****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 331 001L1 TRANSPORTATION ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Abu-Lebdeh, Ghassan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 26 47.3 Sophomore 1 1.8 B 22 40.0 Junior 35 62.5 C 7 12.7 Senior 20 35.7 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 10.7 Studies Program 2 3.6 2 hours 22 39.3 Required by my major 53 96.4 3 hours 21 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 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 58 3.4 6.9 72.4 17.2 3.0 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 51 11.8 15.7 62.7 9.8 2.7 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 58 3.4 3.4 72.4 20.7 3.1 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 58 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 58 3.4 10.3 69.0 17.2 3.0 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 58 0.0 5.2 72.4 22.4 3.2 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 58 5.2 6.9 72.4 15.5 3.0 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 58 8.6 27.6 50.0 13.8 2.7 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 58 6.9 13.8 67.2 12.1 2.8 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 58 5.2 6.9 74.1 13.8 3.0 0.65 11. Was available for consultation 56 7.1 5.4 60.7 26.8 3.1 0.78 12. Satisfact answered class questions 58 1.7 20.7 60.3 17.2 2.9 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 57 5.3 24.6 54.4 15.8 2.8 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 57 3.5 1.8 75.4 19.3 3.1 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 48 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 58 0.0 5.2 74.1 20.7 3.2 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 58 0.0 5.2 79.3 15.5 3.1 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 58 0.0 1.7 74.1 24.1 3.2 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 58 3.4 39.7 46.6 10.3 2.6 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 58 0.0 19.0 60.3 20.7 3.0 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 58 8.6 19.0 53.4 19.0 2.8 0.84. % % 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 = 70 Number of forms scanned = 58 Number of forms with at least one student response = 58 Percent completed = 82.9 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 635 001L1 HIGHWAY SAFETY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 12.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 87.5 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 3 37.5 Required by my major 2 25.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 62.5 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 8 or more hours 1 12.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 87.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 6 66.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 50.0 Required by my major 7 87.5 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 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 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . . % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 81.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G003A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 100.0 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 1 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 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 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . . % % 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 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 772 001L1 EXPER METHS SOIL MECHAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 80.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 3 60.0 % % 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 382 001L1 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 34.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 52.2 Junior 3 13.0 C 3 13.0 Senior 19 82.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 21.7 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 12 52.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 5 21.7 6 - 7 hours 1 4.3 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 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 56.5 34.8 3.3 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 4.3 13.0 73.9 8.7 2.9 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 17.4 65.2 17.4 3.0 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 8.7 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 40.9 45.5 13.6 2.7 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 87.5 6.3 3.0 0.37 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 87.0 13.0 3.1 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 9.1 50.0 31.8 9.1 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 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 8.7 56.5 34.8 3.3 0.62. % % 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 92.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 401S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 26 96.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 3.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 27 100.0 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 20 74.1 Studies Program 1 3.7 2 hours 3 11.1 Required by my major 26 96.3 3 hours 3 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.7 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 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 3.8 0.0 53.8 42.3 3.3 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 3.6 57.1 39.3 3.4 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 3.6 64.3 32.1 3.3 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 3.6 7.1 67.9 21.4 3.1 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 3.6 67.9 28.6 3.3 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 3.6 3.6 67.9 25.0 3.1 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 7.1 10.7 67.9 14.3 2.9 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 7.1 46.4 46.4 3.4 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 3.6 46.4 50.0 3.5 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 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 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 28. Guided student report preparation 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 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 = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 93.3 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 402S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 20 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 20.0 Junior 1 4.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 23 92.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.0 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 60.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 24.0 Required by my major 25 100.0 3 hours 4 16.0 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 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 3.7 70.4 25.9 3.2 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 7.4 74.1 18.5 3.1 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 15.4 73.1 11.5 3.0 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 7.4 70.4 22.2 3.1 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 14.8 66.7 18.5 3.0 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 11.1 59.3 29.6 3.2 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 11.1 59.3 29.6 3.2 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 61.5 34.6 3.3 0.55 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 3.8 65.4 30.8 3.3 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 7.7 65.4 26.9 3.2 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 16.0 56.0 28.0 3.1 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 7.4 63.0 25.9 3.1 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54. % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 93.1 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 003L1 TOPICS IN CE: CHEMICAL ASPECTS ENVR. ENGR. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Deitsch, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 14.3 Senior 4 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 50.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 6 75.0 3 hours 5 62.5 Other (e.g. elective) 2 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 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 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 482 001L1 ELEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 11.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 77.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 100.0 D 1 11.1 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 33.3 6 - 7 hours 3 33.3 8 or more hours 1 11.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 0.0 75.0 12.5 2.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 11.1 11.1 77.8 0.0 2.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 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 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . . % % 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 60.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 486G001L1 REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 14.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 19 70.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 4 14.8 Senior 26 96.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.7 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 2 7.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 7.4 Required by my major 20 74.1 3 hours 6 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 7 25.9 4 - 5 hours 6 22.2 6 - 7 hours 5 18.5 8 or more hours 6 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 27 0.0 0.0 81.5 18.5 3.2 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 38.5 19.2 34.6 7.7 2.1 1.03 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 14.8 22.2 55.6 7.4 2.6 0.85 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 3.8 26.9 65.4 3.8 2.7 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 3.7 85.2 11.1 3.1 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 3.7 14.8 77.8 3.7 2.8 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 81.5 14.8 3.1 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 14.8 44.4 37.0 3.7 2.3 0.78 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 34.6 34.6 26.9 3.8 2.0 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 3.8 73.1 23.1 3.2 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 37.0 51.9 11.1 2.7 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 11.1 59.3 18.5 11.1 2.3 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 27 3.7 7.4 74.1 14.8 3.0 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 20.0 75.0 5.0 2.9 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 20.0 72.0 8.0 2.9 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 24.0 68.0 8.0 2.8 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 8.0 12.0 72.0 8.0 2.8 0.71 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 12.0 48.0 32.0 8.0 2.4 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 18.5 29.6 37.0 14.8 2.5 0.98 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 37.0 33.3 18.5 11.1 2.0 1.02. % % 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 = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 001L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 41.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 58.8 Junior 4 23.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 12 70.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 23.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 58.8 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 1 5.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 5.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 5.9 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 12.5 68.8 18.8 3.1 0.57 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 11.8 47.1 41.2 3.3 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 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 = 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 002L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 40.0 Junior 5 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 50.0 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 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 50.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 3 30.0 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 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 10 10.0 20.0 50.0 20.0 2.8 0.92 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 18.2 54.5 18.2 2.8 0.87 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 36.4 45.5 18.2 2.8 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 9.1 45.5 36.4 3.1 0.94. % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 78.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 003L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 50.0 Junior 1 6.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 15 93.8 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 43.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 12.5 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 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 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 6.3 18.8 62.5 12.5 2.8 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 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 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 0.36 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52. % % 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 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . % 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 = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 69.6 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 482 002L1 ELEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 22.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 16 59.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 5 18.5 Senior 26 96.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.7 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 1 3.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 14.8 Required by my major 24 88.9 3 hours 12 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 11.1 4 - 5 hours 6 22.2 6 - 7 hours 4 14.8 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 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 0.0 59.3 40.7 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 74.1 25.9 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 11.5 69.2 19.2 3.1 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 19.2 61.5 19.2 3.0 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 17.6 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 4.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 4.0 68.0 28.0 3.2 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 4.0 32.0 52.0 12.0 2.7 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 7.4 59.3 33.3 3.3 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 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 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 = 34 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 79.4 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 505 001L1 CONSTRUCT PROJ PLAN/MGMT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hancher, Donn E. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 46.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 14 53.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 24 92.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 7.7 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 2 7.7 Studies Program 1 4.0 2 hours 12 46.2 Required by my major 13 52.0 3 hours 5 19.2 Other (e.g. elective) 11 44.0 4 - 5 hours 6 23.1 6 - 7 hours 1 3.8 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 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 3.8 34.6 46.2 15.4 2.7 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 23.1 50.0 26.9 3.0 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 0.0 40.7 59.3 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 4.2 4.2 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 3.7 44.4 51.9 3.5 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 % % % % 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 3.7 14.8 81.5 3.8 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 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 = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 84.4 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G001L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 66.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 8.3 Senior 10 90.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 9.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 33.3 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 16.7 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 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 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 15.4 30.8 38.5 15.4 2.5 0.97 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 7.7 7.7 46.2 38.5 3.2 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 7.7 7.7 61.5 23.1 3.0 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 15.4 46.2 38.5 3.2 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 86.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 62.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 25.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 7 87.5 3 hours 5 62.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 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 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 22.2 55.6 11.1 11.1 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 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 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 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 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 55.6 11.1 33.3 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 55.6 33.3 11.1 2.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 30.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82. % % 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 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 90.9 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G004L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 66.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 13.3 Senior 15 100.0 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 3 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 6 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 1 6.7 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 93.3 6.7 3.1 0.26 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 26.7 53.3 13.3 2.7 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 13.3 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 3.0 0.38 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 13.3 20.0 53.3 13.3 2.7 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 6.7 6.7 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 33.3 60.0 6.7 2.7 0.59