****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 506 001L1 PRODUCTIV/QUAL CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 3 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 20 83.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.2 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 54.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 25.0 Required by my major 24 100.0 3 hours 2 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 12.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 17.6 41.2 41.2 3.2 0.75 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 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 4.2 37.5 58.3 3.5 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46. % % 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 75.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 600 401L1 PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 25 89.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 7.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 3.6 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 26 92.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.6 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.6 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 46.4 Studies Program 1 3.6 2 hours 9 32.1 Required by my major 27 96.4 3 hours 3 10.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.6 6 - 7 hours 2 7.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 28 3.6 10.7 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 35.7 32.1 28.6 3.6 2.0 0.90 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 4.2 20.8 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 3.6 60.7 35.7 3.3 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 0.0 50.0 46.4 3.4 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 3.7 11.1 51.9 33.3 3.1 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 3.6 3.6 39.3 53.6 3.4 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 14.8 48.1 33.3 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 14.8 29.6 44.4 11.1 2.5 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 3.7 3.7 40.7 51.9 3.4 0.75 11. Was available for consultation 22 9.1 4.5 54.5 31.8 3.1 0.87 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 3.6 14.3 57.1 25.0 3.0 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 17.9 39.3 32.1 10.7 2.4 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 28 7.1 0.0 67.9 25.0 3.1 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 4.2 16.7 79.2 0.0 2.8 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 7.1 3.6 78.6 10.7 2.9 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 7.1 10.7 64.3 17.9 2.9 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 7.1 10.7 67.9 14.3 2.9 0.74 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 28.6 32.1 28.6 10.7 2.2 0.99 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 14.3 42.9 32.1 10.7 2.4 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 10.7 35.7 39.3 14.3 2.6 0.88. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 = 42 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 66.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 790 401S1 SP TOPS IN MGMT DIS: INTELL SYSTEMS FOR BUSIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holsapple, Clyde W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 40.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 20.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 40.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 1 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 001L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lederer, Al ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 78.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 21.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 23 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 17.4 Studies Program 4 17.4 2 hours 8 34.8 Required by my major 18 78.3 3 hours 5 21.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 5 21.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.3 % % 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 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 8.7 43.5 43.5 4.3 2.4 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 16.7 62.5 20.8 3.0 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 4.2 33.3 58.3 4.2 2.6 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 4.2 33.3 50.0 12.5 2.7 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 20.8 79.2 0.0 2.8 0.41 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 4.2 41.7 54.2 3.5 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 21 9.5 14.3 47.6 28.6 3.0 0.92 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 16.7 62.5 20.8 3.0 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 33.3 54.2 12.5 2.8 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 24 4.2 4.2 45.8 45.8 3.3 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 17.4 73.9 4.3 2.8 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 17.4 69.6 13.0 3.0 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 41.7 54.2 4.2 2.6 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 29.2 54.2 16.7 2.9 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 26.1 65.2 8.7 2.8 0.58. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 82.8 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 002L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lederer, Al ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 57.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 42.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 26 100.0 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 3.8 Studies Program 7 26.9 2 hours 12 46.2 Required by my major 17 65.4 3 hours 7 26.9 Other (e.g. elective) 2 7.7 4 - 5 hours 1 3.8 6 - 7 hours 4 15.4 8 or more hours 1 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 7.7 7.7 73.1 11.5 2.9 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 3.8 76.9 19.2 3.2 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 7.7 80.8 11.5 3.0 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 4.0 24.0 60.0 12.0 2.8 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 0.0 11.5 80.8 7.7 3.0 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 11.5 57.7 30.8 3.2 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 16.0 64.0 16.0 2.9 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 7.7 42.3 50.0 3.4 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 7.7 80.8 11.5 3.0 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 0.0 80.8 19.2 3.2 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 12.0 20.0 44.0 24.0 2.8 0.96 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 0.0 23.1 65.4 11.5 2.9 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 0.0 11.5 69.2 19.2 3.1 0.56. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . % 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 = 26 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 83.9 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 620 401L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS IN DECISION MAKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lederer, Al ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 4.3 A 17 77.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 22.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 22 95.7 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 5 22.7 Studies Program 3 13.6 2 hours 8 36.4 Required by my major 18 81.8 3 hours 3 13.6 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.5 4 - 5 hours 5 22.7 6 - 7 hours 1 4.5 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 22 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 0.0 27.3 59.1 13.6 2.9 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 22.7 50.0 27.3 3.0 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 18.2 59.1 22.7 3.0 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 13.6 68.2 18.2 3.0 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 9.1 13.6 54.5 22.7 2.9 0.87 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 4.8 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 27.3 54.5 13.6 2.8 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 22 4.5 4.5 36.4 54.5 3.4 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 13.6 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 22.7 50.0 27.3 3.0 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 4.5 40.9 27.3 27.3 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 23 0.0 34.8 47.8 17.4 2.8 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 4.3 30.4 47.8 17.4 2.8 0.80. % % 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 = 28 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 82.1 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 001L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 27.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 45.5 Junior 7 31.8 C 5 22.7 Senior 15 68.2 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 4.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 31.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 36.4 Required by my major 13 59.1 3 hours 4 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 9 40.9 4 - 5 hours 3 13.6 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 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 8.3 8.3 70.8 12.5 2.9 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 87.0 8.7 3.0 0.37 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 4.2 12.5 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 16.7 79.2 4.2 2.9 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.28 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.38 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 16.7 79.2 4.2 2.9 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 8.3 12.5 62.5 16.7 2.9 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 4.2 0.0 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 78.3 21.7 3.2 0.42 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 4.2 79.2 16.7 3.1 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 12.5 70.8 16.7 3.0 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 30.4 65.2 0.0 2.6 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 4.3 8.7 73.9 13.0 3.0 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 4.3 4.3 82.6 8.7 3.0 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 8.3 4.2 79.2 8.3 2.9 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 16.7 25.0 50.0 8.3 2.5 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 8.3 8.3 75.0 8.3 2.8 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 4.2 12.5 54.2 29.2 3.1 0.78. % % 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 75.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 611 001L1 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTER INTEGRATED MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 100.0 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 4 80.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 20.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 2 40.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 60.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . . % % 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 71.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 001L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 24 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 16.7 Studies Program 3 13.0 2 hours 8 33.3 Required by my major 19 82.6 3 hours 7 29.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 3 12.5 6 - 7 hours 2 8.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 20.8 33.3 41.7 4.2 2.3 0.86 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 52.2 39.1 3.3 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 29.2 54.2 16.7 2.9 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 4.2 50.0 45.8 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.28 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 37.5 58.3 4.2 2.7 0.56 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.65. % % 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 = 36 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 66.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 002L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 43.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.3 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 4 25.0 Studies Program 4 25.0 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 9 56.3 3 hours 4 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 18.8 4 - 5 hours 2 12.5 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 17 5.9 5.9 76.5 11.8 2.9 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 52.9 35.3 5.9 2.4 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 12.5 68.8 18.8 3.1 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 0.0 52.9 41.2 3.3 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 73.9 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 651 401L1 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 70.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 30.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 27 90.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.3 I 0 0.0 Other 2 6.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 23.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 30.0 Required by my major 26 89.7 3 hours 8 26.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 10.3 4 - 5 hours 5 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 31 0.0 0.0 71.0 29.0 3.3 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 31.0 62.1 6.9 0.0 1.8 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 0.0 6.5 77.4 16.1 3.1 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 9.7 51.6 38.7 3.3 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 0.0 22.6 54.8 22.6 3.0 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 0.0 74.2 25.8 3.3 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 3.2 54.8 41.9 3.4 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 6.5 16.1 58.1 19.4 2.9 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 0.0 6.5 64.5 29.0 3.2 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 0.0 35.5 64.5 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 0.0 6.5 58.1 35.5 3.3 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 0.0 16.1 64.5 19.4 3.0 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 3.3 73.3 23.3 3.2 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 8.3 87.5 4.2 3.0 0.36 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 3.3 76.7 20.0 3.2 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 71.4 28.6 0.0 2.3 0.46 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 32 0.0 15.6 59.4 25.0 3.1 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 32 0.0 9.4 43.8 46.9 3.4 0.66. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 = 38 Number of forms scanned = 32 Number of forms with at least one student response = 32 Percent completed = 84.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = DIS 300 004L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Newkirk, Henry ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 31.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 51.7 Junior 3 10.3 C 4 13.8 Senior 26 89.7 D 1 3.4 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 34.5 Studies Program 2 6.9 2 hours 11 37.9 Required by my major 26 89.7 3 hours 7 24.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.4 4 - 5 hours 1 3.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 0.0 0.0 65.5 34.5 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 7.1 39.3 39.3 14.3 2.6 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 11.1 63.0 25.9 3.1 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 0.0 10.3 62.1 27.6 3.2 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 3.4 3.4 55.2 37.9 3.3 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 0.0 55.2 44.8 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 18.5 59.3 18.5 2.9 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 10.3 20.7 44.8 24.1 2.8 0.93 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 17.2 51.7 31.0 3.1 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 29 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 41.4 48.3 10.3 2.7 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 18.5 40.7 29.6 11.1 2.3 0.92 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 10.3 58.6 31.0 3.2 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 18.2 59.1 22.7 3.0 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 28.6 53.6 17.9 2.9 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 17.2 58.6 24.1 3.1 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 20.7 62.1 17.2 3.0 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 11.5 46.2 34.6 7.7 2.4 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 17.2 20.7 51.7 10.3 2.6 0.91 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 13.8 31.0 34.5 20.7 2.6 0.98. % % 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 = 43 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 67.4 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 520 001L1 ADV BUS DATA PROCSS/INFO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pakath, Ramakrishnan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 76.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 9.5 Junior 1 4.8 C 2 9.5 Senior 15 71.4 D 1 4.8 Graduate 5 23.8 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 4.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 28.6 Required by my major 17 81.0 3 hours 7 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 19.0 4 - 5 hours 6 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.8 % % 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 8.7 43.5 47.8 3.4 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 47.8 47.8 3.4 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 13.0 43.5 43.5 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 47.8 43.5 3.3 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 13.0 39.1 26.1 21.7 2.6 0.99 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 21.7 56.5 21.7 3.0 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 26.1 34.8 39.1 3.1 0.81 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 21.7 78.3 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 21.7 47.8 30.4 3.1 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 30.4 47.8 21.7 2.9 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 26.3 52.6 21.1 2.9 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 8.7 43.5 47.8 3.4 0.66 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 21.7 30.4 47.8 3.3 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 8.7 39.1 52.2 3.4 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 17.4 34.8 47.8 3.3 0.76. % % 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 37. Question 37 22 0.0 0.0 22.7 77.3 0.0 3.8 0.43 38. Question 38 22 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 0.0 3.6 0.66 39. Question 39 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 0.0 3.7 0.48 40. Question 40 22 0.0 4.5 36.4 59.1 0.0 3.5 0.60 41. Question 41 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 0.0 3.6 0.50 42. Question 42 22 0.0 9.1 31.8 59.1 0.0 3.5 0.67 43. Question 43 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 54.5 4.5 3.6 0.58 44. Question 44 22 4.5 22.7 31.8 40.9 0.0 3.1 0.92 Number of forms preslugged = 31 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 74.2 % 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 for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 790 001S1 SP TOPS IN DIS:DATA COMMUNICATION & NETWORK INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pakath, Ramakrishnan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 20.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 40.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 40. Question 40 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 3.8 . 41. Question 41 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 42. Question 42 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 3.8 . 43. Question 43 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 44. Question 44 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 002L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 28.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 64.3 Junior 1 6.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 13 86.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 6.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 7.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 53.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 7 46.7 3 hours 2 13.3 Other (e.g. elective) 8 53.3 4 - 5 hours 1 6.7 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 17 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 6.3 56.3 31.3 6.3 2.4 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 5.9 11.8 58.8 23.5 3.0 0.79 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 11.8 41.2 47.1 3.4 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 12.5 37.5 31.3 18.8 2.6 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 11.8 47.1 23.5 17.6 2.5 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 5.9 17.6 52.9 23.5 2.9 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 17.6 29.4 52.9 3.4 0.79. % % 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 53.1 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 003L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 34.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 65.2 Junior 3 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 21 87.5 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 7 29.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 37.5 Required by my major 17 70.8 3 hours 7 29.2 Other (e.g. elective) 7 29.2 4 - 5 hours 1 4.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 8.0 52.0 36.0 4.0 2.4 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 0.0 8.0 80.0 12.0 3.0 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 4.0 4.0 76.0 16.0 3.0 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 4.2 16.7 66.7 12.5 2.9 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 9.5 14.3 71.4 4.8 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 44.0 52.0 3.5 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 16.0 60.0 24.0 3.1 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 4.0 52.0 44.0 3.4 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 15.8 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.28 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 79.2 20.8 3.2 0.41 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 4.2 75.0 20.8 3.2 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 12.0 80.0 8.0 3.0 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 4.0 56.0 40.0 3.4 0.57. % % 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 = 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = B&E 309 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debin, George J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 25.0 Junior 7 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 21 75.0 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 7 25.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 12 42.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 25.0 Required by my major 2 7.1 3 hours 7 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 26 92.9 4 - 5 hours 2 7.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 31 0.0 0.0 38.7 61.3 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 3.2 9.7 48.4 38.7 3.2 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 0.0 41.9 58.1 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 0.0 0.0 29.0 71.0 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 0.0 29.0 71.0 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 17.4 39.1 43.5 3.3 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 0.0 0.0 41.9 58.1 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 3.2 16.1 80.6 3.8 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 0.0 0.0 25.8 74.2 3.7 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 0.0 0.0 38.7 61.3 3.6 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 31 0.0 3.2 38.7 58.1 3.5 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 3.4 6.9 48.3 41.4 3.3 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 0.0 35.5 64.5 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 0.0 3.2 35.5 61.3 3.6 0.56 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 0.0 0.0 25.8 74.2 3.7 0.44. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 38 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 81.6 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = B&E 300 001L1 CAREER DEVELOPMENT IN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Slone, Molly ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 92.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 14.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 12 85.7 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 1 7.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 35.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 42.9 Required by my major 3 21.4 3 hours 2 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 78.6 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 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. 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 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 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35. % % 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 = 28 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 53.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 477 001L1 LABOR ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berger, Mark C ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 41.7 Junior 2 15.4 C 1 8.3 Senior 11 84.6 D 1 8.3 Gr