****************************************************************************** * * * 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). * * * * To view a specific course or instructor, plese use the FIND feature on * * your web browser. * * * ****************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 101 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Collins, Glenn B ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 18 72.0 A 22 88.0 Sophomore 4 16.0 B 3 12.0 Junior 3 12.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 21 84.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 16.0 Required by my major 21 84.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 16.0 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 27 0.0 0.0 18.5 81.5 3.8 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 11.5 88.5 3.9 0.33 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 19.2 80.8 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 18.5 81.5 3.8 0.40 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 8.0 56.0 36.0 3.3 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 15.0 50.0 35.0 3.2 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32. % % 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 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 = 35 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 77.1 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 201 001L1 SCIENTIFIC METHOD IN BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Houtz, Robert L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 100.0 Sophomore 10 45.5 B 0 0.0 Junior 6 27.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 27.3 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 20 95.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 4.8 Required by my major 22 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 3.8 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 11.1 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 36.4 36.4 27.3 2.9 0.83 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 4.3 34.8 60.9 3.6 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 5.0 15.0 45.0 35.0 3.1 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 0.0 63.6 31.8 3.2 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 32.0 64.0 3.6 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 16.7 45.8 37.5 3.2 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 8.0 48.0 44.0 3.4 0.64. % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 45 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 55.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 401 001L1 TECHNICAL WRITING AND PRESENTATIONS IN BIOTECH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schardl, Christopher L ----------------------------------------------------- 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 5 41.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 58.3 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 5 41.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 41.7 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 27.3 36.4 18.2 18.2 2.3 1.10 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 25.0 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.79 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. 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 16.7 25.0 25.0 33.3 2.8 1.14 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 25.0 33.3 41.7 3.2 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 25.0 33.3 41.7 3.2 0.83. % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 12.5 0.0 50.0 37.5 3.1 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 201 001L1 INTRO TO FARM & NATURAL RESOURCE FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debertin, David L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 16.7 Sophomore 2 10.5 B 13 72.2 Junior 8 42.1 C 2 11.1 Senior 9 47.4 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 11 55.0 Studies Program 2 10.0 2 hours 5 25.0 Required by my major 14 70.0 3 hours 3 15.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 20.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.0 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 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 23.8 61.9 14.3 2.9 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 4.8 57.1 33.3 3.2 0.75 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 9.5 4.8 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 9.5 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 4.8 14.3 61.9 19.0 3.0 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 0.0 71.4 23.8 3.1 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 16.7 61.1 22.2 3.1 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 10.0 75.0 15.0 3.1 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 33.3 42.9 19.0 2.8 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 4.8 9.5 61.9 23.8 3.0 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 4.8 14.3 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.77. % % 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 = 26 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 80.8 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 620 001L1 ADV PRODUCTION ECO I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debertin, David L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 100.0 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 2 40.0 Studies Program 1 20.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 2 40.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 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 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 80.0 20.0 0.0 2.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . . % % 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 445G001L1 INTRO RESOURCE/ENVIR ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fleming, Ronald ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 33.3 Sophomore 1 5.6 B 6 33.3 Junior 8 44.4 C 6 33.3 Senior 8 44.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.6 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 27.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 50.0 Required by my major 15 83.3 3 hours 3 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 16.7 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 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 21.1 42.1 21.1 15.8 2.3 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 10.5 47.4 42.1 3.3 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 5.3 0.0 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 5.3 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 31.6 26.3 31.6 2.8 1.03 14. Encouraged class participation 19 5.3 0.0 63.2 31.6 3.2 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 10.5 52.6 36.8 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 36.8 31.6 26.3 2.8 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 10.5 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.63. % % 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 82.6 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 624 001L1 ADV QUANT METHS IN AEC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fleming, Ronald ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 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 12.5 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 87.5 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 8 or more hours 4 44.4 % % 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 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 33.3 44.4 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 12.5 0.0 25.0 62.5 3.4 . % % % % 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . . % % 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 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = AEC 324 001L1 AGRICULTURAL LAW INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Foree, Robert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 33.3 Sophomore 1 4.2 B 12 50.0 Junior 4 16.7 C 3 12.5 Senior 19 79.2 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 1 4.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 16.7 Studies Program 3 12.5 2 hours 9 37.5 Required by my major 5 20.8 3 hours 9 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 16 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 4.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 23 0.0 4.3 56.5 39.1 3.3 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 13.0 56.5 30.4 3.2 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 8.7 52.2 39.1 3.3 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 17.4 82.6 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 10.5 26.3 63.2 3.5 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45. % % 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 = 35 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 68.6 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 441G001L1 AG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ibendahl, Gregory A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 66.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 22.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 33.3 Required by my major 6 66.7 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 33.3 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 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 66.7 22.2 11.1 0.0 1.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 22.2 66.7 11.1 0.0 1.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 22.2 55.6 22.2 0.0 2.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 2.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 44.4 11.1 44.4 0.0 2.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 77.8 22.2 0.0 0.0 1.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 66.7 33.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 55.6 44.4 0.0 2.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 33.3 44.4 22.2 0.0 1.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 22.2 77.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 55.6 44.4 0.0 0.0 1.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 44.4 55.6 0.0 0.0 1.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 88.9 11.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 . . % % 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 = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 52.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 001L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Isaacs, Steven ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 34.5 Sophomore 1 3.4 B 17 58.6 Junior 13 44.8 C 2 6.9 Senior 15 51.7 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 6 20.7 Studies Program 1 3.4 2 hours 15 51.7 Required by my major 26 89.7 3 hours 4 13.8 Other (e.g. elective) 2 6.9 4 - 5 hours 4 13.8 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 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 20.0 56.7 23.3 3.0 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 0.0 43.3 56.7 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 3.8 0.43 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.25 11. Was available for consultation 30 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.38 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 0.0 6.9 48.3 44.8 3.4 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 0.0 34.5 65.5 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 3.3 43.3 53.3 3.5 0.57 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.31 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.25. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 002L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Isaacs, Steven ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 70.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 8 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 10.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 10.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 50.0 Required by my major 8 80.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42. % % 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 33.3 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 101 003L1 ECO OF FOOD & AGRICUL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, Larry D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 5.7 A 12 35.3 Sophomore 9 25.7 B 19 55.9 Junior 16 45.7 C 3 8.8 Senior 8 22.9 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 25 71.4 Studies Program 30 85.7 2 hours 6 17.1 Required by my major 3 8.6 3 hours 3 8.6 Other (e.g. elective) 2 5.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 2.9 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 37 0.0 2.7 70.3 27.0 3.2 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 11.4 31.4 51.4 5.7 2.5 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 0.0 8.1 70.3 21.6 3.1 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 0.0 10.8 70.3 18.9 3.1 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 2.7 0.0 70.3 27.0 3.2 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 0.0 2.7 70.3 27.0 3.2 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 0.0 69.4 30.6 3.3 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 25.0 61.1 13.9 2.9 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 0.0 25.0 47.2 27.8 3.0 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 0.0 78.8 21.2 3.2 0.42 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 0.0 73.0 27.0 3.3 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 13.5 24.3 48.6 13.5 2.6 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 22.2 63.9 13.9 2.9 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 6.1 24.2 63.6 6.1 2.7 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 20.0 57.1 22.9 3.0 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 22.9 62.9 14.3 2.9 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 0.0 8.6 65.7 25.7 3.2 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 11.4 40.0 40.0 8.6 2.5 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 37 8.1 18.9 56.8 16.2 2.8 0.81 21. Overall quality of teaching 37 0.0 18.9 51.4 29.7 3.1 0.70. % % 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 21 9.5 28.6 42.9 19.0 2.7 0.90 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 33 3.0 9.1 72.7 15.2 3.0 0.61 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 30 0.0 16.7 73.3 10.0 2.9 0.52 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 14 0.0 21.4 57.1 21.4 3.0 0.68 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 29 17.2 27.6 44.8 10.3 2.5 0.91 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 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 47 Number of forms scanned = 37 Number of forms with at least one student response = 37 Percent completed = 78.7 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 101 004L1 ECO OF FOOD & AGRICUL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marchant, ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 30.0 A 20 66.7 Sophomore 7 23.3 B 8 26.7 Junior 12 40.0 C 2 6.7 Senior 2 6.7 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 13 43.3 Studies Program 18 60.0 2 hours 8 26.7 Required by my major 11 36.7 3 hours 8 26.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.3 4 - 5 hours 1 3.3 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 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 3.4 24.1 55.2 17.2 2.9 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 3.3 63.3 33.3 3.3 0.53 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 3.4 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 3.3 56.7 40.0 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 3.6 32.1 39.3 25.0 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 3.3 66.7 30.0 3.3 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 13.6 72.7 13.6 3.0 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 24.1 58.6 17.2 2.9 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 20.7 62.1 17.2 3.0 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 3.4 69.0 27.6 3.2 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 10.3 58.6 20.7 10.3 2.3 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 16.7 60.0 23.3 3.1 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 6.7 30.0 63.3 3.6 0.63. % % 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 21 4.8 23.8 57.1 14.3 2.8 0.75 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 26 3.8 11.5 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.66 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 23 8.7 4.3 56.5 30.4 3.1 0.85 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 22 9.1 36.4 31.8 22.7 2.7 0.95 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 = 39 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 Percent completed = 76.9 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 101 005L1 ECO OF FOOD & AGRICUL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marchant, ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 18.9 A 29 80.6 Sophomore 7 18.9 B 6 16.7 Junior 18 48.6 C 1 2.8 Senior 5 13.5 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 15 40.5 Studies Program 24 66.7 2 hours 12 32.4 Required by my major 11 30.6 3 hours 6 16.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.8 4 - 5 hours 2 5.4 6 - 7 hours 2 5.4 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 41 0.0 2.4 34.1 63.4 3.6 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 39 2.6 17.9 43.6 35.9 3.1 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 41 0.0 2.4 41.5 56.1 3.5 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 2.4 2.4 24.4 70.7 3.6 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 41 0.0 0.0 31.7 68.3 3.7 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 41 0.0 0.0 34.1 65.9 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 41 0.0 0.0 26.8 73.2 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 40 0.0 2.5 47.5 50.0 3.5 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 41 0.0 7.3 46.3 46.3 3.4 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 41 0.0 2.4 43.9 53.7 3.5 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 2.6 25.6 71.8 3.7 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 41 0.0 2.4 39.0 58.5 3.6 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 41 2.4 12.2 53.7 31.7 3.1 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 41 0.0 7.3 48.8 43.9 3.4 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 0.0 14.7 52.9 32.4 3.2 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 40 0.0 10.0 55.0 35.0 3.3 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 40 0.0 12.5 55.0 32.5 3.2 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 41 0.0 7.3 46.3 46.3 3.4 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 40 5.0 37.5 37.5 20.0 2.7 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 41 0.0 9.8 58.5 31.7 3.2 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 41 0.0 7.3 29.3 63.4 3.6 0.63. % % 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 26 0.0 15.4 53.8 30.8 3.2 0.67 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 31 0.0 9.7 54.8 35.5 3.3 0.63 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 26 3.8 19.2 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.77 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 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 = 49 Number of forms scanned = 41 Number of forms with at least one student response = 41 Percent completed = 83.7 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 300 001L1 TOPS AEC:SENIOR SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 30.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 2.8 Senior 36 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 13.9 Studies Program 2 5.6 2 hours 6 16.7 Required by my major 34 94.4 3 hours 9 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 8.3 6 - 7 hours 5 13.9 8 or more hours 8 22.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 36 0.0 2.8 38.9 58.3 3.6 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 8.8 50.0 41.2 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 2.8 8.3 41.7 47.2 3.3 0.76 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 5.6 13.9 50.0 30.6 3.1 0.83 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 2.9 5.7 34.3 57.1 3.5 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 32 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 32 0.0 0.0 40.6 59.4 3.6 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 0.0 2.9 38.2 58.8 3.6 0.56 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 3.0 42.4 54.5 3.5 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 0.0 38.2 61.8 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 0.0 10.3 31.0 58.6 3.5 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 8.6 31.4 60.0 3.5 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 2.9 20.0 77.1 3.7 0.51. % % 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 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.63 28. Guided student report preparation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 29. Students free to express opinions 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 31. Developed abil to conduct research 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 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 = 36 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 001L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 14.3 Sophomore 4 11.4 B 19 54.3 Junior 13 37.1 C 10 28.6 Senior 18 51.4 D 1 2.9 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 22.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 20.0 Required by my major 24 68.6 3 hours 12 34.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 31.4 4 - 5 hours 8 22.9 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 37 0.0 0.0 40.5 59.5 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 37 2.7 13.5 45.9 37.8 3.2 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 2.7 0.0 45.9 51.4 3.5 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 2.7 2.7 54.1 40.5 3.3 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 0.0 0.0 54.1 45.9 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 0.0 2.7 62.2 35.1 3.3 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 37 10.8 37.8 35.1 16.2 2.6 0.90 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 0.0 11.4 60.0 28.6 3.2 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 37 0.0 2.7 37.8 59.5 3.6 0.55 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 37 0.0 0.0 27.0 73.0 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 37 0.0 0.0 27.0 73.0 3.7 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 0.0 29.7 70.3 3.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 2.7 8.1 32.4 56.8 3.4 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 37 0.0 0.0 37.8 62.2 3.6 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 37 2.7 2.7 54.1 40.5 3.3 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 37 0.0 2.7 43.2 54.1 3.5 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 37 0.0 2.7 54.1 43.2 3.4 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 37 2.7 2.7 40.5 54.1 3.5 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 5.4 10.8 51.4 32.4 3.1 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 37 2.7 5.4 45.9 45.9 3.4 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 37 0.0 8.1 24.3 67.6 3.6 0.64. % % 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 = 44 Number of forms scanned = 37 Number of forms with at least one student response = 37 Percent completed = 84.1 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 311 001L1 LIVESTOCK/MEAT MARKETING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Meyer, Alphonse L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 64.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 24.0 Junior 6 24.0 C 1 4.0 Senior 19 76.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 8.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 40.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 5 20.0 3 hours 5 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 20 80.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.0 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 25 0.0 8.0 72.0 20.0 3.1 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 4.0 8.0 72.0 16.0 3.0 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 76.0 24.0 3.2 0.44 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 9.1 9.1 72.7 9.1 2.8 0.75 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 73.9 17.4 3.1 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 12.5 66.7 20.8 3.1 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 4.0 8.0 64.0 24.0 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 8.0 60.0 28.0 3.1 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 4.8 90.5 4.8 3.0 0.32 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 0.0 72.0 28.0 3.3 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.38 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 16.0 52.0 32.0 3.2 0.69. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 80.6 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 545 001L1 RESOURCE AND ENVIRON ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pagoulatos, Angelos ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 16.7 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 91.7 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 5 41.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 33.3 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 8.3 8.3 58.3 25.0 3.0 0.85 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 2.4 1.07 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.87 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 16.7 33.3 25.0 25.0 2.6 1.08 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 16.7 41.7 33.3 8.3 2.3 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 8.3 0.0 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.87 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 8.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 2.8 0.97 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 25.0 41.7 16.7 16.7 2.3 1.06 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 16.7 8.3 50.0 25.0 2.8 1.03 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 16.7 16.7 41.7 25.0 2.8 1.06 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 16.7 25.0 33.3 25.0 2.7 1.07 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 25.0 33.3 25.0 16.7 2.3 1.07 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 16.7 33.3 41.7 8.3 2.4 0.90. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 63.2 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 645 001L1 NATURAL RESOURCE ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pagoulatos, Angelos ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 90.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 10.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 90.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 10.0 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