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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 1 6.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 37.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 3 18.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 6.3 0.0 68.8 25.0 3.1 0.72 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 5.9 5.9 70.6 17.6 3.0 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 16.7 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 5.6 50.0 38.9 3.2 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 5.9 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 6.7 0.0 66.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 5.9 5.9 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.81 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 11.8 0.0 58.8 29.4 3.1 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 17 5.9 5.9 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 7.1 7.1 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.83 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 12.5 0.0 68.8 18.8 2.9 0.85 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 7.1 64.3 21.4 3.0 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 6.3 6.3 56.3 31.3 3.1 0.81 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 12.5 12.5 56.3 18.8 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 5.6 5.6 61.1 27.8 3.1 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.65 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 92.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 15.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 30.8 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 2 15.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 23.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 15.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 6.7 20.0 46.7 26.7 2.9 0.88 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 28.6 0.0 71.4 0.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 13.3 6.7 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.92 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 9.1 0.0 90.9 0.0 2.8 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 6.7 0.0 80.0 13.3 3.0 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 13.3 0.0 66.7 20.0 2.9 0.88 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 0.0 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 6.7 0.0 66.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 7.7 0.0 69.2 23.1 3.1 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 7.1 14.3 57.1 21.4 2.9 0.83 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.79 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 7.1 7.1 64.3 21.4 3.0 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 7.1 14.3 50.0 28.6 3.0 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric 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 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 92.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 46.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 38.5 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 2 15.4 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 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 0.0 57.1 28.6 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 26.7 46.7 26.7 3.0 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.43 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 7.1 78.6 14.3 3.1 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 78.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 21.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 13.3 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 6 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 31.3 12.5 37.5 18.8 2.4 1.15 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 25.0 37.5 25.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 21.4 35.7 28.6 14.3 2.4 1.01 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 2.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.89 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 12.5 12.5 50.0 25.0 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 23.1 23.1 38.5 15.4 2.5 1.05 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 15.4 7.7 53.8 23.1 2.8 0.99 11. Was available for consultation 12 16.7 25.0 41.7 16.7 2.6 1.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 23.1 7.7 53.8 15.4 2.6 1.04 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 23.1 30.8 30.8 15.4 2.4 1.04 14. Encouraged class participation 11 27.3 9.1 45.5 18.2 2.5 1.13 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 7.1 14.3 50.0 28.6 3.0 0.88 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 14.3 7.1 57.1 21.4 2.9 0.95 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 25.0 8.3 50.0 16.7 2.6 1.08 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 13.3 13.3 60.0 13.3 2.7 0.88 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 21.4 35.7 28.6 14.3 2.4 1.01 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 17.6 41.2 29.4 11.8 2.4 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 35.3 29.4 29.4 5.9 2.1 0.97 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 69.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 7.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 41.7 16.7 25.0 16.7 2.2 1.19 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 10.0 20.0 70.0 0.0 2.6 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 2.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 0.0 2.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 9.1 9.1 72.7 9.1 2.8 0.75 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 23.1 23.1 46.2 7.7 2.4 0.96 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 11 27.3 27.3 45.5 0.0 2.2 0.87 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 9.1 18.2 54.5 18.2 2.8 0.87 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 18.2 27.3 36.4 18.2 2.5 1.04 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 38.5 15.4 38.5 7.7 2.2 1.07 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 30.8 38.5 23.1 7.7 2.1 0.95 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 66.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 1 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 41.7 50.0 8.3 0.0 1.7 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 60.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 27.3 36.4 36.4 0.0 2.1 0.83 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 37.5 62.5 0.0 0.0 1.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 0.0 2.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 37.5 25.0 37.5 0.0 2.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 0.0 1.6 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 50.0 37.5 12.5 0.0 1.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 50.0 37.5 0.0 12.5 1.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 42.9 28.6 14.3 14.3 2.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 50.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 1.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 50.0 37.5 12.5 0.0 1.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 37.5 37.5 25.0 0.0 1.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 42.9 42.9 14.3 0.0 1.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 22.2 22.2 55.6 0.0 2.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 30.0 20.0 40.0 10.0 2.3 1.06 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 27.3 18.2 54.5 0.0 2.3 0.90 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 2.0 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 53.3 20.0 26.7 0.0 1.7 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 85.7 7.1 7.1 0.0 1.2 0.58 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L4 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berdine, William H % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EDU 305 401L1 CONTEMP ISSUES FACING AT-RISK SCHL AGE/ADOLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harvey, Cecil SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 23 79.3 Sophomore 9 31.0 B 6 20.7 Junior 4 13.8 C 0 0.0 Senior 16 55.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 60.7 Studies Program 3 10.3 2 hours 6 21.4 Required by my major 13 44.8 3 hours 2 7.1 Other (e.g. elective) 13 44.8 4 - 5 hours 3 10.7 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 44 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 41 0.0 0.0 26.8 73.2 3.7 0.45 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 44 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 44 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 44 0.0 0.0 29.5 70.5 3.7 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 43 0.0 0.0 30.2 69.8 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 43 0.0 0.0 27.9 72.1 3.7 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 44 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 44 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 44 0.0 0.0 29.5 70.5 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 44 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 44 0.0 0.0 34.1 65.9 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 44 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 43 0.0 0.0 27.9 72.1 3.7 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 43 0.0 0.0 18.6 81.4 3.8 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 43 0.0 0.0 32.6 67.4 3.7 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 42 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 41 0.0 2.4 26.8 70.7 3.7 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 43 0.0 0.0 16.3 83.7 3.8 0.37 21. Overall quality of teaching 43 0.0 0.0 20.9 79.1 3.8 0.41 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EDU 305 401L1 CONTEMP ISSUES FACING AT-RISK SCHL AGE/ADOLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harvey, Cecil % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 62 Number of forms scanned = 46 Number of forms with at least one student response = 44 Percent completed = 71.0 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 20.0 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 2 13.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 8 or more hours 3 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 18 27.8 50.0 11.1 11.1 2.1 0.94 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 35.3 52.9 11.8 0.0 1.8 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 17.6 23.5 58.8 0.0 2.4 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 27.3 36.4 27.3 9.1 2.2 0.98 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 52.9 23.5 23.5 0.0 1.7 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 16.7 33.3 38.9 11.1 2.4 0.92 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 50.0 33.3 16.7 0.0 1.7 0.77 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 35.3 41.2 17.6 5.9 1.9 0.90 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 68.8 25.0 6.3 0.0 1.4 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 11.1 44.4 33.3 11.1 2.4 0.86 11. Was available for consultation 17 11.8 17.6 64.7 5.9 2.6 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 43.8 43.8 6.3 6.3 1.8 0.86 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 66.7 16.7 11.1 5.6 1.6 0.92 14. Encouraged class participation 13 38.5 38.5 23.1 0.0 1.8 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 36.4 27.3 27.3 9.1 2.1 1.04 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 21.4 42.9 28.6 7.1 2.2 0.89 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 21.4 50.0 21.4 7.1 2.1 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 23.5 35.3 29.4 11.8 2.3 0.99 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 47.1 41.2 11.8 0.0 1.6 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 44.4 44.4 5.6 5.6 1.7 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 66.7 22.2 11.1 0.0 1.4 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 25.0 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 1 8.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 60.0 26.7 13.3 0.0 1.5 0.74 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 38.5 46.2 15.4 0.0 1.8 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 46.7 26.7 26.7 0.0 1.8 0.86 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 66.7 16.7 16.7 0.0 1.5 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 53.3 46.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 40.0 26.7 26.7 6.7 2.0 1.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 53.3 40.0 6.7 0.0 1.5 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 26.7 40.0 26.7 6.7 2.1 0.92 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 64.3 28.6 7.1 0.0 1.4 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 26.7 20.0 46.7 6.7 2.3 0.98 11. Was available for consultation 12 16.7 25.0 58.3 0.0 2.4 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 50.0 28.6 21.4 0.0 1.7 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 46.7 33.3 20.0 0.0 1.7 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 13 53.8 7.7 38.5 0.0 1.8 0.99 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 55.6 0.0 44.4 0.0 1.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 38.5 30.8 30.8 0.0 1.9 0.86 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 23.1 23.1 53.8 0.0 2.3 0.85 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 35.7 7.1 57.1 0.0 2.2 0.97 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 50.0 21.4 28.6 0.0 1.8 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 53.3 20.0 26.7 0.0 1.7 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 60.0 33.3 6.7 0.0 1.5 0.64 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 92.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 46.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 3 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 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 15 60.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 53.8 15.4 30.8 0.0 1.8 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 21.4 35.7 35.7 7.1 2.3 0.91 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 50.0 25.0 16.7 8.3 1.8 1.03 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 26.7 46.7 26.7 0.0 2.0 0.76 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 26.7 20.0 53.3 0.0 2.3 0.88 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 80.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.41 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 13.3 46.7 40.0 0.0 2.3 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 80.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.41 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 26.7 26.7 40.0 6.7 2.3 0.96 11. Was available for consultation 13 15.4 30.8 53.8 0.0 2.4 0.77 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 42.9 42.9 14.3 0.0 1.7 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 53.3 33.3 13.3 0.0 1.6 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 15 20.0 13.3 66.7 0.0 2.5 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 50.0 12.5 37.5 0.0 1.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 46.7 40.0 6.7 6.7 1.7 0.88 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 35.7 42.9 7.1 14.3 2.0 1.04 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 33.3 33.3 26.7 6.7 2.1 0.96 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 46.7 40.0 6.7 6.7 1.7 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 60.0 13.3 20.0 6.7 1.7 1.03 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 80.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.41 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L5 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Sandidge, Rosetta F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 15.4 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 2 15.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 30.8 6 - 7 hours 2 15.4 8 or more hours 3 23.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 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 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 7.1 21.4 71.4 3.6 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Sandidge, Rosetta 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 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Spalding, Mary Elizabeth SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 86.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 13.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 2 12.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 37.5 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 7 43.8 % % 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 5.6 5.6 88.9 3.8 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 5.6 11.1 83.3 3.8 0.55 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 11.1 27.8 61.1 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 18 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 5.6 0.0 94.4 3.9 0.47 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Spalding, Mary Elizabeth % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Angene H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 91.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 8.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 1 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 50.0 6 - 7 hours 2 16.7 8 or more hours 2 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 13.3 26.7 60.0 3.5 0.74 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 21.4 35.7 35.7 3.0 0.96 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 6.7 20.0 73.3 3.7 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 6.7 13.3 80.0 3.7 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 6.7 86.7 3.8 0.56 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Angene H % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 401L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 20 83.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 4 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 8 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 20.8 Required by my major 19 79.2 3 hours 7 29.2 Other (e.g. elective) 5 20.8 4 - 5 hours 3 12.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.2 % % 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 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 12.0 12.0 60.0 16.0 2.8 0.87 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 16.0 48.0 36.0 3.2 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 44.0 56.0 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 64.0 36.0 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 4.0 16.0 64.0 16.0 2.9 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 8.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 24.0 36.0 40.0 3.2 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 401L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 550 402L1 SPEC TOPS IN REHAB: COUNSELING TECH I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 14.3 Studies Program 1 7.1 2 hours 4 28.6 Required by my major 13 92.9 3 hours 6 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 7.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 7.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 18.8 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 18.8 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 68.8 25.0 3.2 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 550 402L1 SPEC TOPS IN REHAB: COUNSELING TECH I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph 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 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 94.1 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 760 401L1 CONTEMP PRAC IN REHAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harley, Debra SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 22.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 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 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 760 401L1 CONTEMP PRAC IN REHAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harley, Debra % % 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RC 510 001L1 ORIENT TO REHAB RESOURCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Martin, Terri L 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 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 27.3 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 8 or more hours 3 27.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 45.5 54.5 0.0 2.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 36.4 63.6 0.0 2.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 41.7 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 50.0 25.0 16.7 2.5 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 33.3 41.7 25.0 0.0 1.9 0.79 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RC 510 001L1 ORIENT TO REHAB RESOURCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Martin, Terri 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 600 201L1 ORGANIZTN & ADMINISTRTN OF AMERICAN EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bjork, Lars G. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 91.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 8.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 2 16.7 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 5 41.7 % % 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 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 600 201L1 ORGANIZTN & ADMINISTRTN OF AMERICAN EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bjork, Lars G. % % 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 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