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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 003L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 35 89.7 A 8 20.5 Sophomore 3 7.7 B 21 53.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 8 20.5 Senior 0 0.0 D 2 5.1 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 2.6 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 5 12.8 Studies Program 32 82.1 2 hours 11 28.2 Required by my major 2 5.1 3 hours 12 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 5 12.8 4 - 5 hours 10 25.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 2.6 % % 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 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 42 0.0 7.1 38.1 54.8 3.5 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 39 0.0 7.7 56.4 35.9 3.3 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 42 2.4 7.1 45.2 45.2 3.3 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 42 2.4 2.4 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 41 0.0 0.0 51.2 48.8 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 42 0.0 0.0 40.5 59.5 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 40 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 42 2.4 2.4 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 42 0.0 2.4 19.0 78.6 3.8 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 42 0.0 4.8 40.5 54.8 3.5 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 41 0.0 2.4 36.6 61.0 3.6 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 9.5 9.5 47.6 33.3 3.0 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 42 0.0 2.4 45.2 52.4 3.5 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 38 0.0 7.9 55.3 36.8 3.3 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 39 0.0 7.7 59.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 2.9 17.1 54.3 25.7 3.0 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 2.5 5.0 40.0 52.5 3.4 0.71 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 41 9.8 26.8 36.6 26.8 2.8 0.95 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 41 2.4 12.2 46.3 39.0 3.2 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 41 2.4 7.3 34.1 56.1 3.4 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 003L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 21 0.0 14.3 52.4 33.3 3.2 0.68 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 19 5.3 0.0 52.6 42.1 3.3 0.75 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 75 Number of forms scanned = 73 Number of forms with at least one student response = 42 Percent completed = 56.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 006L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 39 73.6 A 10 18.9 Sophomore 6 11.3 B 30 56.6 Junior 4 7.5 C 10 18.9 Senior 3 5.7 D 2 3.8 Graduate 1 1.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 1.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 15.1 Studies Program 35 66.0 2 hours 17 32.1 Required by my major 8 15.1 3 hours 19 35.8 Other (e.g. elective) 10 18.9 4 - 5 hours 8 15.1 6 - 7 hours 1 1.9 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 54 0.0 3.7 72.2 24.1 3.2 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 54 1.9 11.1 55.6 31.5 3.2 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 52 5.8 13.5 73.1 7.7 2.8 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 54 5.6 25.9 59.3 9.3 2.7 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 53 0.0 22.6 66.0 11.3 2.9 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 51 2.0 9.8 78.4 9.8 3.0 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 54 0.0 20.4 66.7 13.0 2.9 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 52 7.7 42.3 46.2 3.8 2.5 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 54 7.4 20.4 57.4 14.8 2.8 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 54 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 50 0.0 2.0 66.0 32.0 3.3 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 54 1.9 16.7 61.1 20.4 3.0 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 52 5.8 44.2 36.5 13.5 2.6 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 54 1.9 9.3 64.8 24.1 3.1 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 49 0.0 16.3 65.3 18.4 3.0 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 48 0.0 31.3 58.3 10.4 2.8 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 43 2.3 44.2 51.2 2.3 2.5 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 51 0.0 13.7 74.5 11.8 3.0 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 53 9.4 56.6 26.4 7.5 2.3 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 52 3.8 25.0 63.5 7.7 2.8 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 53 0.0 24.5 54.7 20.8 3.0 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 006L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 15 6.7 46.7 46.7 0.0 2.4 0.63 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 28 3.6 28.6 57.1 10.7 2.8 0.70 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 27 0.0 18.5 81.5 0.0 2.8 0.40 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 13 0.0 30.8 46.2 23.1 2.9 0.76 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 77 Number of forms scanned = 77 Number of forms with at least one student response = 54 Percent completed = 70.1 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 565 401L1 TOPICS IN GEO: TOURISM GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 1 10.0 B 5 50.0 Junior 1 10.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 60.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 10.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 10.0 Pass or Audit 2 20.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 9 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 30.0 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 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 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 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 % % % % 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 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 565 401L1 TOPICS IN GEO: TOURISM GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brunn, Stanley D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 409G002L1 INTRO TO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harvey, Francis SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 16.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 58.3 Junior 5 41.7 C 1 8.3 Senior 5 41.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 8.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 8.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 16.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 16.7 Required by my major 4 33.3 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 66.7 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 1 8.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 16.7 58.3 25.0 0.0 2.1 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 33.3 58.3 8.3 2.8 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 8.3 33.3 58.3 0.0 2.5 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 16.7 58.3 25.0 0.0 2.1 0.67 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 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 41.7 41.7 16.7 2.8 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 16.7 33.3 41.7 8.3 2.4 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 16.7 41.7 33.3 8.3 2.3 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 58.3 25.0 16.7 2.6 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 16.7 50.0 16.7 16.7 2.3 0.98 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 409G002L1 INTRO TO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harvey, Francis % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 2.6 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 336 001L1 GEO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hopper, Hilary SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 64.3 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 2 14.3 Junior 4 30.8 C 3 21.4 Senior 8 61.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 42.9 Studies Program 4 28.6 2 hours 3 21.4 Required by my major 7 50.0 3 hours 5 35.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 21.4 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 33.3 33.3 26.7 2.8 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 18.8 31.3 50.0 3.3 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 6.3 25.0 68.8 3.6 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 6.3 0.0 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.81 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 12.5 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 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 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 6.7 20.0 33.3 40.0 3.1 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 16 6.3 0.0 62.5 31.3 3.2 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 14.3 35.7 50.0 3.4 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 7.7 15.4 53.8 23.1 2.9 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 21.4 35.7 42.9 3.2 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 31.3 56.3 12.5 2.8 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 6.3 12.5 50.0 31.3 3.1 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 336 001L1 GEO SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hopper, Hilary % % 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 51.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 702 401L1 CONCEPTS IN GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, John P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 2 33.3 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 5 83.3 % % 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 0.0 83.3 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 702 401L1 CONCEPTS IN GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, John P % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 25.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 2.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 66.7 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 006L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 14.3 A 3 23.1 Sophomore 7 50.0 B 5 38.5 Junior 1 7.1 C 4 30.8 Senior 4 28.6 D 1 7.7 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 28.6 Studies Program 14 100.0 2 hours 6 42.9 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 5.0 10.0 50.0 35.0 3.2 0.81 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 5.0 0.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 3.0 1.03 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 13.3 40.0 26.7 20.0 2.5 0.99 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.73 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 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 5.0 10.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.85 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 5.3 57.9 26.3 3.0 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 30.8 38.5 30.8 3.0 0.82 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 15.8 26.3 42.1 15.8 2.6 0.96 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 5.0 35.0 30.0 30.0 2.9 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 20.0 25.0 50.0 3.2 0.95 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 006L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 = 47 Number of forms scanned = 47 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 42.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 334 001L1 ENVIRON, SOC AND ECONOMY OF JAPAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 44.4 Sophomore 1 5.3 B 7 38.9 Junior 8 42.1 C 3 16.7 Senior 10 52.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 10.5 Studies Program 2 10.5 2 hours 8 42.1 Required by my major 5 26.3 3 hours 7 36.8 Other (e.g. elective) 12 63.2 4 - 5 hours 2 10.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 21.1 21.1 26.3 31.6 2.7 1.16 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 23.5 17.6 41.2 17.6 2.5 1.07 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 21.1 47.4 31.6 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 15.8 21.1 42.1 21.1 2.7 1.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 11.8 29.4 41.2 17.6 2.6 0.93 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 21.1 15.8 47.4 15.8 2.6 1.02 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 5.3 10.5 36.8 47.4 3.3 0.87 11. Was available for consultation 17 5.9 17.6 52.9 23.5 2.9 0.83 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 21.1 10.5 52.6 15.8 2.6 1.01 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 26.3 47.4 21.1 2.8 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 19 21.1 15.8 47.4 15.8 2.6 1.02 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 5.3 15.8 47.4 31.6 3.1 0.85 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 0.89 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 16.7 25.0 41.7 16.7 2.6 1.00 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 5.6 11.1 61.1 22.2 3.0 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 10.5 21.1 57.9 10.5 2.7 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 21.1 10.5 42.1 26.3 2.7 1.10 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 31.6 15.8 26.3 26.3 2.5 1.22 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 334 001L1 ENVIRON, SOC AND ECONOMY OF JAPAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 = 34 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 55.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 409G001L1 INTRO TO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kennedy, Michael D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 72.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 9.1 Senior 7 63.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 18.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 9.1 I 0 0.0 Other 1 9.1 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 3 27.3 3 hours 2 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 8 72.7 4 - 5 hours 3 27.3 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 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 36.4 36.4 3.1 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 409G001L1 INTRO TO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kennedy, Michael D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 66.7 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 465 401L1 SPEC TOPS: GIS/GPS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kennedy, Michael D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 77.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 12.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 3 37.5 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 11.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 1 12.5 3 hours 5 62.5 Other (e.g. elective) 7 87.5 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 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 465 401L1 SPEC TOPS: GIS/GPS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kennedy, Michael D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 004L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 16 35.6 A 19 43.2 Sophomore 12 26.7 B 20 45.5 Junior 8 17.8 C 5 11.4 Senior 8 17.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.2 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 27 61.4 Studies Program 39 88.6 2 hours 12 27.3 Required by my major 4 9.1 3 hours 3 6.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.3 4 - 5 hours 1 2.3 6 - 7 hours 1 2.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 46 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 0.0 20.0 57.1 22.9 3.0 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 46 0.0 4.3 63.0 32.6 3.3 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 46 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 46 2.2 4.3 54.3 39.1 3.3 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 46 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 46 0.0 0.0 54.3 45.7 3.5 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 45 2.2 11.1 64.4 22.2 3.1 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 46 0.0 2.2 56.5 41.3 3.4 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 46 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 44 0.0 2.3 52.3 45.5 3.4 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 46 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 46 2.2 10.9 56.5 30.4 3.2 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 46 0.0 4.3 54.3 41.3 3.4 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 40 2.5 2.5 72.5 22.5 3.2 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 44 0.0 9.1 75.0 15.9 3.1 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 39 0.0 17.9 69.2 12.8 2.9 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 46 0.0 2.2 78.3 19.6 3.2 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 45 6.7 24.4 60.0 8.9 2.7 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 45 2.2 6.7 60.0 31.1 3.2 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 45 0.0 2.2 42.2 55.6 3.5 0.55 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 004L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 16 6.3 31.3 62.5 0.0 2.6 0.63 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 24 4.2 16.7 70.8 8.3 2.8 0.64 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 26 0.0 3.8 61.5 34.6 3.3 0.55 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 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 = 75 Number of forms scanned = 75 Number of forms with at least one student response = 47 Percent completed = 62.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 007L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 12.0 A 26 53.1 Sophomore 29 58.0 B 21 42.9 Junior 12 24.0 C 2 4.1 Senior 3 6.0 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 33 66.0 Studies Program 41 82.0 2 hours 13 26.0 Required by my major 5 10.0 3 hours 4 8.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 8.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 54 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 2.9 11.4 65.7 20.0 3.0 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 53 1.9 3.8 66.0 28.3 3.2 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 54 0.0 3.7 50.0 46.3 3.4 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 54 0.0 7.4 46.3 46.3 3.4 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 53 0.0 0.0 60.4 39.6 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 54 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 52 0.0 11.5 59.6 28.8 3.2 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 54 0.0 11.1 57.4 31.5 3.2 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 54 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 51 0.0 2.0 60.8 37.3 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 54 0.0 1.9 63.0 35.2 3.3 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 54 5.6 9.3 57.4 27.8 3.1 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 53 0.0 3.8 58.5 37.7 3.3 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 49 0.0 4.1 63.3 32.7 3.3 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 52 1.9 13.5 65.4 19.2 3.0 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 42 2.4 23.8 54.8 19.0 2.9 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 53 0.0 1.9 73.6 24.5 3.2 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 52 5.8 32.7 42.3 19.2 2.8 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 54 0.0 13.0 61.1 25.9 3.1 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 54 1.9 5.6 35.2 57.4 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 160 007L1 LNDS/PEOPLE NON-WEST WLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 24 4.2 37.5 45.8 12.5 2.7 0.76 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 36 2.8 11.1 75.0 11.1 2.9 0.58 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 37 0.0 10.8 70.3 18.9 3.1 0.55 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 32 0.0 0.0 65.6 34.4 3.3 0.48 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 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 = 78 Number of forms scanned = 76 Number of forms with at least one student response = 54 Percent completed = 69.2 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 240 001L1 GEOGRAPHY AND GENDER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 39.4 A 17 51.5 Sophomore 3 9.1 B 15 45.5 Junior 7 21.2 C 1 3.0 Senior 9 27.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 30.3 Studies Program 15 45.5 2 hours 8 24.2 Required by my major 6 18.2 3 hours 9 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 12 36.4 4 - 5 hours 6 18.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 36 0.0 2.8 30.6 66.7 3.6 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 8.8 17.6 50.0 23.5 2.9 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 0.0 0.0 52.8 47.2 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 2.8 11.1 52.8 33.3 3.2 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 0.0 2.8 47.2 50.0 3.5 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 2.8 41.7 55.6 3.5 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 2.8 0.0 27.8 69.4 3.6 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 0.0 2.8 44.4 52.8 3.5 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 19.4 80.6 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 2.8 2.8 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 36 0.0 2.8 38.9 58.3 3.6 0.56 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 36 0.0 16.7 44.4 38.9 3.2 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 3.2 19.4 45.2 32.3 3.1 0.81 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 0.0 5.7 48.6 45.7 3.4 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 36 2.8 19.4 44.4 33.3 3.1 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 11.4 45.7 42.9 3.3 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.61 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 240 001L1 GEOGRAPHY AND GENDER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miranne, Kristine % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 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 = 44 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 81.8 % 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 716 003S1 TOP SEM CULT GEO: FRANKFURT THEORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Natter, Wolfgang SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 2 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 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 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 716 003S1 TOP SEM CULT GEO: FRANKFURT THEORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Natter, Wolfgang % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 60.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 130 401L1 EARTH'S PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = O'Dell, Gary SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 4.2 A 10 43.5 Sophomore 5 20.8 B 9 39.1 Junior 7 29.2 C 3 13.0 Senior 11 45.8 D 1 4.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 33.3 Studies Program 12 50.0 2 hours 4 16.7 Required by my major 9 37.5 3 hours 10 41.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 12.5 4 - 5 hours 2 8.3 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 29 3.4 0.0 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 0.0 6.9 62.1 31.0 3.2 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 13.8 65.5 20.7 3.1 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 3.4 0.0 55.2 41.4 3.3 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 6.9 51.7 41.4 3.3 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 6.9 10.3 51.7 31.0 3.1 0.84 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 3.4 62.1 34.5 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 10.3 65.5 24.1 3.1 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 17.2 48.3 34.5 3.2 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 48.3 51.7 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 3.4 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 7.4 18.5 48.1 25.9 2.9 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 6.9 69.0 24.1 3.2 0.54 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 18.2 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 3.8 15.4 61.5 19.2 3.0 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 16.7 62.5 20.8 3.0 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 11.1 59.3 29.6 3.2 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 10.7 21.4 46.4 21.4 2.8 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 3.4 24.1 44.8 27.6 3.0 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 10.7 60.7 28.6 3.2 0.61 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = GEO 130 401L1 EARTH'S PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = O'Dell, Gary % % 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 6 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 16.7 0.0 16.7 66.7 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 45 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 64.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 716 002S1 TOP SEM GEO:ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 87.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 12.5 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 14.3 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 85.7 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 5 71.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 716 002S1 TOP SEM GEO:ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pickles, John % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . 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 = 10 Percent completed = 71.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 490G001L1 AMERICAN LANDSCAPES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Raitz, K B SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 25.0 Junior 1 7.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 35.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 42.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 14.3 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 7.1 Studies Program 1 7.1 2 hours 4 28.6 Required by my major 7 50.0 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 6 42.9 4 - 5 hours 4 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 7.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 13.3 80.0 3.7 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 490G001L1 AMERICAN LANDSCAPES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Raitz, K B % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 60.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 004L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shannon, Gary W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 27 73.0 A 14 37.8 Sophomore 4 10.8 B 16 43.2 Junior 5 13.5 C 5 13.5 Senior 1 2.7 D 2 5.4 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 7 18.9 Studies Program 30 81.1 2 hours 16 43.2 Required by my major 3 8.1 3 hours 9 24.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 10.8 4 - 5 hours 3 8.1 6 - 7 hours 2 5.4 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 39 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 39 0.0 17.9 66.7 15.4 3.0 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 0.0 16.2 73.0 10.8 2.9 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 2.6 12.8 59.0 25.6 3.1 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 2.6 5.1 56.4 35.9 3.3 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 5.7 62.9 31.4 3.3 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 0.0 7.7 59.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 0.0 41.2 52.9 5.9 2.6 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 39 0.0 15.4 51.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 0.0 44.7 55.3 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 36 0.0 8.3 55.6 36.1 3.3 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 0.0 5.1 48.7 46.2 3.4 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 0.0 35.9 41.0 23.1 2.9 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 38 0.0 31.6 55.3 13.2 2.8 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 36 0.0 11.1 72.2 16.7 3.1 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 25.7 57.1 17.1 2.9 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 3.2 38.7 51.6 6.5 2.6 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 38 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 38 5.3 47.4 26.3 21.1 2.6 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 39 0.0 28.2 56.4 15.4 2.9 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 39 0.0 20.5 41.0 38.5 3.2 0.76 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Geography FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GEO 152 004L1 REGIONAL GEO OF WORLD INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shannon, Gary W