1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 12.9 A 26 89.7 Sophomore 5 16.1 B 3 10.3 Junior 16 51.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 19.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 24 77.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 16.1 Required by my major 1 3.3 3 hours 2 6.5 Other (e.g. elective) 29 96.7 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 35 0.0 0.0 22.9 77.1 3.8 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 0.0 31.4 68.6 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 2.9 17.6 79.4 3.8 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 0.0 0.0 22.9 77.1 3.8 0.43 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 0.0 19.4 80.6 3.8 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 0.0 5.7 14.3 80.0 3.7 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 11.4 88.6 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 2.9 11.4 85.7 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 0.0 5.6 11.1 83.3 3.8 0.54 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 0.0 11.4 88.6 3.9 0.32 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 32 0.0 3.1 25.0 71.9 3.7 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 3.2 32.3 64.5 3.6 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 0.0 20.6 79.4 3.8 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 0.0 11.4 88.6 3.9 0.32 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies DEPARTMENT = ROTC % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 50 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 72.0 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 36 38.7 A 83 91.2 Sophomore 33 35.5 B 8 8.8 Junior 10 10.8 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 15.1 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 84 90.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 8.6 Required by my major 89 95.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 4.3 4 - 5 hours 1 1.1 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 102 0.0 0.0 22.5 77.5 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 78 0.0 3.8 67.9 28.2 3.2 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 90 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 91 0.0 2.2 44.0 53.8 3.5 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 78 7.7 3.8 28.2 60.3 3.4 0.89 8. Graded assignments included comments 71 2.8 1.4 49.3 46.5 3.4 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 96 0.0 4.2 49.0 46.9 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 101 0.0 0.0 35.6 64.4 3.6 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 98 0.0 0.0 33.7 66.3 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 101 0.0 0.0 35.6 64.4 3.6 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 96 3.1 7.3 40.6 49.0 3.4 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 101 1.0 1.0 28.7 69.3 3.7 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 89 0.0 1.1 55.1 43.8 3.4 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 96 0.0 8.3 51.0 40.6 3.3 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 82 1.2 19.5 48.8 30.5 3.1 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 102 0.0 3.9 37.3 58.8 3.5 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 99 1.0 11.1 38.4 49.5 3.4 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 102 0.0 9.8 46.1 44.1 3.3 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 102 0.0 2.9 33.3 63.7 3.6 0.55 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology % % 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 = at least 137 Number of forms scanned = 102 Number of forms with at least one student response = 102 Percent completed = 74.5 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 0.3 A 182 50.7 Sophomore 22 6.1 B 149 41.5 Junior 99 27.3 C 23 6.4 Senior 202 55.6 D 1 0.3 Graduate 36 9.9 E/Fail 2 0.6 Professional 1 0.3 I 1 0.3 Other 2 0.6 Pass or Audit 1 0.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 102 28.2 Studies Program 6 1.7 2 hours 110 30.4 Required by my major 240 66.3 3 hours 88 24.3 Other (e.g. elective) 115 31.8 4 - 5 hours 45 12.4 6 - 7 hours 12 3.3 8 or more hours 5 1.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 378 0.3 1.1 51.1 47.6 3.5 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 317 6.0 21.8 46.4 25.9 2.9 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 367 0.3 4.1 58.0 37.6 3.3 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 348 1.1 2.9 51.1 44.8 3.4 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 380 0.3 2.4 51.6 45.8 3.4 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 368 0.8 4.1 56.0 39.1 3.3 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 376 1.6 8.5 49.5 40.4 3.3 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 373 0.3 6.7 51.2 41.8 3.3 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 379 0.3 5.5 45.1 49.1 3.4 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 379 0.3 0.0 33.0 66.8 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 369 0.0 1.9 44.7 53.4 3.5 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 379 0.3 0.3 47.8 51.7 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 376 1.3 8.2 45.2 45.2 3.3 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 380 0.0 3.9 44.7 51.3 3.5 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 350 0.0 5.4 63.7 30.9 3.3 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 373 0.8 4.3 55.2 39.7 3.3 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 370 0.5 5.9 56.8 36.8 3.3 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 376 0.3 3.5 53.7 42.6 3.4 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 370 2.7 15.9 50.3 31.1 3.1 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 378 0.8 7.4 43.4 48.4 3.4 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 371 0.8 5.7 30.5 63.1 3.6 0.64 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 28. Guided student report preparation 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 29. Students free to express opinions 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 31. Developed abil to conduct research 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 34 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.46 33. Amount of work appropriate 34 0.0 2.9 32.4 64.7 3.6 0.55 34. Instructor explained expectations 34 0.0 0.0 26.5 73.5 3.7 0.45 35. Instructor helped with my problems 34 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.46 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 34 0.0 0.0 32.4 67.6 3.7 0.47 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 511 Number of forms scanned = 384 Number of forms with at least one student response = 380 Percent completed = 74.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Education SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 60 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 22 31.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 47 66.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 1.4 I 0 0.0 Other 1 1.4 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 13.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 35 50.7 Required by my major 59 84.3 3 hours 13 18.8 Other (e.g. elective) 11 15.7 4 - 5 hours 6 8.7 6 - 7 hours 1 1.4 8 or more hours 5 7.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 76 0.0 5.3 35.5 59.2 3.5 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 76 0.0 3.9 38.2 57.9 3.5 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 0.0 0.0 46.3 53.7 3.5 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 65 0.0 0.0 36.9 63.1 3.6 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 71 0.0 1.4 42.3 56.3 3.5 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 61 4.9 18.0 42.6 34.4 3.1 0.85 8. Graded assignments included comments 62 0.0 6.5 37.1 56.5 3.5 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 76 1.3 3.9 30.3 64.5 3.6 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 76 0.0 0.0 14.5 85.5 3.9 0.35 11. Was available for consultation 72 0.0 0.0 19.4 80.6 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 75 0.0 1.3 26.7 72.0 3.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 76 0.0 2.6 28.9 68.4 3.7 0.53 14. Encouraged class participation 76 0.0 1.3 19.7 78.9 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 75 0.0 2.7 38.7 58.7 3.6 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 75 0.0 2.7 41.3 56.0 3.5 0.55 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 72 0.0 2.8 37.5 59.7 3.6 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 75 0.0 1.3 36.0 62.7 3.6 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 75 1.3 8.0 33.3 57.3 3.5 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 76 1.3 3.9 27.6 67.1 3.6 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 76 0.0 3.9 25.0 71.1 3.7 0.55 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Education % % 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 = at least 87 Number of forms scanned = 80 Number of forms with at least one student response = 76 Percent completed = 87.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Animal Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 87 26.1 A 169 50.8 Sophomore 25 7.5 B 127 38.1 Junior 77 23.1 C 28 8.4 Senior 113 33.9 D 6 1.8 Graduate 29 8.7 E/Fail 1 0.3 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.6 Pass or Audit 2 0.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 63 19.0 Studies Program 3 0.9 2 hours 116 35.0 Required by my major 257 76.9 3 hours 84 25.4 Other (e.g. elective) 74 22.2 4 - 5 hours 47 14.2 6 - 7 hours 15 4.5 8 or more hours 3 0.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 348 0.0 1.1 36.2 62.6 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 231 2.2 6.5 45.0 46.3 3.4 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 330 0.3 3.0 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 343 0.3 1.7 38.8 59.2 3.6 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 347 0.9 5.2 42.1 51.9 3.4 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 332 0.6 2.7 43.4 53.3 3.5 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 340 0.6 2.9 37.6 58.8 3.5 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 334 0.9 8.7 45.2 45.2 3.3 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 344 0.9 3.5 36.3 59.3 3.5 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 347 0.3 0.9 23.3 75.5 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 331 0.9 1.8 35.0 62.2 3.6 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 345 0.0 1.2 34.2 64.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 345 2.0 3.2 35.4 59.4 3.5 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 345 0.9 0.9 35.7 62.6 3.6 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 295 0.3 3.4 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 336 0.3 3.6 46.1 50.0 3.5 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 319 0.0 4.7 50.8 44.5 3.4 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 346 0.6 1.2 41.9 56.4 3.5 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 341 1.5 10.0 44.0 44.6 3.3 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 348 1.1 4.3 28.7 65.8 3.6 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 338 1.5 3.6 23.1 71.9 3.7 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Animal Sciences % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 8 25.0 12.5 50.0 12.5 2.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 37.5 25.0 25.0 12.5 2.1 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 12.5 0.0 62.5 25.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 83 0.0 1.2 37.3 61.4 3.6 0.52 33. Amount of work appropriate 85 1.2 10.6 44.7 43.5 3.3 0.71 34. Instructor explained expectations 84 0.0 2.4 47.6 50.0 3.5 0.55 35. Instructor helped with my problems 81 0.0 2.5 54.3 43.2 3.4 0.54 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 76 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.50 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 427 Number of forms scanned = 354 Number of forms with at least one student response = 350 Percent completed = 82.0 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Biosystems and Ag Engineering SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 5.7 A 86 55.1 Sophomore 10 6.3 B 52 33.3 Junior 25 15.8 C 12 7.7 Senior 96 60.8 D 5 3.2 Graduate 17 10.8 E/Fail 1 0.6 Professional 1 0.6 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 19 12.1 Studies Program 1 0.6 2 hours 23 14.6 Required by my major 126 80.3 3 hours 32 20.4 Other (e.g. elective) 29 18.5 4 - 5 hours 45 28.7 6 - 7 hours 15 9.6 8 or more hours 23 14.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 164 0.0 5.5 56.1 38.4 3.3 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 134 5.2 14.9 40.3 39.6 3.1 0.86 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 160 1.9 7.5 43.1 47.5 3.4 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 137 1.5 8.0 38.0 52.6 3.4 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 163 1.2 7.4 46.6 44.8 3.3 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 163 1.2 4.3 54.0 40.5 3.3 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 163 3.7 17.2 42.9 36.2 3.1 0.82 8. Graded assignments included comments 163 1.8 14.1 50.9 33.1 3.2 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 162 3.1 11.1 37.0 48.8 3.3 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 160 0.0 0.6 30.0 69.4 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 163 0.6 6.1 43.6 49.7 3.4 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 162 3.1 6.8 37.7 52.5 3.4 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 161 6.2 12.4 41.6 39.8 3.1 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 162 1.2 6.2 46.3 46.3 3.4 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 123 3.3 16.3 60.2 20.3 3.0 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 158 1.9 6.3 48.1 43.7 3.3 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 160 1.9 5.6 46.9 45.6 3.4 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 160 1.9 5.0 46.9 46.3 3.4 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 151 7.3 20.5 47.7 24.5 2.9 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 165 3.6 10.9 27.3 58.2 3.4 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 162 2.5 8.6 29.6 59.3 3.5 0.76 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Biosystems and Ag Engineering % % 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 40 0.0 2.5 50.0 47.5 3.5 0.55 33. Amount of work appropriate 40 2.5 5.0 60.0 32.5 3.2 0.66 34. Instructor explained expectations 40 0.0 2.5 55.0 42.5 3.4 0.55 35. Instructor helped with my problems 40 0.0 7.5 47.5 45.0 3.4 0.63 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 37 0.0 5.4 51.4 43.2 3.4 0.59 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 183 Number of forms scanned = 168 Number of forms with at least one student response = 166 Percent completed = 90.7 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 3.9 A 65 43.9 Sophomore 17 11.2 B 65 43.9 Junior 35 23.0 C 14 9.5 Senior 55 36.2 D 2 1.4 Graduate 38 25.0 E/Fail 1 0.7 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.7 Pass or Audit 1 0.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 33 21.3 Studies Program 11 7.1 2 hours 49 31.6 Required by my major 98 63.6 3 hours 35 22.6 Other (e.g. elective) 45 29.2 4 - 5 hours 26 16.8 6 - 7 hours 5 3.2 8 or more hours 6 3.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 164 0.0 5.5 47.6 47.0 3.4 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 122 4.1 15.6 47.5 32.8 3.1 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 163 1.8 6.7 52.1 39.3 3.3 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 152 1.3 9.2 46.7 42.8 3.3 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 161 3.7 9.9 40.4 46.0 3.3 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 163 3.7 10.4 42.9 42.9 3.3 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 156 0.6 1.3 48.7 49.4 3.5 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 158 3.8 12.7 44.9 38.6 3.2 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 166 7.8 13.3 36.7 42.2 3.1 0.92 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 166 3.6 6.6 34.3 55.4 3.4 0.77 11. Was available for consultation 156 1.3 3.2 44.9 50.6 3.4 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 167 5.4 13.2 35.9 45.5 3.2 0.87 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 167 9.6 10.8 37.7 41.9 3.1 0.95 14. Encouraged class participation 165 4.2 17.0 42.4 36.4 3.1 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 137 1.5 13.1 53.3 32.1 3.2 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 165 2.4 13.3 49.7 34.5 3.2 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 153 2.6 18.3 51.0 28.1 3.0 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 167 3.6 5.4 47.9 43.1 3.3 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 164 8.5 20.1 45.7 25.6 2.9 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 167 4.2 15.0 32.3 48.5 3.3 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 165 10.9 12.7 22.4 53.9 3.2 1.04 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology % % 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 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 8 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 12.5 37.5 25.0 25.0 2.6 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 12.5 25.0 37.5 25.0 2.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 25.0 25.0 37.5 12.5 2.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 80 1.3 5.0 41.3 52.5 3.5 0.65 33. Amount of work appropriate 80 2.5 8.8 43.8 45.0 3.3 0.74 34. Instructor explained expectations 80 1.3 3.8 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.64 35. Instructor helped with my problems 79 0.0 6.3 46.8 46.8 3.4 0.61 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 75 0.0 0.0 44.0 56.0 3.6 0.50 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 225 Number of forms scanned = 167 Number of forms with at least one student response = 167 Percent completed = 74.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Forestry SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 12 5.1 A 101 43.2 Sophomore 27 11.5 B 102 43.6 Junior 57 24.3 C 23 9.8 Senior 113 48.1 D 4 1.7 Graduate 25 10.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.4 Pass or Audit 4 1.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 46 19.6 Studies Program 13 5.6 2 hours 74 31.5 Required by my major 188 80.3 3 hours 71 30.2 Other (e.g. elective) 33 14.1 4 - 5 hours 30 12.8 6 - 7 hours 8 3.4 8 or more hours 5 2.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 253 0.4 2.4 53.0 44.3 3.4 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 208 7.7 19.2 50.5 22.6 2.9 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 222 0.9 6.3 56.3 36.5 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 218 0.5 4.6 50.9 44.0 3.4 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 251 2.0 4.4 51.8 41.8 3.3 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 228 1.3 3.1 58.3 37.3 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 250 2.4 6.8 48.8 42.0 3.3 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 232 1.3 13.4 53.9 31.5 3.2 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 253 1.6 5.5 48.2 44.7 3.4 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 253 0.4 0.4 33.2 66.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 238 0.0 1.3 48.7 50.0 3.5 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 251 0.0 2.0 46.2 51.8 3.5 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 252 3.2 8.7 45.2 42.9 3.3 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 252 1.2 10.7 48.8 39.3 3.3 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 205 2.0 7.8 62.0 28.3 3.2 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 236 1.3 4.7 61.4 32.6 3.3 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 224 1.3 7.6 63.8 27.2 3.2 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 249 0.4 2.0 54.2 43.4 3.4 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 244 2.5 14.8 56.6 26.2 3.1 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 250 0.4 7.6 45.2 46.8 3.4 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 250 2.0 5.2 36.4 56.4 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Forestry % % 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 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 25 0.0 12.0 52.0 36.0 3.2 0.66 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 11 0.0 9.1 90.9 0.0 2.9 0.30 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 29. Students free to express opinions 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 31. Developed abil to conduct research 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 99 2.0 4.0 62.6 31.3 3.2 0.62 33. Amount of work appropriate 99 3.0 5.1 63.6 28.3 3.2 0.66 34. Instructor explained expectations 97 0.0 5.2 59.8 35.1 3.3 0.56 35. Instructor helped with my problems 95 1.1 6.3 64.2 28.4 3.2 0.59 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 80 0.0 1.3 65.0 33.8 3.3 0.50 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 48 0.0 4.2 8.3 45.8 41.7 4.3 0.79 38. Question 38 48 0.0 2.1 8.3 45.8 43.8 4.3 0.72 39. Question 39 48 4.2 10.4 14.6 29.2 41.7 3.9 1.17 40. Question 40 48 0.0 2.1 6.3 29.2 62.5 4.5 0.71 41. Question 41 44 6.8 20.5 6.8 20.5 45.5 3.8 1.40 42. Question 42 48 0.0 0.0 6.3 39.6 54.2 4.5 0.62 43. Question 43 48 10.4 16.7 10.4 29.2 33.3 3.6 1.38 44. Question 44 46 0.0 4.3 10.9 32.6 52.2 4.3 0.84 45. Question 45 48 0.0 4.2 6.3 37.5 52.1 4.4 0.79 46. Question 46 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 47. Question 47 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 4.5 . 48. Question 48 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 385 Number of forms scanned = 254 Number of forms with at least one student response = 253 Percent completed = 65.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Food Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 46.3 Sophomore 1 2.5 B 14 34.1 Junior 1 2.5 C 7 17.1 Senior 19 47.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 19 47.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 2.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 9.8 Studies Program 1 2.5 2 hours 2 4.9 Required by my major 27 67.5 3 hours 13 31.7 Other (e.g. elective) 12 30.0 4 - 5 hours 9 22.0 6 - 7 hours 9 22.0 8 or more hours 4 9.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 42 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 36 2.8 5.6 55.6 36.1 3.3 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 39 0.0 2.6 53.8 43.6 3.4 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 2.4 7.3 39.0 51.2 3.4 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 41 0.0 4.9 41.5 53.7 3.5 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 40 0.0 2.5 47.5 50.0 3.5 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 41 2.4 7.3 24.4 65.9 3.5 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 40 0.0 7.5 32.5 60.0 3.5 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 42 0.0 4.8 54.8 40.5 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 42 0.0 0.0 26.2 73.8 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 42 0.0 2.4 31.0 66.7 3.6 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 42 2.4 4.8 38.1 54.8 3.5 0.71 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 2.4 11.9 40.5 45.2 3.3 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 42 2.4 2.4 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 39 0.0 5.1 59.0 35.9 3.3 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 42 0.0 0.0 59.5 40.5 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 42 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 42 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 42 2.4 16.7 35.7 45.2 3.2 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 42 0.0 7.1 40.5 52.4 3.5 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 42 2.4 7.1 28.6 61.9 3.5 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Food Sciences % % 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 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 24 0.0 8.3 29.2 62.5 3.5 0.66 33. Amount of work appropriate 25 0.0 8.0 32.0 60.0 3.5 0.65 34. Instructor explained expectations 25 4.0 4.0 36.0 56.0 3.4 0.77 35. Instructor helped with my problems 25 0.0 12.0 40.0 48.0 3.4 0.70 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 25 0.0 12.0 44.0 44.0 3.3 0.69 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 47 Number of forms scanned = 45 Number of forms with at least one student response = 42 Percent completed = 89.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 87 25.4 A 184 54.0 Sophomore 62 18.1 B 94 27.6 Junior 78 22.8 C 42 12.3 Senior 113 33.0 D 13 3.8 Graduate 2 0.6 E/Fail 2 0.6 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 6 1.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 124 36.4 Studies Program 81 23.8 2 hours 110 32.3 Required by my major 205 60.3 3 hours 63 18.5 Other (e.g. elective) 53 15.6 4 - 5 hours 23 6.7 6 - 7 hours 9 2.6 8 or more hours 10 2.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 361 2.2 4.7 52.6 40.4 3.3 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 269 5.9 18.2 48.7 27.1 3.0 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 354 2.5 8.8 53.1 35.6 3.2 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 315 2.5 8.9 48.9 39.7 3.3 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 356 2.0 5.6 50.3 42.1 3.3 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 359 1.7 2.2 55.4 40.7 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 345 6.1 13.9 46.4 33.6 3.1 0.85 8. Graded assignments included comments 341 4.1 13.8 50.7 31.4 3.1 0.78 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 359 6.1 13.6 40.9 39.3 3.1 0.87 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 358 1.4 4.2 40.2 54.2 3.5 0.65 11. Was available for consultation 338 0.9 2.1 49.1 47.9 3.4 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 360 3.3 7.8 42.8 46.1 3.3 0.76 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 360 9.2 15.3 36.7 38.9 3.1 0.95 14. Encouraged class participation 359 1.9 6.1 41.5 50.4 3.4 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 334 2.7 8.4 53.6 35.3 3.2 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 352 3.7 12.2 46.9 37.2 3.2 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 344 4.4 14.8 48.0 32.8 3.1 0.80 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 358 3.9 8.9 49.4 37.7 3.2 0.76 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 356 13.2 21.1 34.6 31.2 2.8 1.01 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 357 7.3 16.8 36.4 39.5 3.1 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 352 7.4 12.2 27.6 52.8 3.3 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX % % 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 50 0.0 24.0 66.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 64 4.7 10.9 62.5 21.9 3.0 0.72 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 56 3.6 12.5 57.1 26.8 3.1 0.74 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 29 3.4 6.9 72.4 17.2 3.0 0.63 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 29 6.9 24.1 62.1 6.9 2.7 0.71 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 16.7 0.0 16.7 66.7 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 16.7 0.0 16.7 66.7 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 15 20.0 20.0 26.7 33.3 2.7 1.16 33. Amount of work appropriate 16 43.8 12.5 18.8 25.0 2.3 1.29 34. Instructor explained expectations 16 12.5 18.8 37.5 31.3 2.9 1.02 35. Instructor helped with my problems 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 0.0 2.4 . 38. Question 38 9 33.3 11.1 55.6 0.0 0.0 2.2 . 39. Question 39 9 0.0 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 3.8 . 40. Question 40 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 3.6 . 41. Question 41 8 12.5 75.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 42. Question 42 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 3.9 . 43. Question 43 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 4.9 . 44. Question 44 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 . 45. Question 45 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 46. Question 46 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 . 47. Question 47 8 0.0 37.5 0.0 50.0 12.5 3.4 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 468 Number of forms scanned = 364 Number of forms with at least one student response = 362 Percent completed = 77.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 1.4 A 31 22.6 Sophomore 19 13.8 B 88 64.2 Junior 33 23.9 C 10 7.3 Senior 66 47.8 D 2 1.5 Graduate 9 6.5 E/Fail 6 4.4 Professional 8 5.8 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 4.3 Studies Program 2 1.5 2 hours 5 3.6 Required by my major 114 83.2 3 hours 7 5.1 Other (e.g. elective) 18 13.1 4 - 5 hours 18 13.0 6 - 7 hours 16 11.6 8 or more hours 84 60.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 139 0.7 3.6 59.7 36.0 3.3 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 121 5.0 14.0 62.0 19.0 3.0 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 132 0.8 3.0 59.8 36.4 3.3 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 71 0.0 4.2 62.0 33.8 3.3 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 141 1.4 14.9 63.8 19.9 3.0 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 140 1.4 6.4 61.4 30.7 3.2 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 138 4.3 21.0 51.4 23.2 2.9 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 135 1.5 14.8 54.1 29.6 3.1 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 141 0.0 6.4 57.4 36.2 3.3 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 138 0.0 1.4 47.1 51.4 3.5 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 135 0.7 0.7 54.8 43.7 3.4 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 141 0.0 3.5 56.0 40.4 3.4 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 135 0.0 4.4 59.3 36.3 3.3 0.56 14. Encouraged class participation 133 0.0 6.0 54.9 39.1 3.3 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 128 1.6 7.0 57.8 33.6 3.2 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 138 1.4 2.9 55.1 40.6 3.3 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 137 1.5 3.6 61.3 33.6 3.3 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 140 0.7 0.7 59.3 39.3 3.4 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 135 0.7 6.7 57.8 34.8 3.3 0.61 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 136 0.7 5.1 46.3 47.8 3.4 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 124 1.6 8.9 44.4 45.2 3.3 0.71 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 11 18.2 9.1 63.6 9.1 2.6 0.92 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 27.3 27.3 45.5 0.0 2.2 0.87 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 27.3 18.2 45.5 9.1 2.4 1.03 35. Instructor helped with my problems 11 18.2 9.1 63.6 9.1 2.6 0.92 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 181 Number of forms scanned = 141 Number of forms with at least one student response = 141 Percent completed = 77.9 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 36 7.8 A 185 40.9 Sophomore 76 16.4 B 182 40.3 Junior 87 18.8 C 62 13.7 Senior 176 38.0 D 13 2.9 Graduate 84 18.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 4 0.9 Pass or Audit 10 2.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 112 24.5 Studies Program 62 13.4 2 hours 112 24.5 Required by my major 275 59.5 3 hours 117 25.6 Other (e.g. elective) 125 27.1 4 - 5 hours 61 13.3 6 - 7 hours 34 7.4 8 or more hours 19 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 494 0.6 1.4 45.3 52.6 3.5 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 432 3.2 8.3 53.0 35.4 3.2 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 470 1.1 4.5 52.1 42.3 3.4 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 479 1.3 4.6 45.9 48.2 3.4 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 491 1.6 3.5 44.6 50.3 3.4 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 469 1.5 4.3 45.4 48.8 3.4 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 490 2.9 6.1 43.9 47.1 3.4 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 473 1.1 11.2 46.1 41.6 3.3 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 493 1.6 6.5 41.0 50.9 3.4 0.69 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 493 0.2 0.4 24.7 74.6 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 449 0.9 3.8 43.9 51.4 3.5 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 491 0.6 2.9 41.1 55.4 3.5 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 491 2.0 8.6 38.3 51.1 3.4 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 484 1.0 6.2 40.7 52.1 3.4 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 422 0.7 4.3 59.5 35.5 3.3 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 466 0.4 4.7 54.1 40.8 3.4 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 456 0.2 10.3 51.8 37.7 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 487 0.6 2.7 47.6 49.1 3.5 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 480 2.3 15.6 47.9 34.2 3.1 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 490 1.6 8.0 39.0 51.4 3.4 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 486 1.6 7.2 30.7 60.5 3.5 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil Science % % 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 91 1.1 3.3 64.8 30.8 3.3 0.57 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 95 2.1 6.3 50.5 41.1 3.3 0.69 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 90 0.0 4.4 54.4 41.1 3.4 0.57 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 56 1.8 3.6 55.4 39.3 3.3 0.64 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 49 0.0 6.1 55.1 38.8 3.3 0.59 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 28. Guided student report preparation 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 29. Students free to express opinions 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 31. Developed abil to conduct research 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 177 1.1 6.2 57.6 35.0 3.3 0.62 33. Amount of work appropriate 177 2.8 7.3 46.9 42.9 3.3 0.73 34. Instructor explained expectations 176 0.6 5.1 55.1 39.2 3.3 0.60 35. Instructor helped with my problems 164 0.6 5.5 55.5 38.4 3.3 0.60 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 138 0.0 5.8 59.4 34.8 3.3 0.57 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 66 0.0 10.6 47.0 37.9 4.5 3.4 0.74 38. Question 38 64 0.0 9.4 35.9 50.0 4.7 3.5 0.73 39. Question 39 64 0.0 4.7 39.1 46.9 9.4 3.6 0.73 40. Question 40 63 1.6 9.5 34.9 47.6 6.3 3.5 0.82 41. Question 41 60 3.3 15.0 55.0 23.3 3.3 3.1 0.81 42. Question 42 63 3.2 17.5 38.1 33.3 7.9 3.3 0.95 43. Question 43 64 9.4 14.1 48.4 23.4 4.7 3.0 0.98 44. Question 44 60 6.7 28.3 40.0 21.7 3.3 2.9 0.95 45. Question 45 63 15.9 38.1 27.0 14.3 4.8 2.5 1.08 46. Question 46 65 4.6 15.4 53.8 23.1 3.1 3.0 0.84 47. Question 47 61 1.6 13.1 49.2 34.4 1.6 3.2 0.76 48. Question 48 63 6.3 41.3 25.4 23.8 3.2 2.8 1.00 49. Question 49 63 1.6 19.0 46.0 28.6 4.8 3.2 0.85 Number of forms preslugged = at least 634 Number of forms scanned = 496 Number of forms with at least one student response = 494 Percent completed = 77.9 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 37.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 42.9 Junior 1 2.9 C 6 17.1 Senior 12 34.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 20 57.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 5.7 Pass or Audit 1 2.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 2.9 Studies Program 3 8.8 2 hours 14 40.0 Required by my major 16 47.1 3 hours 12 34.3 Other (e.g. elective) 15 44.1 4 - 5 hours 6 17.1 6 - 7 hours 1 2.9 8 or more hours 1 2.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 37 0.0 2.7 48.6 48.6 3.5 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 18.5 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 0.0 5.3 65.8 28.9 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 10.8 13.5 56.8 18.9 2.8 0.87 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 2.7 8.1 64.9 24.3 3.1 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 77.1 22.9 3.2 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 37 0.0 2.7 81.1 16.2 3.1 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 5.6 69.4 25.0 3.2 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 2.6 7.9 39.5 50.0 3.4 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 37 2.7 0.0 40.5 56.8 3.5 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 38 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 2.7 10.8 54.1 32.4 3.2 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 38 2.6 13.2 47.4 36.8 3.2 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 37 0.0 0.0 64.9 35.1 3.4 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 36 0.0 5.6 61.1 33.3 3.3 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 37 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 2.7 18.9 48.6 29.7 3.1 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 38 2.6 7.9 50.0 39.5 3.3 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 38 2.6 18.4 39.5 39.5 3.2 0.82 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 33. Amount of work appropriate 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 34. Instructor explained expectations 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 35. Instructor helped with my problems 17 5.9 0.0 70.6 23.5 3.1 0.70 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 52 Number of forms scanned = 38 Number of forms with at least one student response = 38 Percent completed = 73.1 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Veterinary Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 3.3 A 16 53.3 Sophomore 3 10.0 B 11 36.7 Junior 11 36.7 C 3 10.0 Senior 15 50.0 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 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 13 43.3 Required by my major 10 33.3 3 hours 12 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 20 66.7 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 31 0.0 0.0 45.2 54.8 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 0.0 22.6 58.1 19.4 3.0 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 6.5 45.2 48.4 3.4 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 0.0 6.5 45.2 48.4 3.4 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 0.0 51.6 48.4 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 0.0 0.0 64.5 35.5 3.4 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 0.0 3.2 38.7 58.1 3.5 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 0.0 19.4 80.6 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 0.0 0.0 45.2 54.8 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 0.0 0.0 35.5 64.5 3.6 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 31 0.0 3.2 51.6 45.2 3.4 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 6.7 56.7 36.7 3.3 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 7.7 57.7 34.6 3.3 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 0.0 43.3 56.7 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 16.7 40.0 43.3 3.3 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 0.0 0.0 38.7 61.3 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 0.0 6.5 19.4 74.2 3.7 0.60 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Veterinary Science % % 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 = at least 37 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 83.8 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 201 47.5 A 288 68.7 Sophomore 53 12.5 B 101 24.1 Junior 40 9.5 C 16 3.8 Senior 90 21.3 D 5 1.2 Graduate 33 7.8 E/Fail 1 0.2 Professional 0 0.0 I 1 0.2 Other 6 1.4 Pass or Audit 7 1.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 78 18.5 Studies Program 121 28.9 2 hours 126 29.9 Required by my major 25 6.0 3 hours 106 25.1 Other (e.g. elective) 272 64.9 4 - 5 hours 74 17.5 6 - 7 hours 23 5.5 8 or more hours 12 2.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 456 0.7 2.2 38.8 58.3 3.5 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 389 0.8 3.1 47.3 48.8 3.4 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 444 0.5 2.3 46.8 50.5 3.5 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 242 0.4 4.1 41.7 53.7 3.5 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 433 0.7 4.2 41.3 53.8 3.5 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 451 0.9 5.1 43.0 51.0 3.4 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 418 0.7 7.7 40.2 51.4 3.4 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 411 0.2 2.7 37.0 60.1 3.6 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 453 1.5 4.4 36.6 57.4 3.5 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 457 0.4 0.2 16.6 82.7 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 433 0.7 1.4 35.3 62.6 3.6 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 457 0.4 1.3 30.2 68.1 3.7 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 456 1.3 4.4 34.2 60.1 3.5 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 453 0.7 2.9 26.9 69.5 3.7 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 427 0.7 1.9 45.9 51.5 3.5 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 441 0.9 5.2 46.3 47.6 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 386 1.3 11.7 49.0 38.1 3.2 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 450 0.9 1.8 40.0 57.3 3.5 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 447 2.2 11.9 38.9 47.0 3.3 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 453 1.1 6.6 31.1 61.1 3.5 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 446 1.3 5.6 20.9 72.2 3.6 0.65 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences % % 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 69 2.9 14.5 53.6 29.0 3.1 0.74 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 121 0.8 6.6 55.4 37.2 3.3 0.63 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 122 0.0 4.9 39.3 55.7 3.5 0.59 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 59 1.7 1.7 42.4 54.2 3.5 0.63 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 39 0.0 2.6 51.3 46.2 3.4 0.55 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 114 1.8 5.3 40.4 52.6 3.4 0.68 28. Guided student report preparation 148 1.4 6.8 45.3 46.6 3.4 0.67 29. Students free to express opinions 191 0.0 1.0 9.9 89.0 3.9 0.36 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 189 0.5 1.1 24.3 74.1 3.7 0.51 31. Developed abil to conduct research 153 1.3 5.2 45.8 47.7 3.4 0.65 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 565 Number of forms scanned = 492 Number of forms with at least one student response = 458 Percent completed = 81.1 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Anthropology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 185 12.8 A 750 52.5 Sophomore 464 32.2 B 541 37.9 Junior 427 29.7 C 113 7.9 Senior 294 20.4 D 13 0.9 Graduate 59 4.1 E/Fail 5 0.4 Professional 0 0.0 I 2 0.1 Other 11 0.8 Pass or Audit 4 0.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 679 47.2 Studies Program 1,036 72.1 2 hours 418 29.1 Required by my major 221 15.4 3 hours 187 13.0 Other (e.g. elective) 180 12.5 4 - 5 hours 90 6.3 6 - 7 hours 34 2.4 8 or more hours 25 1.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,540 0.6 3.8 58.8 36.8 3.3 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,506 5.5 16.4 53.6 24.5 3.0 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,523 2.5 13.8 58.8 24.9 3.1 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,473 1.1 5.4 56.0 37.5 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,539 1.6 4.9 55.9 37.6 3.3 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,532 0.8 5.0 58.0 36.2 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,528 0.9 6.8 58.2 34.0 3.3 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,449 2.6 19.7 50.1 27.6 3.0 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,547 3.7 12.4 52.2 31.6 3.1 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,543 0.9 1.9 47.6 49.5 3.5 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 1,369 1.0 3.7 58.0 37.3 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,529 2.0 7.3 52.8 38.0 3.3 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,532 6.5 23.7 43.5 26.2 2.9 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 1,515 3.2 14.7 48.2 33.9 3.1 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,498 1.7 7.6 59.3 31.4 3.2 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,481 3.1 19.0 55.8 22.1 3.0 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,285 4.6 32.6 45.1 17.7 2.8 0.79 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,531 1.8 6.5 62.1 29.6 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,523 10.4 36.2 36.6 16.7 2.6 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,540 5.5 19.7 49.1 25.8 3.0 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,525 4.5 15.1 42.6 37.8 3.1 0.83 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Anthropology % % 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 607 5.4 25.2 54.9 14.5 2.8 0.75 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 791 4.9 17.2 62.7 15.2 2.9 0.71 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 792 3.4 15.2 62.5 18.9 3.0 0.69 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 726 2.5 7.2 57.6 32.8 3.2 0.68 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 427 2.8 13.1 59.3 24.8 3.1 0.70 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 149 2.7 7.4 57.0 32.9 3.2 0.69 28. Guided student report preparation 152 2.6 8.6 56.6 32.2 3.2 0.69 29. Students free to express opinions 167 0.0 7.8 55.1 37.1 3.3 0.60 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 169 1.2 5.9 53.8 39.1 3.3 0.64 31. Developed abil to conduct research 157 3.8 17.8 49.0 29.3 3.0 0.79 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 495 2.6 11.5 48.5 37.4 3.2 0.74 33. Amount of work appropriate 500 1.8 3.2 57.4 37.6 3.3 0.62 34. Instructor explained expectations 496 1.6 6.3 52.8 39.3 3.3 0.66 35. Instructor helped with my problems 449 2.4 11.6 51.9 34.1 3.2 0.72 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 196 1.0 9.2 55.1 34.7 3.2 0.65 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 2167 Number of forms scanned = 1598 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1555 Percent completed = 71.8 % 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 302 11.0 A 1,087 40.2 Sophomore 713 25.9 B 1,080 40.0 Junior 730 26.5 C 420 15.5 Senior 816 29.6 D 66 2.4 Graduate 156 5.7 E/Fail 1 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 36 1.3 Pass or Audit 48 1.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 704 25.8 Studies Program 538 19.8 2 hours 718 26.3 Required by my major 1,680 61.8 3 hours 615 22.6 Other (e.g. elective) 500 18.4 4 - 5 hours 492 18.0 6 - 7 hours 134 4.9 8 or more hours 63 2.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 2,939 0.7 2.9 57.1 39.3 3.3 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2,728 6.5 14.8 50.8 27.9 3.0 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2,603 3.8 11.6 56.4 28.2 3.1 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2,734 4.6 14.1 52.3 29.0 3.1 0.78 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2,898 1.6 9.0 55.7 33.7 3.2 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2,590 1.8 5.3 59.4 33.5 3.2 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2,852 1.6 7.9 57.2 33.3 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 2,304 6.3 27.7 42.8 23.2 2.8 0.86 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 2,959 3.9 13.6 47.9 34.6 3.1 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 2,976 0.8 2.8 40.4 56.0 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 2,560 1.1 3.5 56.3 39.2 3.3 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 2,949 1.6 5.9 52.2 40.3 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 2,927 6.0 20.7 42.9 30.4 3.0 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 2,873 2.4 12.5 48.8 36.3 3.2 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2,317 2.0 12.8 61.4 23.8 3.1 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 2,813 2.0 12.5 58.8 26.7 3.1 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 2,627 2.4 17.9 57.3 22.5 3.0 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 2,900 1.7 6.2 60.1 32.0 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 2,836 6.1 30.6 43.9 19.4 2.8 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 2,951 4.5 17.4 49.2 28.9 3.0 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 2,938 4.9 14.9 40.0 40.2 3.2 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Biological Sciences % % 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 703 1.0 7.0 60.5 31.6 3.2 0.61 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 687 2.0 12.5 57.2 28.2 3.1 0.69 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 631 2.7 11.6 58.3 27.4 3.1 0.70 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 205 4.9 13.7 53.2 28.3 3.0 0.78 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 207 1.0 11.6 58.0 29.5 3.2 0.65 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 124 1.6 7.3 41.9 49.2 3.4 0.70 28. Guided student report preparation 128 1.6 5.5 40.6 52.3 3.4 0.67 29. Students free to express opinions 132 2.3 1.5 31.8 64.4 3.6 0.64 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 131 2.3 3.8 42.0 51.9 3.4 0.68 31. Developed abil to conduct research 112 2.7 8.9 48.2 40.2 3.3 0.73 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 700 3.3 15.0 49.6 32.1 3.1 0.77 33. Amount of work appropriate 733 10.4 13.4 48.2 28.1 2.9 0.91 34. Instructor explained expectations 731 2.7 10.8 51.7 34.7 3.2 0.73 35. Instructor helped with my problems 690 3.0 14.8 45.9 36.2 3.2 0.78 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 533 2.4 7.3 57.0 33.2 3.2 0.68 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 4.6 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 41. Question 41 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 5223 Number of forms scanned = 3025 Number of forms with at least one student response = 2995 Percent completed = 57.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Chemistry SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 511 28.3 A 630 35.0 Sophomore 629 34.8 B 707 39.2 Junior 357 19.8 C 368 20.4 Senior 239 13.2 D 74 4.1 Graduate 54 3.0 E/Fail 20 1.1 Professional 3 0.2 I 0 0.0 Other 14 0.8 Pass or Audit 3 0.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 154 8.5 Studies Program 150 8.3 2 hours 397 22.0 Required by my major 1,473 81.8 3 hours 550 30.5 Other (e.g. elective) 167 9.3 4 - 5 hours 408 22.6 6 - 7 hours 183 10.2 8 or more hours 105 5.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,966 0.6 3.4 55.7 40.4 3.4 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,910 2.6 10.3 55.0 32.1 3.2 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,844 1.5 8.4 58.2 31.8 3.2 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,930 4.1 13.0 55.1 27.8 3.1 0.75 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,975 2.2 8.8 56.7 32.3 3.2 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,805 1.2 4.9 59.9 34.0 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,891 1.3 4.1 49.2 45.4 3.4 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,545 8.9 27.8 41.9 21.4 2.8 0.89 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,960 2.7 12.2 48.9 36.1 3.2 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,983 0.7 2.1 42.1 55.1 3.5 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 1,873 1.0 4.5 52.3 42.1 3.4 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,973 2.3 9.7 48.6 39.3 3.2 0.72 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,948 7.2 25.8 42.0 25.0 2.8 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 1,869 3.4 17.3 48.7 30.6 3.1 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,386 3.8 20.1 57.1 19.1 2.9 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,922 1.5 7.0 59.9 31.6 3.2 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,936 1.4 7.6 60.0 31.0 3.2 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,950 1.7 7.1 61.4 29.7 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,878 11.0 37.3 38.1 13.6 2.5 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,970 3.3 16.0 52.7 28.0 3.1 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,944 4.4 14.9 35.6 45.1 3.2 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Chemistry % % 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 409 1.5 8.3 62.6 27.6 3.2 0.63 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 379 4.0 18.5 57.3 20.3 2.9 0.74 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 225 2.7 16.9 57.8 22.7 3.0 0.71 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 71 7.0 25.4 53.5 14.1 2.7 0.79 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 71 7.0 14.1 62.0 16.9 2.9 0.77 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 36 5.6 11.1 58.3 25.0 3.0 0.77 28. Guided student report preparation 28 7.1 7.1 64.3 21.4 3.0 0.77 29. Students free to express opinions 41 2.4 17.1 53.7 26.8 3.0 0.74 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 40 2.5 10.0 57.5 30.0 3.2 0.70 31. Developed abil to conduct research 41 4.9 24.4 46.3 24.4 2.9 0.83 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 477 2.5 14.0 59.3 24.1 3.1 0.69 33. Amount of work appropriate 485 8.2 12.8 61.0 17.9 2.9 0.79 34. Instructor explained expectations 478 2.7 11.1 56.7 29.5 3.1 0.71 35. Instructor helped with my problems 469 3.4 11.9 53.9 30.7 3.1 0.74 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 474 4.2 16.0 55.9 23.8 3.0 0.75 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 4.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 3151 Number of forms scanned = 3106 Numbe