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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 510 401L1 MENT HLTH KNOWLDG FOR SOC PROFS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Acra, Paul D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 93.8 Sophomore 1 6.3 B 0 0.0 Junior 1 6.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 10 62.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 18.8 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.3 Pass or Audit 1 6.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 43.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 37.5 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 6.3 Other (e.g. elective) 16 100.0 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 6.3 % % 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 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 6.3 18.8 75.0 3.7 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 0.73 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 510 401L1 MENT HLTH KNOWLDG FOR SOC PROFS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Acra, 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 56.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 222 002L1 DEVELOPMENT SOC WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.3 A 6 31.6 Sophomore 7 36.8 B 11 57.9 Junior 7 36.8 C 1 5.3 Senior 4 21.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 1 5.3 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 16.7 Studies Program 2 10.5 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 15 78.9 3 hours 7 38.9 Other (e.g. elective) 2 10.5 4 - 5 hours 2 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 4.8 0.0 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 4.8 23.8 47.6 23.8 2.9 0.83 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 9.5 61.9 28.6 3.2 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 33.3 44.4 16.7 2.7 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 61.1 33.3 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 23.8 61.9 3.5 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 23.8 52.4 23.8 3.0 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 4.8 4.8 57.1 33.3 3.2 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 28.6 66.7 3.6 0.59 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 222 002L1 DEVELOPMENT SOC WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin % % 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 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 84.0 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 001L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 64.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 29.4 Junior 5 29.4 C 1 5.9 Senior 12 70.6 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 5.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 35.3 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 6 35.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 5.6 22.2 72.2 3.7 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 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 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 001L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 20 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 90.0 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 401L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 46.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 4 26.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 401L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % 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 = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 65.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 94.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 5.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 19 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 15.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 31.6 Required by my major 18 94.7 3 hours 6 31.6 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.3 4 - 5 hours 3 15.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.3 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 22 0.0 0.0 59.1 40.9 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 4.5 4.5 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.79 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 4.5 0.0 54.5 40.9 3.3 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 4.8 4.8 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.78 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 4.5 45.5 50.0 3.5 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 4.5 45.5 50.0 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 4.5 45.5 45.5 3.3 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 0.0 59.1 40.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 0.0 54.5 40.9 3.3 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 0.0 54.5 40.9 3.3 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 4.5 4.5 50.0 40.9 3.3 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 4.5 0.0 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 4.5 4.5 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 4.5 0.0 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 91.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 750 401L1 RESRCH DESIGN & IMPLE IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 23 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.3 Studies Program 1 4.3 2 hours 8 34.8 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 7 30.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 13.0 6 - 7 hours 4 17.4 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 23 0.0 4.3 34.8 60.9 3.6 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 9.1 50.0 40.9 3.3 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 18.2 59.1 22.7 3.0 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 8.7 39.1 52.2 3.4 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 13.6 36.4 50.0 3.4 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 4.3 30.4 65.2 3.6 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 8.7 52.2 39.1 3.3 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 8.7 39.1 52.2 3.4 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 17.4 47.8 34.8 3.2 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 4.3 56.5 39.1 3.3 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 17.6 52.9 29.4 3.1 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 8.7 47.8 43.5 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.76 % % % % 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 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 13.6 31.8 54.5 3.4 0.73 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 750 401L1 RESRCH DESIGN & IMPLE IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % 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 = 26 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 88.5 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 401L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 88.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 37.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 37.5 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 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 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 12.5 0.0 50.0 37.5 3.1 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 401L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 36.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 25.0 Required by my major 12 92.3 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 7.7 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 16.7 8.3 50.0 25.0 2.8 1.03 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.65 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 0.0 21.4 35.7 42.9 3.2 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % 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 = 27 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 55.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 600 401L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ballantine, John R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 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 18 100.0 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 2 11.1 2 hours 7 38.9 Required by my major 16 88.9 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 27.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 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 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 38.9 55.6 3.5 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 5.6 61.1 33.3 3.3 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 12.5 68.8 18.8 3.1 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 16.7 44.4 38.9 3.2 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 11.1 50.0 38.9 3.3 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 38.9 55.6 3.5 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 600 401L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ballantine, John R % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 94.7 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 600 404L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ballantine, John R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 13.3 Studies Program 1 6.7 2 hours 7 46.7 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 4 26.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 6.7 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 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 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 7.1 0.0 64.3 28.6 3.1 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 6.3 18.8 31.3 43.8 3.1 0.96 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 18.8 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 12.5 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 18.8 56.3 25.0 3.1 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 18.8 37.5 43.8 3.3 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 600 404L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ballantine, John R % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 88.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 322 002L1 SOC WRK & SOCIAL WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = COOPER, ROBERT J. II SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 84.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 15.4 Junior 9 69.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 30.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 30.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 12 92.3 3 hours 3 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 7.7 4 - 5 hours 3 23.1 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 14 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 322 002L1 SOC WRK & SOCIAL WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = COOPER, ROBERT J. II % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 63.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 620 402L1 HUM BEHAV/SOC ENVIRON INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 73.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 26.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 93.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 20.0 Studies Program 2 13.3 2 hours 5 33.3 Required by my major 12 80.0 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 1 6.7 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 6.7 6.7 86.7 3.8 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 7.1 14.3 78.6 3.7 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 20.0 73.3 3.7 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 620 402L1 HUM BEHAV/SOC ENVIRON INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 93.8 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 002L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 78.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 21.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 19 100.0 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 4 21.1 Studies Program 3 16.7 2 hours 12 63.2 Required by my major 15 83.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 15.8 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 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 9.5 42.9 47.6 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 14.3 38.1 47.6 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 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 0.0 4.8 95.2 4.0 0.22 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 002L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. % % 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 722 201L1 SOCIAL WORK PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOPATHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, J J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 92.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 7.1 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 35.7 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 3 21.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 21.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 12.5 31.3 56.3 3.4 0.73 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 30.8 23.1 46.2 3.2 0.90 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 13 7.7 38.5 15.4 38.5 2.8 1.07 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 6.3 18.8 75.0 3.7 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 62.5 3.6 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 12.5 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 12.5 31.3 56.3 3.4 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 6.3 18.8 75.0 3.7 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 0.72 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 722 201L1 SOCIAL WORK PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOPATHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, J 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 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 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 88.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 781 001L2 THEORY DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOCIAL WORK PROFESS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, J J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 50.0 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 6 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 6 100.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 2.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 2.6 . 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 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 50.0 16.7 33.3 2.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 781 001L2 THEORY DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOCIAL WORK PROFESS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, J 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 400 401L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Collins, L L SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 73.3 Sophomore 1 6.3 B 4 26.7 Junior 6 37.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 56.3 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 4 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 37.5 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 4 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 6.3 % % 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 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 11.8 5.9 52.9 29.4 3.0 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 5.9 0.0 58.8 35.3 3.2 0.75 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 7.1 64.3 28.6 3.2 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 17.6 35.3 47.1 3.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 12.5 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 400 401L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Collins, L L % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 70.8 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 202L1 RESRCH DESIGN & IMPLE IN SW PRACT II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Coyle, Pat SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 92.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 7.7 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 1 7.7 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 3 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 53.8 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 8 or more hours 1 7.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 % % % % 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 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 202L1 RESRCH DESIGN & IMPLE IN SW PRACT II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Coyle, Pat % % 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 54.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 700 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Croney, Elizabeth L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 84.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 15.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 26 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 11.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 42.3 Required by my major 26 100.0 3 hours 10 38.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 7.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 3.7 33.3 63.0 3.6 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 0.0 25.9 74.1 3.7 0.45 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 7.4 48.1 44.4 3.4 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 7.4 7.4 51.9 33.3 3.1 0.85 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 3.7 18.5 48.1 29.6 3.0 0.81 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 14.8 37.0 48.1 3.3 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 8.0 52.0 40.0 3.3 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 11.1 51.9 37.0 3.3 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 15.4 50.0 34.6 3.2 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 11.1 40.7 48.1 3.4 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 15.4 42.3 42.3 3.3 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 7.4 7.4 29.6 55.6 3.3 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 7.4 18.5 40.7 33.3 3.0 0.92 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 700 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Croney, Elizabeth L. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD