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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 011 001L1 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = BLACKWELL, LOIS SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 100.0 Sophomore 1 9.1 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 90.9 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 9.1 Required by my major 9 81.8 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 2 18.2 4 - 5 hours 3 27.3 6 - 7 hours 5 45.5 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 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 18.2 27.3 54.5 3.4 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 3.1 0.88 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 011 001L1 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = BLACKWELL, 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 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 312 001L1 INTRO GER LIT:POP FORMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blackwell, Lois J 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 1 16.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 83.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 3 60.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 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 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 2.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 14.3 28.6 28.6 28.6 2.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 312 001L1 INTRO GER LIT:POP FORMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blackwell, Lois J % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 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 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 70.0 % 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 101 401L1 BASIC GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 3 33.3 B 2 25.0 Junior 2 22.2 C 2 25.0 Senior 2 22.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 22.2 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 4 44.4 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 8 or more hours 1 11.1 % % 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 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 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 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 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 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 27.3 18.2 0.0 54.5 2.8 1.40 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 101 401L1 BASIC GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 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 0.0 100.0 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 78.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 307 001L1 INTERM GER COMP/CONVR I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 1 14.3 B 2 33.3 Junior 4 57.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 28.6 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 16.7 Required by my major 4 66.7 3 hours 4 66.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 33.3 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 307 001L1 INTERM GER COMP/CONVR I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald % % 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 653 001L1 RESEARCH AND ISSUES IN TEACHING GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 100.0 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 5 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 4 80.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 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 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 653 001L1 RESEARCH AND ISSUES IN TEACHING GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hoebusch, Harald % % 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 206 001L1 ORAL PRACTICE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 29.4 Sophomore 8 44.4 B 9 52.9 Junior 5 27.8 C 2 11.8 Senior 3 16.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 5.6 Pass or Audit 1 5.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.6 Studies Program 2 11.1 2 hours 8 44.4 Required by my major 6 33.3 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 10 55.6 4 - 5 hours 4 22.2 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 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 10.0 15.0 65.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 4.8 0.0 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 5.0 0.0 55.0 40.0 3.3 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 5.0 0.0 65.0 30.0 3.2 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 9.5 42.9 47.6 3.4 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 4.8 19.0 42.9 33.3 3.0 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 21.4 71.4 7.1 2.9 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 29.4 47.1 23.5 2.9 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 9.5 52.4 33.3 3.1 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 206 001L1 ORAL PRACTICE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 37. Question 37 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 44. Question 44 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 47. Question 47 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 48. Question 48 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 91.3 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 263 001L1 GER CULTUR TRADITION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 22.2 A 3 33.3 Sophomore 4 44.4 B 4 44.4 Junior 2 22.2 C 1 11.1 Senior 1 11.1 D 1 11.1 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 3 33.3 Studies Program 5 55.6 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 45.5 45.5 9.1 2.6 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 18.2 27.3 45.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 9.1 54.5 27.3 9.1 2.4 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 90.9 0.0 2.9 0.30 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 36.4 45.5 18.2 2.8 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 27.3 9.1 54.5 9.1 2.5 1.04 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 9.1 18.2 54.5 18.2 2.8 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 36.4 18.2 45.5 0.0 2.1 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 18.2 54.5 9.1 18.2 2.3 1.01 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 45.5 45.5 0.0 2.4 0.67 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 263 001L1 GER CULTUR TRADITION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley % % 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 66.7 0.0 33.3 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 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 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 38. Question 38 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 39. Question 39 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 . 40. Question 40 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 . 41. Question 41 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 . 43. Question 43 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 3.5 . 44. Question 44 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 3.0 . 45. Question 45 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 3.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 47. Question 47 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 48. Question 48 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 3.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 84.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 620 001S1 STDS IN THE MIDDLE AGES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 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 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 620 001S1 STDS IN THE MIDDLE AGES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kucaba, Kelley % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 520 001L1 SP STUDIES GER LIT/CULT HIS:LITERATURE & HISTORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = McKnight, Phillip S SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 20.0 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 1 16.7 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 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 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 520 001L1 SP STUDIES GER LIT/CULT HIS:LITERATURE & HISTORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = McKnight, Phillip S % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 3 21.4 B 7 50.0 Junior 3 21.4 C 2 14.3 Senior 8 57.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 6 42.9 2 hours 5 35.7 Required by my major 6 42.9 3 hours 8 57.1 Other (e.g. elective) 2 14.3 4 - 5 hours 1 7.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 0.0 21.4 57.1 21.4 3.0 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 21.4 50.0 28.6 3.1 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 7.7 30.8 38.5 23.1 2.8 0.93 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 14.3 64.3 21.4 3.1 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 28.6 35.7 35.7 3.1 0.83 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 201 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert % % 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 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 73.7 % 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 202 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 23.1 A 7 53.8 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 4 30.8 Junior 1 7.7 C 2 15.4 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 4 30.8 Studies Program 2 15.4 2 hours 4 30.8 Required by my major 10 76.9 3 hours 3 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 7.7 4 - 5 hours 1 7.7 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 11.8 52.9 29.4 3.1 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 6.3 68.8 25.0 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 5.9 0.0 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 11.8 47.1 41.2 3.3 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 6.3 12.5 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.85 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 14 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 21.4 71.4 7.1 2.9 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 7.1 78.6 14.3 3.1 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 7.1 28.6 50.0 14.3 2.7 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 25.0 43.8 31.3 3.1 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.72 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 202 001L1 INTERMEDIATE GERMAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert % % 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 65.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 319 001L1 CONTEMP GER LIT/CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 11.1 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 33.3 Junior 2 22.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 66.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 6 66.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = German FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = GER 319 001L1 CONTEMP GER LIT/CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Puszkar, Norbert % % 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 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data.