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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 380 001L1 SURVEY OF 19TH CENTURY RUSSIAN LIT (IN ENGLISH) INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Roger B SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 44.4 Junior 1 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 87.5 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 1 12.5 Studies Program 2 25.0 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 2 25.0 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 8 or more hours 1 12.5 % % 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 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 10.0 0.0 70.0 20.0 3.0 0.82 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 3.6 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 10.0 80.0 3.7 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 % % % % 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 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 3.6 0.67 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 380 001L1 SURVEY OF 19TH CENTURY RUSSIAN LIT (IN ENGLISH) INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Roger B % % 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 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RAE 328 001L1 ISLAM CIV:RISE ISLA 1798 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Darrat, Suleiman SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 75.9 Sophomore 7 25.0 B 6 20.7 Junior 8 28.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 13 46.4 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 3.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 27.6 Studies Program 21 72.4 2 hours 11 37.9 Required by my major 1 3.4 3 hours 7 24.1 Other (e.g. elective) 7 24.1 4 - 5 hours 2 6.9 6 - 7 hours 1 3.4 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 32 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 3.2 0.0 45.2 51.6 3.5 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 32 0.0 3.1 46.9 50.0 3.5 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 32 0.0 0.0 28.1 71.9 3.7 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 0.0 45.2 54.8 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 6.7 36.7 56.7 3.5 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 3.3 43.3 53.3 3.5 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 32 0.0 3.1 46.9 50.0 3.5 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 32 0.0 3.1 15.6 81.3 3.8 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 31 0.0 3.2 35.5 61.3 3.6 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 3.2 3.2 25.8 67.7 3.6 0.72 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 6.5 0.0 35.5 58.1 3.5 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 32 3.1 3.1 46.9 46.9 3.4 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 3.3 0.0 33.3 63.3 3.6 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 3.4 6.9 34.5 55.2 3.4 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 3.7 7.4 40.7 48.1 3.3 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 0.0 32.3 67.7 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 6.7 30.0 63.3 3.6 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 3.3 30.0 66.7 3.6 0.56 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RAE 328 001L1 ISLAM CIV:RISE ISLA 1798 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Darrat, Suleiman % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 42 Number of forms scanned = 32 Number of forms with at least one student response = 32 Percent completed = 76.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 324 001L1 JEWISH THOUGHT/CULTURE I ANCIENT ISRAEL - MID AG INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Frank, Daniel SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 25.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 2 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 37.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 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 2 25.0 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 6 75.0 4 - 5 hours 1 12.5 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . % % % % 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 324 001L1 JEWISH THOUGHT/CULTURE I ANCIENT ISRAEL - MID AG INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Frank, Daniel % % 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 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 = 13 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 69.2 % 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 280 001L1 RUSSIAN & SOVIET CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Janecek, Gerald J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 22.0 A 24 58.5 Sophomore 10 24.4 B 15 36.6 Junior 12 29.3 C 1 2.4 Senior 9 22.0 D 1 2.4 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.4 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 20 48.8 Studies Program 31 75.6 2 hours 10 24.4 Required by my major 5 12.2 3 hours 10 24.4 Other (e.g. elective) 5 12.2 4 - 5 hours 1 2.4 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 49 0.0 0.0 38.8 61.2 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 47 6.4 17.0 53.2 23.4 2.9 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 49 0.0 6.1 59.2 34.7 3.3 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 49 0.0 4.1 40.8 55.1 3.5 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 50 2.0 4.0 42.0 52.0 3.4 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 50 0.0 0.0 46.0 54.0 3.5 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 50 0.0 0.0 58.0 42.0 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 50 2.0 8.0 52.0 38.0 3.3 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 50 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 50 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 45 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 50 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 49 0.0 8.2 44.9 46.9 3.4 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 50 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 45 0.0 0.0 57.8 42.2 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 45 2.2 13.3 57.8 26.7 3.1 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 42 2.4 23.8 59.5 14.3 2.9 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 47 0.0 2.1 57.4 40.4 3.4 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 49 4.1 20.4 49.0 26.5 3.0 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 49 0.0 4.1 49.0 46.9 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 49 0.0 6.1 34.7 59.2 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 280 001L1 RUSSIAN & SOVIET CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Janecek, Gerald 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 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 18 5.6 11.1 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.83 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 22 0.0 9.1 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.67 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 41 0.0 0.0 19.5 80.5 3.8 0.40 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 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 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 = 66 Number of forms scanned = 50 Number of forms with at least one student response = 50 Percent completed = 75.8 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE RUSSIAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rouhier-Willoughby, Jeanma SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 50.0 Junior 2 50.0 C 2 50.0 Senior 2 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 2 50.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 25.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 25.0 4 - 5 hours 3 75.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 25.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 40.0 0.0 40.0 20.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 40.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 2.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 20.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 20.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 40.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 2.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE RUSSIAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rouhier-Willoughby, Jeanma % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 50.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 2.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 50.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 2.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 370 001L1 RUSSIAN FOLKLORE (IN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rouhier-Willoughby, Jeanma SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 9.1 Sophomore 6 27.3 B 7 31.8 Junior 7 31.8 C 12 54.5 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 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 4.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.5 Studies Program 16 72.7 2 hours 5 22.7 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 6 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 27.3 4 - 5 hours 5 22.7 6 - 7 hours 4 18.2 8 or more hours 1 4.5 % % 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 16.0 60.0 24.0 3.1 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 20.0 64.0 16.0 3.0 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 20.0 52.0 28.0 3.1 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 0.0 12.0 68.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 16.0 36.0 36.0 12.0 2.4 0.92 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 4.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 4.0 16.0 56.0 24.0 3.0 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 12.0 56.0 32.0 3.2 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 4.2 62.5 33.3 3.3 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 8.0 20.0 28.0 44.0 3.1 1.00 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 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 16.0 60.0 24.0 3.1 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 4.8 42.9 38.1 14.3 2.6 0.80 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 4.0 16.0 52.0 28.0 3.0 0.79 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 4.2 41.7 33.3 20.8 2.7 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 36.0 40.0 24.0 2.9 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 4.0 20.0 36.0 40.0 3.1 0.88 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 370 001L1 RUSSIAN FOLKLORE (IN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rouhier-Willoughby, Jeanma % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 13 0.0 23.1 46.2 30.8 3.1 0.76 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 42 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 101 002L1 ELEMENTARY RUSSIAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ruder, Cynthia A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 30.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 1 10.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 1 10.0 C 1 10.0 Senior 3 30.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 20.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 10.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 10.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 50.0 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 40.0 4 - 5 hours 5 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 2 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 0.0 81.8 3.6 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 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 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 14. Encouraged class participation 11 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 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 101 002L1 ELEMENTARY RUSSIAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ruder, Cynthia 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 120 001L1 BEGINNING JAPANESE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Slaymaker, Douglas SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 6.7 A 10 62.5 Sophomore 3 20.0 B 2 12.5 Junior 4 26.7 C 1 6.3 Senior 7 46.7 D 1 6.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 12.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 6.3 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 5 31.3 Required by my major 3 18.8 3 hours 4 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 12 75.0 4 - 5 hours 3 18.8 6 - 7 hours 2 12.5 8 or more hours 1 6.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 11.1 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 5.6 22.2 72.2 3.7 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 120 001L1 BEGINNING JAPANESE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Slaymaker, Douglas % % 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 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 11 36.4 45.5 9.1 0.0 9.1 2.0 1.18 38. Question 38 15 33.3 13.3 53.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.94 Number of forms preslugged = 28 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 64.3 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 220 001L1 INTERMED JAPANESE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Slaymaker, Douglas SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 5 45.5 B 5 45.5 Junior 1 9.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 36.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 9.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 9.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 9.1 Studies Program 1 9.1 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 1 9.1 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 81.8 4 - 5 hours 8 72.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 50.0 3.3 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 8.3 58.3 25.0 3.0 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 % % % % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Russian and Eastern Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RAE 220 001L1 INTERMED JAPANESE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Slaymaker, Douglas % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 9 22.2 77.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 . 38. Question 38 11 9.1 36.4 27.3 9.1 18.2 2.9 1.30 Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 92.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO".