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 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 111 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES I, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harbour, Daniel M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 8 57.1 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 2 14.3 B 1 7.1 Junior 3 21.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 7.1 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 9 69.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 30.8 Required by my major 1 7.1 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 13 92.9 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 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 111 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES I, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harbour, Daniel M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 111 002L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES I, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harbour, Daniel M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 14 73.7 A 17 89.5 Sophomore 4 21.1 B 0 0.0 Junior 1 5.3 C 0 0.0 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 2 10.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 13 68.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 15.8 Required by my major 1 5.3 3 hours 2 10.5 Other (e.g. elective) 18 94.7 4 - 5 hours 1 5.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 21.1 31.6 47.4 3.3 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 111 002L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES I, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harbour, Daniel M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 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 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 341 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES IV, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Morgan, Cheryl SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 10 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 90.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 10.0 Required by my major 1 10.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 9 90.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 % % % % 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 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 341 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES IV, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Morgan, Cheryl % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = AS 331 401L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES III, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Parker, James S SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 3 60.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 40.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 40.0 Studies Program 1 20.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = AS 331 401L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES III, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Parker, James S % % 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 211 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES II, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perry, Peter K SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 Sophomore 5 71.4 B 0 0.0 Junior 1 14.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . % % % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AS 211 001L1 AEROSPACE STUDIES II, AFROTC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perry, Peter K % % 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 = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 58.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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".