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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L3 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams, Christopher SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 7 63.6 B 1 10.0 Junior 4 36.4 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 6 60.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 27.3 Studies Program 2 18.2 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 2 18.2 3 hours 2 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 7 63.6 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % 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 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 9.1 27.3 54.5 9.1 2.6 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 25.0 33.3 33.3 2.9 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L3 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams, Christopher % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 57.1 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L3 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams, Christopher SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 8 80.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 20.0 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 10 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 1 10.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 9 90.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 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 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 21.4 35.7 42.9 3.2 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 38.5 38.5 23.1 2.8 0.80 % % % % 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 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.65 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L3 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams, Christopher % % 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 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 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 34. Instructor explained expectations 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 35. Instructor helped with my problems 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L1 SPEC COURSE:ENVIRONMENT PHYSIOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 60.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 40.0 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 0 0.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 40.0 % % 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 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 2.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L1 SPEC COURSE:ENVIRONMENT PHYSIOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley J % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 002L1 SPEC COURSE: COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cooper, Robin L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 16.7 Pass or Audit 1 16.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 50.0 Required by my major 1 16.7 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 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 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 002L1 SPEC COURSE: COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cooper, Robin 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 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 = 6 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L2 SPEC COURSE:ENVIRONMENT PHYSIOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hogstrand, Christer J.L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 33.3 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 16.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 2 33.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 66.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 1 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 16.7 16.7 16.7 50.0 3.0 . % % % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L2 SPEC COURSE:ENVIRONMENT PHYSIOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hogstrand, Christer J.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 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 = 6 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 002L2 SPEC COURSE: COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hogstrand, Christer J.L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 16.7 Pass or Audit 1 16.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 1 20.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 002L2 SPEC COURSE: COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hogstrand, Christer J.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 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 6 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 001L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY VIRUSES ARE NOT NASTY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lesnaw, Judith A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 19 95.0 A 17 89.5 Sophomore 1 5.0 B 2 10.5 Junior 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 25.0 Studies Program 9 45.0 2 hours 6 30.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 6 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 11 55.0 4 - 5 hours 3 15.0 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 5.3 5.3 42.1 47.4 3.3 0.82 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 81.8 9.1 0.0 9.1 1.4 0.92 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 62.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 1.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 001L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY VIRUSES ARE NOT NASTY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lesnaw, Judith 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 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 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 19 15.8 10.5 57.9 15.8 2.7 0.93 28. Guided student report preparation 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 29. Students free to express opinions 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 31. Developed abil to conduct research 18 5.6 11.1 27.8 55.6 3.3 0.91 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 90.9 % 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L1 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Murphy, Sarah Anne SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 20.0 Sophomore 8 66.7 B 1 10.0 Junior 4 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 10.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 6 60.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 27.3 Studies Program 2 16.7 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 2 16.7 3 hours 2 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 8 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 16.7 75.0 3.7 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 25.0 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L1 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Murphy, Sarah Anne % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 57.1 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L2 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Murphy, Sarah Anne SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 9 75.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 3 25.0 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 12 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 66.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 16.7 Required by my major 1 8.3 3 hours 1 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 91.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 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 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.65 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 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 30.8 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.69 % % % % 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 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 0.76 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L2 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Murphy, Sarah Anne % % 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 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 13 7.7 7.7 46.2 38.5 3.2 0.90 33. Amount of work appropriate 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 34. Instructor explained expectations 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 35. Instructor helped with my problems 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L4 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shelton, Tommy SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 22.2 Sophomore 7 63.6 B 1 11.1 Junior 4 36.4 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 6 66.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 30.0 Studies Program 2 18.2 2 hours 4 40.0 Required by my major 1 9.1 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 72.7 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 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 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 10.0 40.0 40.0 10.0 2.5 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 401L4 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOP II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shelton, Tommy % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 52.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L4 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shelton, Tommy SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 9 81.8 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 18.2 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 10 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 72.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 1 9.1 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 10 90.9 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 15.4 46.2 38.5 3.2 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 15.4 53.8 30.8 3.2 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 100 402L4 SP INTRO CRSE:BIO 152 BIOLOGY WORKSHOPII INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shelton, Tommy % % 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 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 12 8.3 0.0 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.87 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 34. Instructor explained expectations 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 35. Instructor helped with my problems 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % 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 = 13 Percent completed = 92.9 % 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 004S1 BIOLOGY SEMINAR: PLANT/ANIMAL INTERACTION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baskin, Jerry M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 88.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 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 6 66.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 33.3 Required by my major 7 77.8 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 22.2 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 13 7.7 7.7 30.8 53.8 3.3 0.95 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 7.7 0.0 69.2 23.1 3.1 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 004S1 BIOLOGY SEMINAR: PLANT/ANIMAL INTERACTION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baskin, Jerry 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 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 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 29. Students free to express opinions 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 92.9 % 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 007S1 BIOLOGY SEM:BIODIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baskin, Jerry M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 90.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 10.0 Junior 3 30.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 60.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 10.0 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 70.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 8 80.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 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 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.84 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 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 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 18.2 54.5 3.3 0.90 % % % % 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 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 007S1 BIOLOGY SEM:BIODIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baskin, Jerry 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 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 11 0.0 18.2 27.3 54.5 3.4 0.81 28. Guided student report preparation 11 0.0 27.3 18.2 54.5 3.3 0.90 29. Students free to express opinions 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 31. Developed abil to conduct research 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 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 = 12 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 102 002L1 HUMAN ECOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 48 40.0 A 34 28.3 Sophomore 46 38.3 B 66 55.0 Junior 16 13.3 C 20 16.7 Senior 10 8.3 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 58 48.3 Studies Program 98 82.4 2 hours 29 24.2 Required by my major 20 16.8 3 hours 24 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 0.8 4 - 5 hours 6 5.0 6 - 7 hours 3 2.5 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 138 0.0 0.0 44.2 55.8 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 135 11.9 24.4 47.4 16.3 2.7 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 131 2.3 14.5 59.5 23.7 3.0 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 137 1.5 8.8 53.3 36.5 3.2 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 137 0.0 3.6 51.8 44.5 3.4 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 136 0.0 8.8 55.9 35.3 3.3 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 138 0.7 13.8 55.1 30.4 3.2 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 125 7.2 36.8 42.4 13.6 2.6 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 138 2.9 6.5 52.9 37.7 3.3 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 137 0.0 0.0 39.4 60.6 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 123 0.8 3.3 61.8 34.1 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 135 0.0 0.7 52.6 46.7 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 137 7.3 23.4 46.7 22.6 2.8 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 135 1.5 16.3 63.7 18.5 3.0 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 115 3.5 14.8 66.1 15.7 2.9 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 127 3.1 19.7 63.0 14.2 2.9 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 113 3.5 28.3 54.9 13.3 2.8 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 134 1.5 9.0 66.4 23.1 3.1 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 128 10.2 39.8 34.4 15.6 2.6 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 137 2.9 15.3 58.4 23.4 3.0 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 137 1.5 16.1 40.1 42.3 3.2 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 102 002L1 HUMAN ECOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth % % 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 125 3.2 8.8 64.8 23.2 3.1 0.67 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 124 4.8 16.9 58.1 20.2 2.9 0.75 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 125 4.8 13.6 64.0 17.6 2.9 0.71 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 76 1.3 11.8 69.7 17.1 3.0 0.59 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 65 0.0 9.2 69.2 21.5 3.1 0.55 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 288 Number of forms scanned = 139 Number of forms with at least one student response = 139 Percent completed = 48.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 150 001L1 PRIN OF BIOLOGY I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 24 20.2 A 17 14.7 Sophomore 59 49.6 B 48 41.4 Junior 27 22.7 C 42 36.2 Senior 8 6.7 D 8 6.9 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 0.9 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.8 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 25 21.4 Studies Program 13 11.2 2 hours 35 29.9 Required by my major 90 77.6 3 hours 31 26.5 Other (e.g. elective) 13 11.2 4 - 5 hours 19 16.2 6 - 7 hours 7 6.0 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 128 0.0 4.7 57.0 38.3 3.3 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 128 8.6 16.4 53.1 21.9 2.9 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 125 7.2 27.2 51.2 14.4 2.7 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 126 13.5 25.4 43.7 17.5 2.7 0.92 5. Grading was fair and consistent 127 1.6 17.3 58.3 22.8 3.0 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 126 4.0 10.3 61.1 24.6 3.1 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 123 2.4 10.6 57.7 29.3 3.1 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 122 15.6 50.8 28.7 4.9 2.2 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 127 7.1 14.2 51.2 27.6 3.0 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 127 0.0 1.6 49.6 48.8 3.5 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 111 0.0 0.0 65.8 34.2 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 127 0.8 2.4 59.1 37.8 3.3 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 125 12.0 22.4 48.0 17.6 2.7 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 124 2.4 18.5 58.9 20.2 3.0 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 106 3.8 31.1 53.8 11.3 2.7 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 120 5.8 18.3 60.0 15.8 2.9 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 119 6.7 30.3 52.1 10.9 2.7 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 127 3.1 11.0 57.5 28.3 3.1 0.72 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 121 9.9 36.4 43.8 9.9 2.5 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 127 7.1 23.6 49.6 19.7 2.8 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 126 10.3 18.3 42.1 29.4 2.9 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 150 001L1 PRIN OF BIOLOGY I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth % % 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 101 0.0 13.9 67.3 18.8 3.0 0.57 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 97 2.1 12.4 68.0 17.5 3.0 0.62 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 97 4.1 21.6 64.9 9.3 2.8 0.66 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 44 4.5 38.6 47.7 9.1 2.6 0.72 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 47 6.4 21.3 53.2 19.1 2.9 0.81 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 235 Number of forms scanned = 128 Number of forms with at least one student response = 128 Percent completed = 54.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 208 001L1 PRINCIPLES OF MICROBIO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 2.2 A 32 37.2 Sophomore 27 30.3 B 26 30.2 Junior 40 44.9 C 25 29.1 Senior 17 19.1 D 3 3.5 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 3 3.4 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 19.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 30 34.1 Required by my major 69 80.2 3 hours 22 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 17 19.8 4 - 5 hours 17 19.3 6 - 7 hours 1 1.1 8 or more hours 1 1.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 97 0.0 0.0 39.2 60.8 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 96 5.2 12.5 43.8 38.5 3.2 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 96 2.1 5.2 52.1 40.6 3.3 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 97 3.1 7.2 46.4 43.3 3.3 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 96 0.0 2.1 46.9 51.0 3.5 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 96 0.0 3.1 51.0 45.8 3.4 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 97 0.0 2.1 52.6 45.4 3.4 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 87 2.3 9.2 55.2 33.3 3.2 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 97 1.0 0.0 44.3 54.6 3.5 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 97 0.0 0.0 29.9 70.1 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 89 0.0 0.0 48.3 51.7 3.5 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 97 1.0 0.0 42.3 56.7 3.5 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 96 4.2 7.3 41.7 46.9 3.3 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 95 1.1 6.3 48.4 44.2 3.4 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 78 0.0 10.3 61.5 28.2 3.2 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 92 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 86 0.0 11.6 61.6 26.7 3.2 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 95 0.0 3.2 57.9 38.9 3.4 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 92 5.4 15.2 42.4 37.0 3.1 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 96 1.0 6.3 51.0 41.7 3.3 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 95 1.1 0.0 38.9 60.0 3.6 0.56 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 208 001L1 PRINCIPLES OF MICROBIO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beattie, Ruth % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 203 Number of forms scanned = 98 Number of forms with at least one student response = 98 Percent completed = 48.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 010S1 BIOLOGY SEMINAR:ECOTOX. AND AQUATIC SYSTEM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 100.0 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 4 66.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 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 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 425 010S1 BIOLOGY SEMINAR:ECOTOX. AND AQUATIC SYSTEM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley J % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 40.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 2.6 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 20.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 25.0 25.0 0.0 50.0 2.8 . 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 77.8 % 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 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = BIO 315 001L1 INTRO TO CELL BIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bonner, Philip H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 28.9 Sophomore 3 6.4 B 18 40.0 Junior 24 51.1 C 11 24.4 Senior 19 40.4 D 3 6.7 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 2.1 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 8.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 8.5 Required by my major 41 87.2 3 hours 14 29.8 Other (e.g. elective) 6 12.8 4 - 5 hours 13 27.7 6 - 7 hours 5 10.6 8 or more hours 7 14.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 48 0.0 8.3 68.8 22.9 3.1 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 48 2.1 8.3 45.8 43.8 3.3 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 8.8 8.8 52.9 29.4 3.0 0.87 4. Exams reflected what was taught 48 10.4 27.1 39.6 22.9 2.8 0.93 5. Grading was fair and consistent 48 4.2 20.8 52.1 22.9 2.9 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 5.7 2.9 68.6 22.9 3.1 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 46 0.0 6.5 73.9 19.6 3.1 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 44 2.3 29.5 54.5 13.6 2.8 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 47 8.5 29.8 42.6 19.1 2.7 0.88 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 48 0.0 0.0 35.4 64.6 3.6 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 43 0.0 0.0 67.4 32.6 3.3 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 48 2.1 4.2 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 46 6.5 21.7 45.7 26.1 2.9 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 45 2.2 17.8 55.6 24.4 3.0 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 44 2.3 11.4 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 44 2.3 13.6 50.0 34.1 3.2 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 47 2.1 12.8 44.7 40.4 3.2 0.76 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 44 6.8 34.1 29.5 29.5 2.8 0.95 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 48 8.3 18.8 35.4 37.5 3.0 0.96 21. Overall quality of teaching 48 10.4 20.8 37.5 31.3 2.9 0.97 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences FACUL