****************************************************************************** * * * 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 495 001L1 EXPERIMENTAL METHODS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chappell, Joseph ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 58.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 8.3 Senior 13 100.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 7.7 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 3 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 38.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 4 30.8 % % 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 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 23.1 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 15.4 15.4 61.5 7.7 2.6 0.87 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 46.2 7.7 46.2 3.0 1.00 % % % % 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 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48. % % 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 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 33. Amount of work appropriate 13 7.7 30.8 53.8 7.7 2.6 0.77 34. Instructor explained expectations 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 35. Instructor helped with my problems 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 360 001L1 GENETICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pfeiffer, Todd W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 22.2 Sophomore 7 38.9 B 7 38.9 Junior 8 44.4 C 6 33.3 Senior 3 16.7 D 1 5.6 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 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 17 94.4 3 hours 4 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.6 4 - 5 hours 4 22.2 6 - 7 hours 2 11.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 5.6 5.6 61.1 27.8 3.1 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 11.1 72.2 11.1 2.9 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 16.7 72.2 11.1 2.9 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 81.3 18.8 3.2 0.40 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 5.9 47.1 29.4 17.6 2.6 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 11.1 61.1 27.8 3.2 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 16.7 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.68. % % 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 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 0.0 3.4 0.61 38. Question 38 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 3.3 0.69 39. Question 39 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 3.3 0.69 40. Question 40 18 11.1 38.9 22.2 27.8 0.0 2.7 1.03 41. Question 41 18 44.4 27.8 16.7 11.1 0.0 1.9 1.06 42. Question 42 18 33.3 38.9 27.8 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.80 43. Question 43 18 44.4 27.8 16.7 11.1 0.0 1.9 1.06 44. Question 44 18 16.7 11.1 50.0 22.2 0.0 2.8 1.00 45. Question 45 18 66.7 22.2 11.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.70 46. Question 46 17 23.5 29.4 23.5 23.5 0.0 2.5 1.12 47. Question 47 9 11.1 11.1 33.3 44.4 0.0 3.1 . 48. Question 48 16 12.5 37.5 18.8 31.3 0.0 2.7 1.08 49. Question 49 18 11.1 11.1 22.2 27.8 27.8 3.5 1.34 Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 78.3 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 401 001L1 TECHNICAL WRITING AND PRESENTATIONS IN BIOTECH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schardl, Christopher L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 3 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 50.0 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 3 50.0 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 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 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . % % % % 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 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . . % % 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 88.9 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 303 001L1 MICROECONOMIC CONCEPTS IN AG ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 36.0 Sophomore 2 8.0 B 8 32.0 Junior 14 56.0 C 7 28.0 Senior 9 36.0 D 1 4.0 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 12 48.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 16.0 Required by my major 22 88.0 3 hours 7 28.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 12.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 3.7 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 11.1 29.6 51.9 7.4 2.6 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 7.4 63.0 29.6 3.2 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 11.1 51.9 37.0 3.3 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 14.8 51.9 33.3 3.2 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 18.5 63.0 18.5 3.0 0.62 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 27 0.0 3.7 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 14.8 55.6 25.9 3.0 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 7.4 66.7 25.9 3.2 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 17.4 60.9 21.7 3.0 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 7.4 63.0 29.6 3.2 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 3.8 23.1 57.7 15.4 2.8 0.73 % % % % 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 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 18.5 55.6 25.9 3.1 0.68. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 54 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 001L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dillon, Carl ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 33.3 Sophomore 1 11.1 B 4 44.4 Junior 4 44.4 C 2 22.2 Senior 4 44.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 44.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 7 77.8 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 2 22.2 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 11.1 11.1 77.8 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 11.1 11.1 77.8 3.7 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 47.4 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 002L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dillon, Carl ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 23.5 Sophomore 1 5.9 B 7 41.2 Junior 8 47.1 C 4 23.5 Senior 8 47.1 D 2 11.8 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 1 5.9 2 hours 10 58.8 Required by my major 14 82.4 3 hours 5 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 2 11.8 4 - 5 hours 2 11.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 10.0 55.0 35.0 3.3 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 10.0 5.0 30.0 55.0 3.3 0.98 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 11.1 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 10.0 20.0 35.0 35.0 3.0 1.00 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 15.0 35.0 50.0 3.4 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 5.0 25.0 65.0 3.5 0.83. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 20 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 661 001L1 PROGRAMMING MODELS AEC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dillon, Carl ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 60.0 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 1 20.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 4 80.0 % % 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 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 653 401L1 LOCAL ECON DEVELOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freshwater, David ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 56.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 43.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 16 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 6.7 2 hours 3 18.8 Required by my major 2 13.3 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 12 80.0 4 - 5 hours 6 37.5 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 1 6.3 % % 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 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 2.9 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 6.3 18.8 37.5 37.5 3.1 0.93 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 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 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 13.3 33.3 53.3 3.4 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 18.8 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 18.8 56.3 25.0 3.1 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 18.8 43.8 37.5 3.2 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 17 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 94.1 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = AEC 300 001L1 TOPS AEC:ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND REGULATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gorton, William T. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 60.9 Sophomore 2 8.7 B 5 21.7 Junior 7 30.4 C 2 8.7 Senior 13 56.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 4.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 8.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 26.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 34.8 Required by my major 4 17.4 3 hours 6 26.1 Other (e.g. elective) 19 82.6 4 - 5 hours 3 13.0 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 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 4.3 39.1 56.5 3.5 0.59 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 31.8 63.6 3.6 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 30.4 60.9 3.5 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 4.5 27.3 68.2 3.6 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 8.7 34.8 56.5 3.5 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 17.4 82.6 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 4.3 0.0 21.7 73.9 3.7 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 26.1 69.6 3.7 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 4.3 26.1 69.6 3.7 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 4.3 4.3 34.8 56.5 3.4 0.79 % % % % 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 17.4 78.3 3.7 0.54 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 4.3 8.7 87.0 3.8 0.49. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 71.9 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 445G001L1 INTRO RESOURCE/ENVIR ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Infanger, Craig L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 60.0 Sophomore 2 10.0 B 7 35.0 Junior 5 25.0 C 1 5.0 Senior 11 55.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 10.0 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 5.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 20.0 Required by my major 16 80.0 3 hours 8 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 20.0 4 - 5 hours 6 30.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 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 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 0.0 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 5.0 15.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.61. % % 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 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 001L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 16.7 Sophomore 4 12.9 B 18 60.0 Junior 18 58.1 C 6 20.0 Senior 9 29.0 D 1 3.3 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 6.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 17 54.8 Required by my major 24 77.4 3 hours 8 25.8 Other (e.g. elective) 7 22.6 4 - 5 hours 4 12.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 33 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 11.8 55.9 32.4 3.2 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 5.9 50.0 44.1 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 0.0 67.6 32.4 3.3 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 2.9 64.7 32.4 3.3 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 2.9 67.6 29.4 3.3 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 11.8 14.7 47.1 26.5 2.9 0.95 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 33 0.0 0.0 39.4 60.6 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 33 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 0.0 39.4 60.6 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 0.0 0.0 34.4 65.6 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 33 0.0 6.1 45.5 48.5 3.4 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 33 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 0.0 0.0 51.5 48.5 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 0.0 0.0 42.4 57.6 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 3.0 39.4 57.6 3.5 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 32 3.1 9.4 37.5 50.0 3.3 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 0.0 0.0 20.6 79.4 3.8 0.41. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 002L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 29.4 Sophomore 7 41.2 B 8 47.1 Junior 5 29.4 C 4 23.5 Senior 5 29.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 31.3 Required by my major 11 68.8 3 hours 7 43.8 Other (e.g. elective) 5 31.3 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 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 20 0.0 5.0 25.0 70.0 3.7 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 10.0 35.0 55.0 3.5 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 10.0 25.0 25.0 40.0 3.0 1.05 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 38.9 55.6 3.5 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0 3.9 0.37. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 321 001L1 AG FUTURES MARKETS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Maynard, Leigh J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 36.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 50.0 Junior 10 43.5 C 1 4.5 Senior 12 52.2 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 2 9.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 27.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 36.4 Required by my major 12 57.1 3 hours 4 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 9 42.9 4 - 5 hours 3 13.6 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 24 0.0 4.2 41.7 54.2 3.5 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 5.0 10.0 65.0 20.0 3.0 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 4.2 4.2 37.5 54.2 3.4 0.78 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 4.2 33.3 62.5 3.6 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 4.2 33.3 62.5 3.6 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 4.2 33.3 62.5 3.6 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 4.2 0.0 37.5 58.3 3.5 0.72 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 4.5 31.8 63.6 3.6 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 4.2 41.7 54.2 3.5 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 17.4 47.8 34.8 3.2 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 4.2 4.2 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.75 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 4.2 4.2 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 4.2 4.2 33.3 58.3 3.5 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 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 = 45 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 53.3 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 606 001L1 ADV AGRICULTURAL MKT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Maynard, Leigh J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 88.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 4 44.4 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 3 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 62.5 25.0 12.5 2.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 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 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 646 001L1 INTERTEMP ALLOC NAT RES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pagoulatos, Angelos ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 4 80.0 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 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 532 001L1 AGRICULT & FOOD POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Skees, Jerry R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 35.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 46.4 Junior 9 32.1 C 5 17.9 Senior 14 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 17.9 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 1 3.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 28.6 Required by my major 13 46.4 3 hours 12 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 15 53.6 4 - 5 hours 3 10.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.6 8 or more hours 3 10.7 % % 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 7.1 46.4 46.4 3.4 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 10.7 46.4 42.9 3.3 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 0.0 67.9 32.1 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 3.7 44.4 51.9 3.5 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 3.6 42.9 53.6 3.5 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62 % % % % 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 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 0.0 18.5 81.5 3.8 0.40. % % 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 = 38 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 73.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 640 001L1 ADV AGRICULTURAL POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Skees, Jerry R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 81.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 9.1 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 4 36.4 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 6 54.5 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 4 36.4 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 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 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00. % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 422 001L1 AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vickner, Steven S ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 17.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 19 65.5 Junior 1 3.4 C 5 17.2 Senior 28 96.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 6.9 Studies Program 1 3.4 2 hours 5 17.2 Required by my major 28 96.6 3 hours 13 44.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 20.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.4 8 or more hours 2 6.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 6.9 10.3 62.1 20.7 3.0 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 3.3 56.7 40.0 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 29 0.0 0.0 31.0 69.0 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 10.0 43.3 46.7 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 3.3 6.7 56.7 33.3 3.2 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 3.3 3.3 40.0 53.3 3.4 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 3.3 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 10.3 34.5 55.2 3.4 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 3.3 10.0 70.0 16.7 3.0 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 3.3 6.7 23.3 66.7 3.5 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 3.3 6.7 26.7 63.3 3.5 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 33 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 483 001L1 REGIONAL ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vickner, Steven S ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 70.0 Sophomore