1****************************************************************************** * * * Please note that these results DO NOT INCLUDE: * * * * * Course sections taught by a TA * * * Discussion, Laboratory, Independent Study, Practicum, or * * Residency course sections (results contain only LECTURES * * and SEMINARS) * * * Any course section with fewer than 5 evaluations returned * * * * Given for each item are the number responding (N), the percentage that * * strongly disagreed, the percentage that disagreed, the percentage that * * agreed, the percentage that strongly agreed, the mean, and the standard * * deviation (SD). * * * ****************************************************************************** 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 300 003L1 SPECIAL COURSE: GSC III ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Watkins, John F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 26.5 Sophomore 49 100.0 B 30 61.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 6 12.2 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 24 48.0 Studies Program 35 72.9 2 hours 14 28.0 Required by my major 1 2.1 3 hours 10 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 12 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 4.0 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 52 1.9 17.3 55.8 25.0 3.0 0.71 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 46.7 33.3 13.3 6.7 1.8 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 51 9.8 31.4 52.9 5.9 2.5 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 52 7.7 15.4 55.8 21.2 2.9 0.82 5. Grading was fair and consistent 52 9.6 28.8 50.0 11.5 2.6 0.82 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 51 3.9 27.5 62.7 5.9 2.7 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 50 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 52 3.8 1.9 71.2 23.1 3.1 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 50 8.0 16.0 66.0 10.0 2.8 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 52 0.0 3.8 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 52 0.0 3.8 69.2 26.9 3.2 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 52 0.0 5.8 71.2 23.1 3.2 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 52 9.6 46.2 36.5 7.7 2.4 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 51 3.9 13.7 58.8 23.5 3.0 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 44 6.8 22.7 59.1 11.4 2.8 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 47 4.3 23.4 63.8 8.5 2.8 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 4.9 31.7 58.5 4.9 2.6 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 48 6.3 18.8 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 50 18.0 48.0 28.0 6.0 2.2 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 52 26.9 36.5 34.6 1.9 2.1 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 52 9.6 36.5 42.3 11.5 2.6 0.83 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 300 003L1 SPECIAL COURSE: GSC III ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Watkins, John 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 24 4.2 25.0 58.3 12.5 2.8 0.72 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 28 10.7 10.7 67.9 10.7 2.8 0.79 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 28 10.7 25.0 42.9 21.4 2.8 0.93 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 10 10.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 2.8 1.03 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 13 15.4 23.1 38.5 23.1 2.7 1.03 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 0.0 100.0 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 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 = at least 65 Number of forms scanned = 65 Number of forms with at least one student response = 52 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ENS 200 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schein, Richard H. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 13.0 A 4 18.2 Sophomore 2 8.7 B 12 54.5 Junior 11 47.8 C 6 27.3 Senior 7 30.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 8.7 Studies Program 2 8.7 2 hours 5 21.7 Required by my major 7 30.4 3 hours 4 17.4 Other (e.g. elective) 14 60.9 4 - 5 hours 12 52.2 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 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 4.0 4.0 68.0 24.0 3.1 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 8.0 24.0 52.0 16.0 2.8 0.83 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 4.0 24.0 36.0 36.0 3.0 0.89 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 4.0 12.0 52.0 32.0 3.1 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 12.0 12.0 52.0 24.0 2.9 0.93 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 12.0 48.0 40.0 3.3 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 59.1 40.9 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 4.2 50.0 45.8 3.4 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 8.0 52.0 40.0 3.3 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 4.2 0.0 75.0 20.8 3.1 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 12.0 40.0 48.0 3.4 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 4.0 0.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ENS 200 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schein, Richard 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 35 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 71.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ST 500 001L1 INTRO TO SOCIAL THEORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 41.7 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 91.7 E/Fail 1 8.3 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 0 0.0 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 12 100.0 4 - 5 hours 6 50.0 6 - 7 hours 2 16.7 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 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 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 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 25.0 33.3 41.7 3.2 0.83 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ST 500 001L1 INTRO TO SOCIAL THEORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 39. Question 39 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 14 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 005L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 24 70.6 A 11 32.4 Sophomore 3 8.8 B 16 47.1 Junior 4 11.8 C 6 17.6 Senior 2 5.9 D 1 2.9 Graduate 1 2.9 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 10 29.4 Studies Program 22 66.7 2 hours 11 32.4 Required by my major 6 18.2 3 hours 7 20.6 Other (e.g. elective) 5 15.2 4 - 5 hours 5 14.7 6 - 7 hours 1 2.9 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 39 0.0 2.6 59.0 38.5 3.4 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 39 0.0 7.7 48.7 43.6 3.4 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 39 0.0 12.8 59.0 28.2 3.2 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 0.0 12.8 46.2 41.0 3.3 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 2.6 5.1 56.4 35.9 3.3 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 38 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 38 0.0 2.6 44.7 52.6 3.5 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 38 0.0 13.2 60.5 26.3 3.1 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 39 0.0 10.3 48.7 41.0 3.3 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 39 0.0 0.0 25.6 74.4 3.7 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 0.0 5.1 48.7 46.2 3.4 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 0.0 15.4 51.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 39 0.0 10.3 41.0 48.7 3.4 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 39 0.0 2.6 59.0 38.5 3.4 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 38 0.0 13.2 57.9 28.9 3.2 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 0.0 26.5 50.0 23.5 3.0 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 39 0.0 5.1 64.1 30.8 3.3 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 38 2.6 28.9 39.5 28.9 2.9 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 0.0 7.9 63.2 28.9 3.2 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 0.0 7.9 42.1 50.0 3.4 0.64 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 005L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % 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 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 19 0.0 5.3 78.9 15.8 3.1 0.46 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 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 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 49 Number of forms scanned = 49 Number of forms with at least one student response = 39 Percent completed = 79.6 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 006L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 26 83.9 A 3 9.7 Sophomore 3 9.7 B 16 51.6 Junior 1 3.2 C 10 32.3 Senior 0 0.0 D 2 6.5 Graduate 1 3.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 22.6 Studies Program 23 74.2 2 hours 10 32.3 Required by my major 4 12.9 3 hours 9 29.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 12.9 4 - 5 hours 3 9.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.2 8 or more hours 1 3.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 33 3.0 3.0 48.5 45.5 3.4 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 33 3.0 12.1 57.6 27.3 3.1 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 3.2 16.1 61.3 19.4 3.0 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 32 9.4 12.5 43.8 34.4 3.0 0.93 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 6.5 3.2 58.1 32.3 3.2 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 32 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 33 0.0 6.1 48.5 45.5 3.4 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 32 9.4 9.4 56.3 25.0 3.0 0.86 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 32 3.1 15.6 46.9 34.4 3.1 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 32 0.0 3.1 50.0 46.9 3.4 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 3.1 0.0 56.3 40.6 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 3.2 25.8 45.2 25.8 2.9 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 32 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 31 0.0 12.9 64.5 22.6 3.1 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 32 3.1 9.4 68.8 18.8 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 3.4 20.7 58.6 17.2 2.9 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 6.5 3.2 61.3 29.0 3.1 0.76 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 10.3 37.9 41.4 10.3 2.5 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 33 6.1 15.2 51.5 27.3 3.0 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 32 0.0 21.9 37.5 40.6 3.2 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 006L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % 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 16 6.3 31.3 37.5 25.0 2.8 0.91 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 21 0.0 19.0 52.4 28.6 3.1 0.70 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 20 5.0 15.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.76 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 10 0.0 40.0 30.0 30.0 2.9 0.88 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 49 Number of forms scanned = 49 Number of forms with at least one student response = 33 Percent completed = 67.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 329 401L1 GEO OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 31.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 43.8 Junior 4 25.0 C 3 18.8 Senior 12 75.0 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 6.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 13.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 20.0 Required by my major 7 50.0 3 hours 6 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 13.3 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 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 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 72.2 22.2 3.2 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 27.8 27.8 44.4 3.2 0.86 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 5.6 50.0 38.9 3.2 0.81 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 5.6 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 11.1 16.7 27.8 44.4 3.1 1.06 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 11.1 5.6 22.2 61.1 3.3 1.03 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 0.0 46.7 46.7 3.3 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 11.1 5.6 33.3 50.0 3.2 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 11.1 5.6 27.8 55.6 3.3 1.02 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 329 401L1 GEO OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 78.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 305 001L1 ELEMENTS OF CARTOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gilbreath, Richard SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 50.0 Sophomore 1 5.9 B 7 43.8 Junior 5 29.4 C 1 6.3 Senior 10 58.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 5.9 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 5.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 12 70.6 3 hours 4 23.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 29.4 4 - 5 hours 5 29.4 6 - 7 hours 3 17.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 7.1 0.0 57.1 35.7 3.2 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 62.5 3.6 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 11.8 41.2 47.1 3.4 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 18.8 25.0 56.3 3.4 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 11.8 29.4 58.8 3.5 0.72 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 305 001L1 ELEMENTS OF CARTOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gilbreath, Richard % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 21 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 81.0 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 702 401L1 CONCEPTS IN GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, John P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 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 4 80.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 8 or more hours 2 33.3 % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 7 14.3 0.0 28.6 57.1 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 702 401L1 CONCEPTS IN GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, John 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 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 334 001L1 ENVIRON, SOC AND ECONOMY OF JAPAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 42.9 Sophomore 6 27.3 B 9 42.9 Junior 10 45.5 C 3 14.3 Senior 6 27.3 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 6 27.3 Studies Program 10 47.6 2 hours 12 54.5 Required by my major 1 4.8 3 hours 2 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 10 47.6 4 - 5 hours 2 9.1 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 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 11.1 11.1 48.1 29.6 3.0 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 11.5 53.8 34.6 3.2 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 3.7 11.1 51.9 33.3 3.1 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 4.2 12.5 45.8 37.5 3.2 0.82 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 0.0 36.0 40.0 24.0 2.9 0.78 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 3.6 10.7 46.4 39.3 3.2 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 24 4.2 4.2 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.77 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 10.7 39.3 50.0 3.4 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 17.9 42.9 39.3 3.2 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 28 3.6 14.3 46.4 35.7 3.1 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 17.4 56.5 26.1 3.1 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 7.7 19.2 38.5 34.6 3.0 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 22.2 40.7 33.3 3.0 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 7.4 11.1 29.6 51.9 3.3 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 334 001L1 ENVIRON, SOC AND ECONOMY OF JAPAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 90.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 718 001S1 TOP SEM GEO ENV/RES: ENVIR & MULTINAT'L CORP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 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 1 16.7 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 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 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 718 001S1 TOP SEM GEO ENV/RES: ENVIR & MULTINAT'L CORP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P 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 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 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 285 401L1 INTRODUCTION TO PLANNING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mattone, Frank M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 1 10.0 B 4 40.0 Junior 1 10.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 70.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 10.0 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 10.0 Studies Program 1 10.0 2 hours 6 60.0 Required by my major 2 20.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 70.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 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 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 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 10.0 10.0 80.0 3.7 0.67 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 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 10.0 10.0 80.0 3.7 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 10.0 80.0 3.7 0.67 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 285 401L1 INTRODUCTION TO PLANNING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mattone, Frank 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 002L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 3.5 A 36 63.2 Sophomore 33 57.9 B 19 33.3 Junior 5 8.8 C 1 1.8 Senior 17 29.8 D 1 1.8 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 31 54.4 Studies Program 54 94.7 2 hours 18 31.6 Required by my major 1 1.8 3 hours 7 12.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 3.5 4 - 5 hours 1 1.8 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 58 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 40 5.0 7.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 57 1.8 8.8 66.7 22.8 3.1 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 58 3.4 25.9 41.4 29.3 3.0 0.84 5. Grading was fair and consistent 58 0.0 5.2 55.2 39.7 3.3 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 58 0.0 0.0 63.8 36.2 3.4 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 58 1.7 1.7 50.0 46.6 3.4 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 56 1.8 23.2 48.2 26.8 3.0 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 58 6.9 20.7 41.4 31.0 3.0 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 58 0.0 1.7 50.0 48.3 3.5 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 52 0.0 3.8 51.9 44.2 3.4 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 58 1.7 6.9 56.9 34.5 3.2 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 56 5.4 23.2 42.9 28.6 2.9 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 58 1.7 8.6 48.3 41.4 3.3 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 55 0.0 10.9 58.2 30.9 3.2 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 52 3.8 17.3 50.0 28.8 3.0 0.79 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 49 6.1 28.6 38.8 26.5 2.9 0.89 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 58 1.7 3.4 69.0 25.9 3.2 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 56 8.9 30.4 39.3 21.4 2.7 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 58 1.7 19.0 56.9 22.4 3.0 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 58 0.0 24.1 37.9 37.9 3.1 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 002L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine % % 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 41 7.3 17.1 65.9 9.8 2.8 0.72 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 54 1.9 13.0 70.4 14.8 3.0 0.60 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 48 2.1 14.6 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.64 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 51 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.48 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 28 0.0 3.6 75.0 21.4 3.2 0.48 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 = 79 Number of forms scanned = 79 Number of forms with at least one student response = 58 Percent completed = 73.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 005L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 11.1 A 36 69.2 Sophomore 32 59.3 B 13 25.0 Junior 9 16.7 C 3 5.8 Senior 7 13.0 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 29 53.7 Studies Program 53 98.1 2 hours 16 29.6 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 6 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 1.9 4 - 5 hours 2 3.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 1.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 54 0.0 1.9 55.6 42.6 3.4 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 2.6 15.8 57.9 23.7 3.0 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 55 0.0 7.3 69.1 23.6 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 55 0.0 16.4 58.2 25.5 3.1 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 55 0.0 1.8 61.8 36.4 3.3 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 55 0.0 3.6 60.0 36.4 3.3 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 55 0.0 1.8 50.9 47.3 3.5 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 50 0.0 32.0 48.0 20.0 2.9 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 55 3.6 21.8 49.1 25.5 3.0 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 55 1.8 0.0 40.0 58.2 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 50 2.0 4.0 56.0 38.0 3.3 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 55 1.8 3.6 61.8 32.7 3.3 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 53 3.8 28.3 52.8 15.1 2.8 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 55 3.6 16.4 50.9 29.1 3.1 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 51 0.0 7.8 66.7 25.5 3.2 0.56 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 49 2.0 14.3 65.3 18.4 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 43 4.7 25.6 60.5 9.3 2.7 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 55 0.0 7.3 67.3 25.5 3.2 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 51 2.0 29.4 60.8 7.8 2.7 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 55 0.0 18.2 52.7 29.1 3.1 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 54 3.7 18.5 40.7 37.0 3.1 0.84 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 005L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine % % 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 30 6.7 23.3 66.7 3.3 2.7 0.66 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 44 2.3 13.6 75.0 9.1 2.9 0.56 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 38 0.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 2.9 0.45 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 44 0.0 4.5 65.9 29.5 3.3 0.53 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 18 0.0 0.0 94.4 5.6 3.1 0.24 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 = 76 Number of forms scanned = 76 Number of forms with at least one student response = 56 Percent completed = 73.7 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 722 001S1 TOP SEM SOC/POL GEO: TRANSITIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 100.0 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 0 0.0 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 100.0 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 3 42.9 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 0.0 85.7 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 722 001S1 TOP SEM SOC/POL GEO: TRANSITIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 490G001L1 AMERICAN LANDSCAPES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Raitz, K B SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 27.3 Junior 2 16.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 16.7 Pass or Audit 1 9.1 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 25.0 Required by my major 5 41.7 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 7 58.3 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 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 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 490G001L1 AMERICAN LANDSCAPES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Raitz, K B % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 68.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 003L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 4.8 A 23 37.7 Sophomore 15 23.8 B 34 55.7 Junior 25 39.7 C 4 6.6 Senior 20 31.7 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 25 40.3 Studies Program 60 96.8 2 hours 25 40.3 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 8 12.9 Other (e.g. elective) 2 3.2 4 - 5 hours 3 4.8 6 - 7 hours 1 1.6 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 64 1.6 3.1 64.1 31.3 3.3 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 57 5.3 12.3 64.9 17.5 2.9 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 64 7.8 6.3 62.5 23.4 3.0 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 64 7.8 7.8 54.7 29.7 3.1 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 64 3.1 9.4 59.4 28.1 3.1 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 64 3.1 6.3 59.4 31.3 3.2 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 64 4.7 9.4 65.6 20.3 3.0 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 62 3.2 21.0 64.5 11.3 2.8 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 64 6.3 7.8 54.7 31.3 3.1 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 64 1.6 0.0 35.9 62.5 3.6 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 55 1.8 0.0 65.5 32.7 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 64 1.6 6.3 54.7 37.5 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 64 9.4 9.4 53.1 28.1 3.0 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 64 1.6 4.7 60.9 32.8 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 63 6.3 6.3 60.3 27.0 3.1 0.77 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 63 4.8 9.5 68.3 17.5 3.0 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 55 5.5 29.1 54.5 10.9 2.7 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 63 3.2 4.8 69.8 22.2 3.1 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 63 9.5 34.9 42.9 12.7 2.6 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 64 6.3 17.2 54.7 21.9 2.9 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 63 3.2 9.5 41.3 46.0 3.3 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 003L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan % % 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 23 4.3 34.8 47.8 13.0 2.7 0.76 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 46 6.5 21.7 54.3 17.4 2.8 0.80 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 47 4.3 8.5 70.2 17.0 3.0 0.66 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 46 2.2 4.3 54.3 39.1 3.3 0.66 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 7 14.3 28.6 28.6 28.6 2.7 . 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 = 76 Number of forms scanned = 76 Number of forms with at least one student response = 64 Percent completed = 84.2 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 722 002S1 TOP SEM SOC/POL GEO: INTL POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 20.0 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 2 20.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 9.1 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 9.1 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 81.8 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 2 18.2 8 or more hours 4 36.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 14.3 21.4 64.3 3.5 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 9.1 81.8 3.7 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 7.1 0.0 14.3 78.6 3.6 0.84 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 7.1 14.3 21.4 57.1 3.3 0.99 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 722 002S1 TOP SEM SOC/POL GEO: INTL POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 31. Developed abil to conduct research 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 130 002L1 EARTH'S PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roth, Linda SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 16.3 A 22 50.0 Sophomore 9 20.9 B 12 27.3 Junior 14 32.6 C 9 20.5 Senior 13 30.2 D 1 2.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 18 40.9 Studies Program 25 56.8 2 hours 15 34.1 Required by my major 9 20.5 3 hours 9 20.5 Other (e.g. elective) 10 22.7 4 - 5 hours 1 2.3 6 - 7 hours 1 2.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 44 2.3 9.1 72.7 15.9 3.0 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 44 2.3 9.1 68.2 20.5 3.1 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 4.5 15.9 68.2 11.4 2.9 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 44 2.3 15.9 68.2 13.6 2.9 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 44 0.0 4.5 70.5 25.0 3.2 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 44 4.5 15.9 61.4 18.2 2.9 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 44 0.0 15.9 63.6 20.5 3.0 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 43 2.3 25.6 60.5 11.6 2.8 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 44 9.1 45.5 36.4 9.1 2.5 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 44 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 44 0.0 15.9 70.5 13.6 3.0 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 43 14.0 41.9 32.6 11.6 2.4 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 44 2.3 4.5 63.6 29.5 3.2 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 2.9 38.2 44.1 14.7 2.7 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 40 7.5 37.5 47.5 7.5 2.6 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 11.4 37.1 45.7 5.7 2.5 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 41 2.4 17.1 73.2 7.3 2.9 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 43 18.6 39.5 39.5 2.3 2.3 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 44 15.9 27.3 52.3 4.5 2.5 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 44 20.5 29.5 36.4 13.6 2.4 0.97 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 130 002L1 EARTH'S PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roth, Linda % % 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 17 5.9 41.2 41.2 11.8 2.6 0.80 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 23 4.3 13.0 69.6 13.0 2.9 0.67 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 0.0 21.7 69.6 8.7 2.9 0.55 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 10 20.0 10.0 50.0 20.0 2.7 1.06 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