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 - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 18.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 27.3 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 4 36.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 7.1 35.7 42.9 14.3 2.6 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 7.1 21.4 64.3 7.1 2.7 0.73 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 14.3 57.1 21.4 2.9 0.83 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 2.9 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 40.0 33.3 20.0 2.7 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 13.3 26.7 53.3 6.7 2.5 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 15 6.7 46.7 40.0 6.7 2.5 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 36.4 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 26.7 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 38.5 53.8 7.7 2.7 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 40.0 46.7 6.7 2.5 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 13.3 33.3 33.3 20.0 2.6 0.99 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 6.7 33.3 46.7 13.3 2.7 0.82 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 20.0 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 2 15.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 38.5 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 2 15.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 2 15.4 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 13.0 30.4 52.2 4.3 2.5 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 15.8 21.1 63.2 0.0 2.5 0.77 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 8.7 26.1 65.2 0.0 2.6 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 36.4 63.6 0.0 2.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 17.4 30.4 47.8 4.3 2.4 0.84 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 5.3 21.1 73.7 0.0 2.7 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 4.3 26.1 65.2 4.3 2.7 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 8.7 21.7 60.9 8.7 2.7 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 4.3 8.7 56.5 30.4 3.1 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 4.3 56.5 39.1 3.3 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 31.6 47.4 21.1 2.9 0.74 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 21.7 52.2 26.1 3.0 0.71 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 8.7 34.8 39.1 17.4 2.7 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 23 4.3 13.0 56.5 26.1 3.0 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 13.6 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 36.4 50.0 13.6 2.8 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 9.5 28.6 57.1 4.8 2.6 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 26.1 65.2 8.7 2.8 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 4.3 47.8 43.5 4.3 2.5 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 4.5 22.7 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 9.1 27.3 36.4 27.3 2.8 0.96 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 100.0 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 18 94.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 5.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 19 100.0 3 hours 4 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 11.1 6 - 7 hours 2 11.1 8 or more hours 4 22.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 7.7 30.8 46.2 15.4 2.7 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 6.3 18.8 62.5 12.5 2.8 0.75 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 26.7 60.0 6.7 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 21.1 52.6 26.3 3.1 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 15.8 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 26.3 68.4 5.3 2.8 0.54 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 44.4 55.6 0.0 2.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 8.3 0.0 75.0 16.7 3.0 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 8.3 16.7 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 9.1 18.2 54.5 18.2 2.8 0.87 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 7.7 0.0 84.6 7.7 2.9 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 38.5 38.5 15.4 2.6 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 7.1 14.3 57.1 21.4 2.9 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 6.3 31.3 31.3 31.3 2.9 0.96 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L2 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderman, Eric M. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 . 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 = 20 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 2 15.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 6 46.2 % % 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 18.8 81.3 0.0 2.8 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 31.3 25.0 43.8 0.0 2.1 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 18.8 68.8 12.5 2.9 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 6.3 12.5 56.3 25.0 3.0 0.82 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 6.3 6.3 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 68.8 25.0 3.2 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 18.8 62.5 12.5 2.8 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 31.3 62.5 6.3 2.8 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 31.3 37.5 31.3 3.0 0.82 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 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 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 25.0 Studies Program 1 5.9 2 hours 5 31.3 Required by my major 16 94.1 3 hours 3 18.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 18.8 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 21 0.0 38.1 47.6 14.3 2.8 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 31.8 36.4 22.7 9.1 2.1 0.97 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 4.5 13.6 68.2 13.6 2.9 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 23.1 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 13.6 63.6 22.7 3.1 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 22.7 63.6 13.6 2.9 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 22.7 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 9.5 23.8 57.1 9.5 2.7 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 18 5.6 5.6 72.2 16.7 3.0 0.69 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 10.5 10.5 57.9 21.1 2.9 0.88 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 9.5 19.0 52.4 19.0 2.8 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 18 5.6 11.1 61.1 22.2 3.0 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 6.7 20.0 66.7 6.7 2.7 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 5.3 10.5 68.4 15.8 2.9 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 4.8 81.0 14.3 3.1 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 42.9 42.9 9.5 2.6 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 4.8 28.6 52.4 14.3 2.8 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 10.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 2.6 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 95.7 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 94.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 5.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 18 94.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 5.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 29.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 4 23.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 11.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 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 5.6 5.6 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.73 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 11.1 27.8 38.9 22.2 2.7 0.96 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 11.1 5.6 55.6 27.8 3.0 0.91 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 11.1 61.1 27.8 3.2 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 17 5.9 0.0 52.9 41.2 3.3 0.77 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 22.2 50.0 27.8 3.1 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 25.0 43.8 31.3 3.1 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 42.9 28.6 28.6 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 17 5.9 29.4 35.3 29.4 2.9 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 17.6 41.2 35.3 3.1 0.90 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 003L3 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mazur, Joan % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 = 20 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Spalding, Mary Elizabeth SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 2 15.4 8 or more hours 9 69.2 % % 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 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 12.5 12.5 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.96 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 13.3 53.3 26.7 3.0 0.85 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 6.3 6.3 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 62.5 3.6 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 6.3 18.8 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 18.8 56.3 25.0 3.1 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 12.5 6.3 43.8 37.5 3.1 1.00 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 6.3 0.0 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 12.5 31.3 56.3 3.4 0.73 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 001L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Spalding, Mary Elizabeth % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Angene H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 95.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 5.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 21 100.0 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 5 25.0 Required by my major 21 100.0 3 hours 1 5.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 8 or more hours 8 40.0 % % 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 26.1 69.6 3.7 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 8.7 4.3 52.2 34.8 3.1 0.87 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 4.5 0.0 54.5 40.9 3.3 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 43.5 47.8 3.4 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 4.3 21.7 39.1 34.8 3.0 0.88 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 17.4 30.4 52.2 3.3 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 13.0 43.5 43.5 3.3 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 8.7 34.8 56.5 3.5 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 13.0 34.8 52.2 3.4 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 0.0 36.4 59.1 3.5 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 13.6 31.8 50.0 3.3 0.88 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 5.3 10.5 21.1 63.2 3.4 0.90 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 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 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 4.5 27.3 68.2 3.6 0.58 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDU 645 002L1 FOUNDATNS OF PEDAGOGICAL THEORY/PRAC IN SEC SCHL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Angene H % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 4 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RC 510 001L1 ORIENT TO REHAB RESOURCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beach, David SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 81.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 16.7 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 3 25.0 Required by my major 11 91.7 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 8.3 16.7 75.0 3.7 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 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 8.3 83.3 3.8 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = RC 510 001L1 ORIENT TO REHAB RESOURCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Beach, David % % 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 201L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 6.3 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 81.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 6.3 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.3 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 20.0 Required by my major 10 62.5 3 hours 8 53.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 37.5 4 - 5 hours 2 13.3 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 12.5 31.3 43.8 12.5 2.6 0.89 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 6.3 0.0 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 0.0 68.8 25.0 3.1 0.72 % % % % 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 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 6.3 6.3 31.3 56.3 3.4 0.89 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 201L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 59.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 401L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 82.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 17.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 5.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 94.1 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 23.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 11.8 Required by my major 13 76.5 3 hours 6 35.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 23.5 4 - 5 hours 4 23.5 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 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 6.7 6.7 53.3 33.3 3.1 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 25.0 43.8 31.3 3.1 0.77 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 0.0 58.8 35.3 3.2 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 58.8 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 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 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 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 0.0 52.9 41.2 3.3 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 520 401L1 PRINCIPLES OF REHAB COUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 77.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 650 001L1 REHAB COUNSELING THEORY AND PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 18.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 25.0 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 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 13.3 26.7 60.0 3.5 0.74 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 13.3 26.7 33.3 26.7 2.7 1.03 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 6.3 6.3 56.3 31.3 3.1 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 6.3 0.0 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 6.3 6.3 37.5 50.0 3.3 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 6.3 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 6.3 12.5 31.3 50.0 3.3 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 6.3 6.3 31.3 56.3 3.4 0.89 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 650 001L1 REHAB COUNSELING THEORY AND PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 84.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 650 205L1 REHAB COUNSELING THEORY AND PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 16.7 A 6 100.0 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 5 83.3 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 1 16.7 Required by my major 2 33.3 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 650 205L1 REHAB COUNSELING THEORY AND PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crystal, Ralph M % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 720 002L1 INTERN IN REHAB COUNSEL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Feist-Price, Sonja SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 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 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 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 4 66.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 33.3 16.7 50.0 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 720 002L1 INTERN IN REHAB COUNSEL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Feist-Price, Sonja % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 760 401L1 CONTEMP PRAC IN REHAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harley, Debra SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 90.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 9.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 36.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 9 90.0 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % 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 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. -Education FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = RC 760 401L1 CONTEMP PRAC IN REHAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harley, Debra % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 63.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 650 201L1 LEADERSHIP FOR SCHOOL PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams-Rodgers, Lois SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 95.0 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 18 90.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 2 10.0 I 1 5.0 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 5.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 31.6 Required by my major 17 89.5 3 hours 4 21.1 Other (e.g. elective) 2 10.5 4 - 5 hours 3 15.8 6 - 7 hours 3 15.8 8 or more hours 2 10.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 15.0 20.0 35.0 30.0 2.8 1.06 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 15.0 55.0 30.0 3.2 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 10.0 15.0 35.0 40.0 3.1 1.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 5.0 10.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.85 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 5.0 30.0 25.0 40.0 3.0 0.97 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 35.0 35.0 30.0 3.0 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 26.3 36.8 36.8 3.1 0.81 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0 3.9 0.37 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 20.0 45.0 35.0 3.2 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 20.0 35.0 45.0 3.3 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 650 201L1 LEADERSHIP FOR SCHOOL PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Adams-Rodgers, Lois % % 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 95.2 % 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 = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EDA 601 202L1 INTRO TO SCH LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Babbage, Keen SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 94.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 5.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 94.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 5.9 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.9 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 12 75.0 3 hours 8 47.1 Other (e.g. elective) 3 18.8 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 5.9 47.1 41.2 3.2 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 5.9 94.1 3.9 0.24 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 5.9 94.1 3.9 0.24 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 5.9 5.9 88.2 3.8 0.53 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 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 0.0 5.9 94.1 3.9 0.24 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EDA 601 202L1 INTRO TO SCH LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Babbage, Keen % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 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 at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 702 201L1 LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATNAL ORGANIZATIONS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bjork, Lars G. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 94.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 5.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 88.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 2 11.8 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 5.9 2 hours 1 5.9 Required by my major 14 82.4 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 2 11.8 4 - 5 hours 6 35.3 6 - 7 hours 5 29.4 8 or more hours 2 11.8 % % 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 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 11.8 23.5 64.7 3.5 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education DEPARTMENT = Administration and Supervision FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EDA 702 201L1 LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATNAL ORGANIZATIONS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bjork, Lars G. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 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 .