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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 510 401L1 MENT HLTH KNOWLDG FOR SOC PROFS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Acra, Paul D SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 8.3 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 33.3 E/Fail 1 8.3 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 8.3 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 33.3 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 3 25.0 3 hours 5 41.7 Other (e.g. elective) 8 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 8.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 510 401L1 MENT HLTH KNOWLDG FOR SOC PROFS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Acra, Paul D % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 53.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 620 403L1 HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Albers, Dale SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 23.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 64.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 5.9 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 17 100.0 E/Fail 1 5.9 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 6.3 Studies Program 1 5.9 2 hours 1 6.3 Required by my major 15 88.2 3 hours 4 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.9 4 - 5 hours 8 50.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 12.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 5.3 21.1 52.6 21.1 2.9 0.81 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 20.0 30.0 35.0 15.0 2.5 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 10.0 75.0 15.0 3.1 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 5.3 15.8 47.4 31.6 3.1 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 15.8 63.2 21.1 3.1 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 42.1 42.1 15.8 2.7 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 5.0 15.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 21.1 36.8 36.8 3.1 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 25.0 70.0 3.7 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 10.0 5.0 45.0 40.0 3.2 0.93 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 11.1 22.2 22.2 44.4 3.0 1.08 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 5.0 10.0 55.0 30.0 3.1 0.79 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 5.0 25.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 5.0 15.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 5.3 31.6 52.6 10.5 2.7 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 620 403L1 HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Albers, Dale % % 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 21 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 95.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 730 001L1 ADVANCED SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY AND SERVICES I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 64.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 35.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 17 100.0 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 1 5.9 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 16 94.1 3 hours 4 23.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 12 70.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 11.8 41.2 41.2 5.9 2.4 0.80 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 11.8 11.8 70.6 3.5 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 6.3 0.0 31.3 62.5 3.5 0.82 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 17.6 76.5 3.7 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 11.8 29.4 58.8 3.5 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 5.9 5.9 35.3 52.9 3.4 0.86 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 11.8 11.8 17.6 58.8 3.2 1.09 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 0.0 11.8 82.4 3.7 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 730 001L1 ADVANCED SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY AND SERVICES I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 730 402L1 ADVANCED SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY AND SERVICES I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 81.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 8.3 Studies Program 2 16.7 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 6 - 7 hours 4 33.3 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 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 730 402L1 ADVANCED SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY AND SERVICES I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Amato-von Hemert, Katherin % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 001L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 60.0 Junior 7 46.7 C 3 20.0 Senior 8 53.3 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 3 20.0 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 4 26.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 13.3 53.3 26.7 6.7 2.3 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 13.3 13.3 40.0 33.3 2.9 1.03 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 53.3 33.3 6.7 6.7 1.7 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.41 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 6.7 6.7 73.3 13.3 2.9 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 7.1 42.9 35.7 14.3 2.6 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 6.7 33.3 53.3 6.7 2.6 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 13.3 26.7 53.3 6.7 2.5 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 26.7 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 40.0 40.0 13.3 2.6 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 6.7 40.0 46.7 6.7 2.5 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 26.7 33.3 33.3 6.7 2.2 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 001L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 17 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 002L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 28.6 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 8 57.1 Junior 5 35.7 C 1 7.1 Senior 8 57.1 D 1 7.1 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 1 7.1 Studies Program 1 7.1 2 hours 2 14.3 Required by my major 13 92.9 3 hours 2 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 35.7 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 8 or more hours 2 14.3 % % 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 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 13.3 20.0 46.7 20.0 2.7 0.96 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 40.0 46.7 13.3 2.7 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 % % % % 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 13 7.7 30.8 46.2 15.4 2.7 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 400 002L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Dinah % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 600 202L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Badger, Karen SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 18 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 2 11.1 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 15 83.3 3 hours 3 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.6 4 - 5 hours 10 55.6 6 - 7 hours 2 11.1 8 or more hours 3 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 89.5 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 5.3 26.3 68.4 3.6 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 89.5 3.9 0.32 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 5.3 31.6 63.2 3.6 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 600 202L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Badger, Karen % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 86.4 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 401L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 93.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 6.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 18.8 Studies Program 2 12.5 2 hours 7 43.8 Required by my major 14 87.5 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 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 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 5.6 16.7 77.8 3.7 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 701 401L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 20 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 750 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 18 100.0 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 8 44.4 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 9 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 0.0 9.5 90.5 3.9 0.30 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 21.1 78.9 3.8 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 9.5 90.5 3.9 0.30 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 9.5 90.5 3.9 0.30 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 4.8 95.2 4.0 0.22 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 4.8 95.2 4.0 0.22 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 4.8 95.2 4.0 0.22 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 9.5 23.8 66.7 3.6 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 9.5 90.5 3.9 0.30 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0 3.9 0.37 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 0.0 5.3 94.7 3.9 0.23 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 750 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 95.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 401L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 92.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 2 18.2 2 hours 2 15.4 Required by my major 9 81.8 3 hours 6 46.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 7.7 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 8 or more hours 3 23.1 % % 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 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 76.9 3.7 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 15.4 30.8 53.8 3.4 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 401L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 21 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 61.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 86.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 13.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 94.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 5.9 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 41.2 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 5 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 5.3 0.0 94.7 3.9 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 0.34 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 10.5 10.5 78.9 3.7 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 10.5 89.5 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 10.5 26.3 63.2 3.5 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 5.3 21.1 73.7 3.7 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 5.3 21.1 73.7 3.7 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 10.5 15.8 73.7 3.6 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 10.5 42.1 47.4 3.4 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 11.1 5.6 83.3 3.7 0.67 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 751 402L1 RESEARCH DESIGN & IMPLE- MENTATION IN SW PRACT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, Lisa % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 79.2 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 401L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Byars, Lauretta F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 69.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 23.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 13 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 1 7.7 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 23.1 Studies Program 2 15.4 2 hours 7 53.8 Required by my major 11 84.6 3 hours 1 7.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 7.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 6.7 33.3 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 21.4 42.9 35.7 0.0 2.1 0.77 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 7.1 7.1 71.4 14.3 2.9 0.73 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 35.7 57.1 0.0 2.5 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 7.1 0.0 92.9 0.0 2.9 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 13.3 53.3 33.3 0.0 2.2 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 7.1 42.9 35.7 14.3 2.6 0.85 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 7.1 57.1 28.6 7.1 2.4 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 7.1 7.1 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.66 11. Was available for consultation 11 9.1 27.3 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.69 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 13.3 26.7 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 33.3 60.0 6.7 2.7 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 2.9 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 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 13 0.0 53.8 46.2 0.0 2.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 13.3 73.3 6.7 2.8 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 20.0 46.7 26.7 6.7 2.2 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 15.4 61.5 23.1 0.0 2.1 0.64 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 401L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Byars, Lauretta F % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 93.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 322 002L1 SOC WRK & SOCIAL WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = COOPER, ROBERT J. II SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 36.4 Junior 7 63.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 36.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 45.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 27.3 Required by my major 10 90.9 3 hours 2 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 9.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 15.4 30.8 53.8 3.4 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 15.4 38.5 46.2 3.3 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 8.3 16.7 16.7 58.3 3.3 1.06 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 15.4 23.1 61.5 3.5 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.66 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 0.0 33.3 58.3 3.4 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 322 002L1 SOC WRK & SOCIAL WELFARE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = COOPER, ROBERT J. II % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 86.7 % 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 601 203L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cassidy, Shelagh SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 100.0 Sophomore 1 5.3 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 18 94.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 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 16.7 Studies Program 2 11.1 2 hours 6 33.3 Required by my major 16 88.9 3 hours 4 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 15.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.73 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 5.0 20.0 35.0 40.0 3.1 0.91 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 25.0 30.0 45.0 3.2 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 15.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 15.0 45.0 40.0 3.3 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 5.0 20.0 30.0 45.0 3.2 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 5.6 22.2 33.3 38.9 3.1 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = SW 601 203L1 SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cassidy, Shelagh % % 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 20 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 701 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 88.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 11.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 17 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 17.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 52.9 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 23.5 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 0.0 29.4 64.7 3.5 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 17.6 76.5 3.7 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 5.9 5.9 29.4 58.8 3.4 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 0.0 17.6 76.5 3.6 0.79 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 701 402L1 ADVANCED GENERALIST SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 89.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 002L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 88.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 11.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 17 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 17.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 29.4 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 35.3 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 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 5.9 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 0.0 33.3 61.1 3.5 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 5.6 94.4 3.9 0.24 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 720 002L1 SW PERSPECTIVES ON HUMAN AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 21 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 740 001O1 ADVANCED GRADUATE EDUCATIONAL PRACTICUM I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 2 16.7 Required by my major 11 91.7 3 hours 1 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 9 75.0 % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 7.7 0.0 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 7.7 0.0 38.5 53.8 3.4 0.87 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 740 001O1 ADVANCED GRADUATE EDUCATIONAL PRACTICUM I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chima, Felix O. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 28. Guided student report preparation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 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 = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 92.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 722 201L1 SOCIAL WORK PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOPATHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, James J. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 73.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 93.8 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.3 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 14 87.5 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.3 4 - 5 hours 5 31.3 6 - 7 hours 2 12.5 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 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 62.5 3.6 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 6.3 18.8 75.0 3.7 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 0.0 31.3 68.8 3.7 0.48 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 0.34 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DATA Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Fall 1998 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work DEPARTMENT = Social Work FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = SW 722 201L1 SOCIAL WORK PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOPATHOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Clark, James 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 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.