.7 2 hours 20 52.6 Required by my major 8 21.1 3 hours 9 23.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 5.3 4 - 5 hours 3 7.9 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 39 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 37 0.0 10.8 64.9 24.3 3.1 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 0.0 18.9 64.9 16.2 3.0 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 0.0 17.9 41.0 41.0 3.2 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 7.7 20.5 41.0 30.8 2.9 0.92 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 39 2.6 17.9 48.7 30.8 3.1 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 2.6 28.2 48.7 20.5 2.9 0.77 8. Graded assignments included comments 39 5.1 25.6 59.0 10.3 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 0.0 23.7 50.0 26.3 3.0 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 39 0.0 0.0 28.2 71.8 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 34 2.9 2.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 0.0 12.8 56.4 30.8 3.2 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 0.0 23.1 51.3 25.6 3.0 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 38 0.0 5.3 55.3 39.5 3.3 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 39 0.0 2.6 64.1 33.3 3.3 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 38 0.0 10.5 71.1 18.4 3.1 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 30.3 60.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 39 0.0 5.1 56.4 38.5 3.3 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 39 7.7 38.5 46.2 7.7 2.5 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 0.0 36.8 36.8 26.3 2.9 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 0.0 21.1 42.1 36.8 3.2 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 212 001L1 CULT/POL IN THIRD WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aziabu, Yao 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 12 0.0 33.3 58.3 8.3 2.8 0.62 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 23 4.3 30.4 47.8 17.4 2.8 0.80 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 4.3 13.0 52.2 30.4 3.1 0.79 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 24 4.2 0.0 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.69 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 54 Number of forms scanned = 39 Number of forms with at least one student response = 39 Percent completed = 72.2 % 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 430G001L1 CONDUCT AMER FOREIGN REL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aziabu, Yao E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 30.8 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 8 61.5 Junior 3 23.1 C 1 7.7 Senior 9 69.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 30.8 Studies Program 1 7.7 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 9 69.2 3 hours 4 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 3 23.1 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 0.0 7.1 64.3 28.6 3.2 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 21.4 35.7 42.9 3.2 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 7.1 35.7 50.0 3.3 0.91 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 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 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 21.4 35.7 42.9 3.2 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 430G001L1 CONDUCT AMER FOREIGN REL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aziabu, Yao 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 41.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 280 002L1 ISSUES IN PUBLIC POLICY: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bartilow, Horace A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 22.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 77.8 Junior 3 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 66.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 11.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 7 77.8 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 280 002L1 ISSUES IN PUBLIC POLICY: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bartilow, Horace 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 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 = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 56.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 433G001L1 POL INTERNTNL ECON RELAT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bartilow, Horace A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 39.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 39.1 Junior 6 26.1 C 3 13.0 Senior 13 56.5 D 2 8.7 Graduate 2 8.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 8.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 13.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 26.1 Required by my major 10 43.5 3 hours 7 30.4 Other (e.g. elective) 13 56.5 4 - 5 hours 3 13.0 6 - 7 hours 3 13.0 8 or more hours 1 4.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 4.0 8.0 64.0 24.0 3.1 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 4.2 4.2 54.2 37.5 3.3 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 8.7 21.7 47.8 21.7 2.8 0.89 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 12.0 16.0 52.0 20.0 2.8 0.91 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 16.0 32.0 36.0 16.0 2.5 0.96 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 12.5 16.7 41.7 29.2 2.9 0.99 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 8.0 4.0 72.0 16.0 3.0 0.73 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 20.0 16.0 40.0 24.0 2.7 1.07 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 20.0 16.0 48.0 16.0 2.6 1.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 4.0 12.0 44.0 40.0 3.2 0.82 11. Was available for consultation 25 4.0 8.0 52.0 36.0 3.2 0.76 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 28.0 24.0 28.0 20.0 2.4 1.12 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 20.0 4.0 44.0 32.0 2.9 1.09 14. Encouraged class participation 25 4.0 20.0 40.0 36.0 3.1 0.86 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 12.5 20.8 45.8 20.8 2.8 0.94 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 12.0 8.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 18.2 13.6 40.9 27.3 2.8 1.07 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 12.0 12.0 28.0 48.0 3.1 1.05 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 20.0 16.0 32.0 32.0 2.8 1.13 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 24.0 20.0 36.0 20.0 2.5 1.08 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 36.0 12.0 32.0 20.0 2.4 1.19 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 433G001L1 POL INTERNTNL ECON RELAT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bartilow, Horace 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 35 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 71.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 461G002L1 CIVIL LIBERTIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Canon, Bradley C SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 30.4 Sophomore 1 4.5 B 11 47.8 Junior 11 50.0 C 3 13.0 Senior 9 40.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 4.5 Pass or Audit 2 8.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 13.0 Studies Program 1 4.5 2 hours 6 26.1 Required by my major 12 54.5 3 hours 6 26.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 40.9 4 - 5 hours 5 21.7 6 - 7 hours 3 13.0 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 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 4.2 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 4.2 0.0 75.0 20.8 3.1 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 12.0 68.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 8.0 52.0 40.0 3.3 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 13.6 59.1 27.3 3.1 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 4.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 4.0 16.0 52.0 28.0 3.0 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 12.5 54.2 33.3 3.2 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 461G002L1 CIVIL LIBERTIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Canon, Bradley C % % 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 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 = 48 Number of forms scanned = 48 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 52.1 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 467G001L1 THE U.S. SUPREME COURT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Canon, Bradley C SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 45.7 Sophomore 3 8.8 B 17 48.6 Junior 12 35.3 C 2 5.7 Senior 18 52.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 22.9 Studies Program 1 3.0 2 hours 15 42.9 Required by my major 18 54.5 3 hours 8 22.9 Other (e.g. elective) 14 42.4 4 - 5 hours 4 11.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 37 0.0 0.0 43.2 56.8 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 37 5.4 18.9 51.4 24.3 2.9 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 2.7 5.4 43.2 48.6 3.4 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 5.4 10.8 48.6 35.1 3.1 0.82 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 8.1 0.0 62.2 29.7 3.1 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 2.7 2.7 67.6 27.0 3.2 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 37 0.0 2.7 64.9 32.4 3.3 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 37 2.7 10.8 56.8 29.7 3.1 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 37 5.4 16.2 56.8 21.6 2.9 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 37 0.0 0.0 43.2 56.8 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 36 0.0 2.8 52.8 44.4 3.4 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 2.7 45.9 51.4 3.5 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 5.6 19.4 38.9 36.1 3.1 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 37 5.4 5.4 45.9 43.2 3.3 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 7.1 17.9 53.6 21.4 2.9 0.83 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 5.9 2.9 64.7 26.5 3.1 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 7.1 10.7 53.6 28.6 3.0 0.84 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 5.9 5.9 55.9 32.4 3.1 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 5.9 17.6 47.1 29.4 3.0 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 36 5.6 8.3 44.4 41.7 3.2 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 5.6 11.1 47.2 36.1 3.1 0.83 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 467G001L1 THE U.S. SUPREME COURT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Canon, Bradley C % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 58 Number of forms scanned = 38 Number of forms with at least one student response = 37 Percent completed = 63.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 431G001L1 NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Davis, Benton V SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 28.0 Junior 2 8.0 C 2 8.0 Senior 19 76.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 16.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 4.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 16.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 8.0 Required by my major 18 72.0 3 hours 12 48.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 28.0 4 - 5 hours 6 24.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 8.7 39.1 52.2 3.4 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 44.0 56.0 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.26 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 7.1 32.1 60.7 3.5 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 7.1 39.3 53.6 3.5 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 4.2 4.2 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 3.6 32.1 64.3 3.6 0.57 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 3.6 35.7 60.7 3.6 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 10.7 28.6 60.7 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 431G001L1 NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Davis, Benton V % % 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 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 40 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 70.0 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 428G001L1 LATIN AMER GOVT/POLITICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Davis, Charles L SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 52.9 Sophomore 2 5.7 B 14 41.2 Junior 14 40.0 C 2 5.9 Senior 14 40.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 14.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 27.8 Studies Program 8 22.2 2 hours 10 27.8 Required by my major 21 58.3 3 hours 8 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 7 19.4 4 - 5 hours 5 13.9 6 - 7 hours 1 2.8 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 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 0.0 15.8 65.8 18.4 3.0 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 0.0 5.1 59.0 35.9 3.3 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 38 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 38 5.3 7.9 68.4 18.4 3.0 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 0.0 2.6 76.9 20.5 3.2 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 19.4 52.8 27.8 3.1 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 5.3 5.3 63.2 26.3 3.1 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 39 0.0 0.0 48.7 51.3 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 37 2.7 2.7 62.2 32.4 3.2 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 0.0 2.6 56.4 41.0 3.4 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 2.6 20.5 56.4 20.5 2.9 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 39 0.0 12.8 59.0 28.2 3.2 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 36 0.0 5.6 72.2 22.2 3.2 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 36 0.0 13.9 69.4 16.7 3.0 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 16.1 71.0 12.9 3.0 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 39 0.0 5.1 59.0 35.9 3.3 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 5.4 16.2 56.8 21.6 2.9 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 39 0.0 15.4 56.4 28.2 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 39 2.6 23.1 38.5 35.9 3.1 0.84 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 428G001L1 LATIN AMER GOVT/POLITICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Davis, Charles L % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 = 62 Number of forms scanned = 39 Number of forms with at least one student response = 39 Percent completed = 62.9 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 101 011L1 AMERICAN GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fording, Richard C. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 23 62.2 A 10 27.0 Sophomore 6 16.2 B 13 35.1 Junior 3 8.1 C 14 37.8 Senior 5 13.5 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 9 24.3 Studies Program 22 62.9 2 hours 6 16.2 Required by my major 8 22.9 3 hours 10 27.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 14.3 4 - 5 hours 7 18.9 6 - 7 hours 5 13.5 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 38 0.0 0.0 60.5 39.5 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 2.9 11.8 64.7 20.6 3.0 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 38 10.5 18.4 44.7 26.3 2.9 0.93 5. Grading was fair and consistent 38 0.0 10.5 60.5 28.9 3.2 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 2.7 2.7 56.8 37.8 3.3 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 38 0.0 5.3 44.7 50.0 3.4 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 12.1 24.2 36.4 27.3 2.8 0.99 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 5.3 23.7 39.5 31.6 3.0 0.88 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 0.0 61.8 38.2 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 38 0.0 2.6 57.9 39.5 3.4 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 10.8 21.6 43.2 24.3 2.8 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 38 2.6 10.5 60.5 26.3 3.1 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 2.9 14.7 67.6 14.7 2.9 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 32 6.3 12.5 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.84 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 6.7 36.7 43.3 13.3 2.6 0.81 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 38 0.0 7.9 65.8 26.3 3.2 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 38 5.3 36.8 42.1 15.8 2.7 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 2.6 28.9 42.1 26.3 2.9 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 7.9 21.1 31.6 39.5 3.0 0.97 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 101 011L1 AMERICAN GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fording, Richard C. % % 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 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 14 0.0 14.3 64.3 21.4 3.1 0.62 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 11 9.1 18.2 72.7 0.0 2.6 0.67 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 25.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 50 Number of forms scanned = 50 Number of forms with at least one student response = 38 Percent completed = 76.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 491 003L1 SP TOP IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fording, Richard C. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 25.0 Junior 2 25.0 C 2 25.0 Senior 6 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 62.5 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 3 37.5 4 - 5 hours 4 50.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 0.0 50.0 37.5 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 12.5 12.5 12.5 62.5 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 491 003L1 SP TOP IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fording, Richard C. % % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = PS 420G001L1 GOVTS & POL SOUTH ASIA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gadbois, George H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 65.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 35.0 Junior 5 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 15 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 15.0 Studies Program 4 20.0 2 hours 7 35.0 Required by my major 14 70.0 3 hours 4 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 10.0 4 - 5 hours 5 25.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.0 % % 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 9.1 50.0 40.9 3.3 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 4.5 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 0.0 68.2 31.8 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 5.0 0.0 65.0 30.0 3.2 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 31.3 43.8 25.0 2.9 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 9.1 9.1 36.4 45.5 3.2 0.96 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 13.6 86.4 3.9 0.35 11. Was available for consultation 16 6.3 0.0 37.5 56.3 3.4 0.81 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 4.3 4.3 34.8 56.5 3.4 0.79 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 4.3 26.1 26.1 43.5 3.1 0.95 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 13.6 40.9 45.5 3.3 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 0.76 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 41.2 23.5 35.3 2.9 0.90 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 13.6 13.6 31.8 40.9 3.0 1.07 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 4.3 21.7 39.1 34.8 3.0 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 8.7 8.7 34.8 47.8 3.2 0.95 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = PS 420G001L1 GOVTS & POL SOUTH ASIA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gadbois, George 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 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 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 101 010L1 AMERICAN GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gross, Donald A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 50.0 A 6 35.3 Sophomore 7 38.9 B 6 35.3 Junior 2 11.1 C 5 29.4 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 38.9 Studies Program 11 61.1 2 hours 6 33.3 Required by my major 4 22.2 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 3 16.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 16.7 61.1 22.2 3.1 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 10.5 52.6 36.8 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 66.7 16.7 11.1 2.3 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 15.8 42.1 42.1 3.3 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 21.1 42.1 31.6 3.0 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 42.1 31.6 26.3 2.8 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 18.8 62.5 18.8 3.0 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 17.6 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 30.8 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 5.6 33.3 38.9 22.2 2.8 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 21.1 47.4 31.6 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 5.6 38.9 55.6 3.5 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 101 010L1 AMERICAN GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gross, Donald 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 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 = 75 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 25.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 711 003S1 TOP SEM IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gross, Donald A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 16.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 83.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 4 66.7 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 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 711 003S1 TOP SEM IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gross, Donald 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 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 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 480G001L1 GOVERNMENT & THE ECONOMY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hager, Gregory L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 52.0 Sophomore 1 4.0 B 11 44.0 Junior 5 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 13 52.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 24.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 4.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 24.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 12 48.0 3 hours 9 36.0 Other (e.g. elective) 13 52.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.0 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 26 0.0 3.8 26.9 69.2 3.7 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 8.0 32.0 60.0 3.5 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 3.8 34.6 61.5 3.6 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 3.8 34.6 61.5 3.6 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 3.8 38.5 57.7 3.5 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 3.8 42.3 53.8 3.5 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 0.0 3.8 23.1 73.1 3.7 0.55 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 0.0 26.9 73.1 3.7 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 3.8 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 7.7 42.3 50.0 3.4 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 0.0 0.0 26.9 73.1 3.7 0.45 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 480G001L1 GOVERNMENT & THE ECONOMY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hager, Gregory L. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 39 Number of forms scanned = 39 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 66.7 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 711 401S1 TOP SEM IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = IRVIN, CYNTHIA SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 7 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 42.9 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 711 401S1 TOP SEM IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = IRVIN, CYNTHIA % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 210 001L1 INTRO EURO POL:EAST/WEST INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Irvin, Cynthia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 27.3 Sophomore 3 27.3 B 7 63.6 Junior 7 63.6 C 1 9.1 Senior 1 9.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 27.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 6 54.5 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 5 45.5 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 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 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 9.1 0.0 63.6 27.3 3.1 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 10.0 0.0 40.0 50.0 3.3 0.95 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 20.0 10.0 70.0 3.5 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 210 001L1 INTRO EURO POL:EAST/WEST INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Irvin, Cynthia % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 12 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 91.7 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 491 401L1 SP TOP IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Irvin, Cynthia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 14.3 Junior 1 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 37.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 37.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 12.5 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 25.0 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 75.0 4 - 5 hours 1 12.5 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 0.0 88.9 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 11.1 0.0 88.9 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 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 9 0.0 11.1 11.1 77.8 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 0.0 88.9 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 0.0 88.9 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . % % % % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 491 401L1 SP TOP IN PS: INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Irvin, Cynthia % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 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 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 17 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 52.9 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Political Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PS 235 002L1 WORLD POLITICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kaufman, Stuart SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 8 23.5 A 9 26.5 Sophomore 9 26.5 B 16 47.1 Junior 12 35.3 C 8 23.5 Senior 4 11.8 D 1 2.9 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.9 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 11.8 Studies Program 10 29.4 2 hours 11 32.4 Required by my major 17 50.0 3 hours 11 32.4 Other (e.g. elective) 7 20.6 4 - 5 hours 7 20.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 2.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 37 0.0 2.7 54.1 43.2 3.4 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 37 0.0 13.5 75.7 10.8 3.0 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 0.0 8.3 63.9 27.8 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 0.0 2.8 50.0 47.2 3.4 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 5.7 11.4 57.1 25.7 3.0 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 0.0 8.3 63.9 27.8 3.2 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 2.8 5.6 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 2.8 8.3 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 36 2.8 5.6 52.8 38.9 3.3 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 35 2.9 8.6 60.0 28.6 3.1 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 8.8 70.6 20.6 3.1 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 32 0.0 15.6 68.8 15.6 3.0 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 2.9 58.8 38.2 3.4 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 5.7 11.4 57.1 25.7 3.0 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) S