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 101 001L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Akhlaghi, Amin Reza SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 83.3 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 16.7 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 5 83.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 16.7 Required by my major 1 16.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 001L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Akhlaghi, Amin Reza % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 004L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY PHY OF ALMOST EVERYTHING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brill, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 1 14.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 85.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 4 57.1 2 hours 5 71.4 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 42.9 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . % % % % 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 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 004L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY PHY OF ALMOST EVERYTHING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brill, Joseph W % % 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 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 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 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 77.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 002L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY STDY OF SLAVERY IN US INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freehling, William SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 18 100.0 A 11 61.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 38.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.6 Studies Program 4 22.2 2 hours 11 61.1 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 14 77.8 4 - 5 hours 1 5.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 89.5 3.9 0.32 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 15.8 42.1 42.1 3.3 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 002L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY STDY OF SLAVERY IN US INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freehling, William % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 29. Students free to express opinions 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 31. Developed abil to conduct research 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 95.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 002L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kemp, Jamie Dawn SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 3 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 66.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 33.3 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 101 002L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kemp, Jamie Dawn % % 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 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 005L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perkins, Jimmye Shannon SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 6 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 6 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 28.6 57.1 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 005L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perkins, Jimmye Shannon % % 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 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 003L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Poe, Angela Rose SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 7 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . % % % % 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 003L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Poe, Angela Rose % % 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 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 005L1 SP INTRO CRSE:ANCIENT STORIES IN MODERN FILMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rabel, Robert J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 28.6 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 3 21.4 B 7 50.0 Junior 3 21.4 C 1 7.1 Senior 3 21.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 7.1 Pass or Audit 1 7.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 7.1 Studies Program 2 14.3 2 hours 7 50.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 12 85.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 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 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 9.5 33.3 57.1 3.5 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 22.7 40.9 36.4 3.1 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 4.5 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 0.0 31.8 63.6 3.5 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 9.1 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 4.5 18.2 31.8 45.5 3.2 0.91 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 4.5 27.3 68.2 3.6 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.48 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 005L1 SP INTRO CRSE:ANCIENT STORIES IN MODERN FILMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rabel, Robert J % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 88.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 006L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tucker, Mark Daniel SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 7 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 85.7 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 1 14.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 0.0 85.7 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Unknown faculty type COURSE = A&S 101 006L2 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tucker, Mark Daniel % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 003L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY MARK TWAIN'S AMERICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Weisenburger, Steven C SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 87.5 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 1 12.5 B 3 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 12.5 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 4 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 87.5 4 - 5 hours 1 12.5 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 3.3 . % % % % 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 003L1 SP INTRO CRSE:DISCOVERY MARK TWAIN'S AMERICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Weisenburger, Steven C % % 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 64.3 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 001L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 83.3 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 16.7 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 5 83.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 16.7 Required by my major 1 16.7 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 001L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 002L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 3 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 33.3 Required by my major 1 25.0 3 hours 1 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 75.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 002L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W % % 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 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 003L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 7 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 003L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 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 = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 005L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 6 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 100.0 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 005L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W % % 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 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 006L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 7 100.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 85.7 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 1 14.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 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 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 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 14.3 85.7 3.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 101 006L1 SPECIAL INTRO COURSE: COLLEGE CHEM WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 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 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AAS 200 001L1 INTRO AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harris, J John SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 21.4 A 15 55.6 Sophomore 6 21.4 B 12 44.4 Junior 12 42.9 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 35.7 Studies Program 2 7.7 2 hours 7 25.0 Required by my major 3 11.5 3 hours 7 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 21 80.8 4 - 5 hours 2 7.1 6 - 7 hours 1 3.6 8 or more hours 1 3.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 3.6 14.3 50.0 32.1 3.1 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 3.6 46.4 50.0 3.5 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 7.1 46.4 46.4 3.4 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 7.4 40.7 51.9 3.4 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 25.9 74.1 3.7 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 0.0 0.0 40.7 59.3 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 7.7 50.0 42.3 3.3 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 3.6 35.7 60.7 3.6 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AAS 200 001L1 INTRO AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harris, J 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 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 96.6 % 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AC 301 001L1 TOP IN AM CULT:THE SOUTH INTERDISCIP PERSPECTIVE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freehling, William SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 83.3 Sophomore 2 11.1 B 2 11.1 Junior 3 16.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 61.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 11.1 Pass or Audit 1 5.6 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 16.7 Required by my major 1 5.6 3 hours 10 55.6 Other (e.g. elective) 17 94.4 4 - 5 hours 2 11.1 6 - 7 hours 3 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 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.31 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 89.5 3.9 0.32 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 95.0 4.0 0.22 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AC 301 001L1 TOP IN AM CULT:THE SOUTH INTERDISCIP PERSPECTIVE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freehling, William % % 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 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ENS 200 001L2 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Howell, Paul D. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 13.0 A 4 17.4 Sophomore 3 13.0 B 14 60.9 Junior 11 47.8 C 5 21.7 Senior 6 26.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 8.7 Studies Program 3 13.6 2 hours 5 21.7 Required by my major 7 31.8 3 hours 5 21.7 Other (e.g. elective) 12 54.5 4 - 5 hours 11 47.8 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 24 0.0 0.0 79.2 20.8 3.2 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 25.0 54.2 16.7 2.8 0.76 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 4.2 20.8 41.7 33.3 3.0 0.86 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 12.5 58.3 29.2 3.2 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 4.3 13.0 52.2 30.4 3.1 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 12.5 58.3 29.2 3.2 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 4.2 0.0 66.7 29.2 3.2 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 4.2 4.2 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 12.5 41.7 45.8 3.3 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 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 001L2 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Howell, Paul 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 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 68.6 % 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSC 301 002L2 MINI-COLLEGE IIIB: MSC: DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = BARTLING, HUGH SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 39.1 Sophomore 25 100.0 B 11 47.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 3 13.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 20.8 Studies Program 18 78.3 2 hours 8 33.3 Required by my major 1 4.3 3 hours 6 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 17.4 4 - 5 hours 5 20.8 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 28 0.0 10.7 71.4 17.9 3.1 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 7.1 17.9 57.1 17.9 2.9 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 3.6 25.0 67.9 3.6 2.7 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 3.6 7.1 75.0 14.3 3.0 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 14.3 71.4 10.7 2.9 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 3.6 17.9 67.9 10.7 2.9 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 10.7 14.3 64.3 10.7 2.8 0.80 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 7.4 40.7 48.1 3.7 2.5 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 3.6 32.1 53.6 10.7 2.7 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 21.4 53.6 25.0 3.0 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 7.1 78.6 14.3 3.1 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 3.6 28.6 53.6 14.3 2.8 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 7.1 28.6 53.6 10.7 2.7 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 28 7.1 21.4 64.3 7.1 2.7 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 4.2 0.0 91.7 4.2 3.0 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 17.4 73.9 8.7 2.9 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 13.0 73.9 13.0 3.0 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 11.5 76.9 11.5 3.0 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 12.0 28.0 56.0 4.0 2.5 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 11.1 25.9 48.1 14.8 2.7 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 3.7 29.6 55.6 11.1 2.7 0.71 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 = MSC 301 002L2 MINI-COLLEGE IIIB: MSC: DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = BARTLING, HUGH % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 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. I