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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 235 001L1 CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chapman, James P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 18.5 A 17 63.0 Sophomore 4 14.8 B 7 25.9 Junior 3 11.1 C 2 7.4 Senior 14 51.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 3.7 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 33.3 Studies Program 3 11.1 2 hours 7 25.9 Required by my major 6 22.2 3 hours 5 18.5 Other (e.g. elective) 18 66.7 4 - 5 hours 6 22.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 0.0 0.0 37.9 62.1 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 0.0 3.4 34.5 62.1 3.6 0.57 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 0.0 0.0 41.4 58.6 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 3.4 31.0 65.5 3.6 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 3.4 48.3 48.3 3.4 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 7.7 50.0 42.3 3.3 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 0.0 51.7 48.3 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 20.7 79.3 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 3.6 50.0 46.4 3.4 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 3.4 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 13.6 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 0.0 3.4 37.9 58.6 3.6 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 0.0 3.4 31.0 65.5 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 235 001L1 CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chapman, James P % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 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 = 40 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 72.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 101 001L1 ELEMENTARY LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Guindon, Lynn Della SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 10.0 A 4 40.0 Sophomore 4 40.0 B 3 30.0 Junior 3 30.0 C 2 20.0 Senior 2 20.0 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 1 10.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 6 66.7 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 4 40.0 6 - 7 hours 4 40.0 8 or more hours 2 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 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 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 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 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 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 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 101 001L1 ELEMENTARY LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Guindon, Lynn Della % % 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 52.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CLA 390 401L1 ROMAN, JEW AND GREEK: BACKGROUNDS CHRISTIANITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holle, Bruce F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 20.0 Sophomore 1 4.5 B 10 50.0 Junior 3 13.6 C 3 15.0 Senior 16 72.7 D 1 5.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 9.1 Pass or Audit 2 10.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 9.1 Required by my major 9 40.9 3 hours 9 40.9 Other (e.g. elective) 13 59.1 4 - 5 hours 8 36.4 6 - 7 hours 1 4.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 4.0 40.0 56.0 3.5 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 8.3 37.5 54.2 3.5 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 4.3 13.0 82.6 3.8 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 26.1 65.2 3.6 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 0.0 61.9 33.3 3.2 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 4.0 20.0 76.0 3.7 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 4.0 0.0 96.0 3.9 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 4.3 34.8 60.9 3.6 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 32.0 64.0 3.6 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 8.0 16.0 72.0 3.6 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 4.0 96.0 4.0 0.20 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 4.3 34.8 56.5 3.4 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 4.3 4.3 47.8 43.5 3.3 0.76 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 5.9 11.8 47.1 35.3 3.1 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 8.0 8.0 32.0 52.0 3.3 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 4.0 4.0 12.0 80.0 3.7 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 4.0 0.0 12.0 84.0 3.8 0.66 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CLA 390 401L1 ROMAN, JEW AND GREEK: BACKGROUNDS CHRISTIANITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holle, Bruce F % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 29 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 86.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 251 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GREEK INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Martin, Hubert M, Jr SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 1 20.0 C 2 40.0 Senior 4 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 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 50.0 25.0 25.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 33.3 16.7 50.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 16.7 0.0 83.3 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 251 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GREEK INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Martin, Hubert M, Jr % % 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 151 001L1 ELEMENTARY GREEK INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Jane E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 16.7 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 16.7 B 5 83.3 Junior 2 33.3 C 1 16.7 Senior 1 16.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 66.7 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 33.3 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 3 50.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 151 001L1 ELEMENTARY GREEK INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Jane E % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 70.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Jane E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.9 A 8 47.1 Sophomore 4 23.5 B 5 29.4 Junior 6 35.3 C 3 17.6 Senior 5 29.4 D 1 5.9 Graduate 1 5.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 6 35.3 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 8 47.1 3 hours 5 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 17.6 4 - 5 hours 5 29.4 6 - 7 hours 2 11.8 8 or more hours 1 5.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 11.1 11.1 44.4 33.3 3.0 0.97 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 11.1 50.0 38.9 3.3 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 22.2 44.4 27.8 2.9 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 31.3 37.5 25.0 2.8 0.91 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Jane E % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 425G001L1 HEROIC IDEAL:GRK ROM EPC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rabel, Robert J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 25.0 Junior 2 22.2 C 1 12.5 Senior 6 66.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 11.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 7 77.8 4 - 5 hours 3 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 1 11.1 % % 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 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 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 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 425G001L1 HEROIC IDEAL:GRK ROM EPC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rabel, Robert 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 = 13 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 76.9 % 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 210 001L1 THE ART OF GREECE & ROME INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Scaife, A Ross SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 16.7 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 4 33.3 B 6 54.5 Junior 4 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 16.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 8.3 Studies Program 5 41.7 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 6 50.0 3 hours 8 66.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 8.3 4 - 5 hours 2 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 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 0.0 53.8 38.5 3.2 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 7.7 76.9 7.7 7.7 2.2 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 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 7.7 0.0 15.4 76.9 3.6 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 76.9 3.7 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 7.7 30.8 53.8 3.3 0.95 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 76.9 3.7 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 7.7 84.6 3.8 0.60 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 210 001L1 THE ART OF GREECE & ROME INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Scaife, A Ross % % 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 65.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 526 001L1 ROM IMPER PROSE:IMPER PORTRAITS:TACITUS'ANNALE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Swift, Louis J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 62.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 12.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 75.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 12.5 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 12.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 7 87.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 42.9 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 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 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 526 001L1 ROM IMPER PROSE:IMPER PORTRAITS:TACITUS'ANNALE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Swift, Louis 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 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 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 = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 88.9 % 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 = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 301 001L1 LATIN LITERATURE I: THE ART OF LOVE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tunberg, T SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 14.3 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 2 28.6 B 3 42.9 Junior 3 42.9 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 28.6 4 - 5 hours 5 71.4 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 8 or more hours 1 14.3 % % 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . % % % % 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Classics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CLA 301 001L1 LATIN LITERATURE I: THE ART OF LOVE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tunberg, T % % 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 7 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 mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO".