****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 406 001L1 PRODUC/INVENTORY CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 8.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 23 92.0 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 12.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 12 48.0 Required by my major 23 92.0 3 hours 6 24.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 8.0 4 - 5 hours 4 16.0 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 0.0 13.6 40.9 45.5 3.3 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 3.7 25.9 70.4 3.7 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.43 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 25.9 70.4 3.7 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 0.0 40.7 59.3 3.6 0.50 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 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 25.9 74.1 3.7 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 3.7 22.2 74.1 3.7 0.54 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 3.7 29.6 66.7 3.6 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 3.8 38.5 57.7 3.5 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 3.7 29.6 66.7 3.6 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 3.7 0.0 25.9 70.4 3.6 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 29.6 66.7 3.6 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 0.0 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 = 45 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 700 401S1 TOPS IN OPERATIONS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chung, Chen H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 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 6 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 20.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 2 50.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 1 25.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 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 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = DIS 300 001L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Frunza, Viorica ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 84.0 Sophomore 1 4.0 B 3 12.0 Junior 15 60.0 C 1 4.0 Senior 9 36.0 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 14 56.0 Studies Program 4 15.4 2 hours 4 16.0 Required by my major 21 80.8 3 hours 6 24.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.8 4 - 5 hours 1 4.0 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 29 3.4 3.4 75.9 17.2 3.1 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 24.1 34.5 31.0 10.3 2.3 0.96 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 3.4 10.3 65.5 20.7 3.0 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 3.4 6.9 41.4 48.3 3.3 0.77 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 3.4 17.2 51.7 27.6 3.0 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 11.5 69.2 19.2 3.1 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 26.1 65.2 8.7 2.8 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 6.9 24.1 58.6 10.3 2.7 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 3.6 3.6 60.7 32.1 3.2 0.69 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 31.0 24.1 34.5 10.3 2.2 1.02 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 17.9 32.1 39.3 10.7 2.4 0.92 14. Encouraged class participation 29 6.9 17.2 44.8 31.0 3.0 0.89 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 7.7 23.1 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.82 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 3.6 17.9 57.1 21.4 3.0 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 3.6 14.3 60.7 21.4 3.0 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 3.6 7.1 71.4 17.9 3.0 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 10.7 32.1 42.9 14.3 2.6 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 13.8 20.7 44.8 20.7 2.7 0.96 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 20.7 34.5 24.1 20.7 2.4 1.06. % % 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 = 54 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 53.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = DIS 300 003L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Frunza, Viorica ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 16.7 Junior 8 44.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 55.6 Studies Program 2 11.1 2 hours 4 22.2 Required by my major 16 88.9 3 hours 1 5.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.6 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 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 15.0 50.0 20.0 15.0 2.4 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 5.0 35.0 60.0 3.6 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 5.0 35.0 60.0 3.6 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 5.3 0.0 63.2 31.6 3.2 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 5.3 21.1 63.2 10.5 2.8 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 10.0 20.0 40.0 30.0 2.9 0.97 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 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 15.0 30.0 40.0 15.0 2.6 0.94 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 11.1 44.4 33.3 11.1 2.4 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 20 5.0 10.0 55.0 30.0 3.1 0.79 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 46.2 23.1 30.8 2.8 0.90 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 20.0 55.0 25.0 3.1 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 3.1 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 15.0 60.0 25.0 3.1 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 15.8 47.4 26.3 10.5 2.3 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 10.0 35.0 25.0 30.0 2.8 1.02 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 25.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.81. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 43 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 46.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 621 001L1 BUSINESS EXPERT SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holsapple, Clyde W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 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 1 11.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 33.3 Required by my major 6 60.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 4 40.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 623 401L1 BUS DECISION SUPPORT SYS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holsapple, Clyde W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 77.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 22.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 18 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 12 66.7 3 hours 4 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 6 33.3 4 - 5 hours 1 5.6 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 19 0.0 5.3 26.3 68.4 3.6 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 10.5 26.3 63.2 3.5 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 15.8 68.4 10.5 2.8 0.69 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 16 6.3 6.3 18.8 68.8 3.5 0.89 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 5.3 5.3 31.6 57.9 3.4 0.84 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 21.1 47.4 26.3 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 36.8 52.6 10.5 2.7 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 5.3 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 31.6 47.4 15.8 2.7 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 21.1 36.8 42.1 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 21.1 42.1 36.8 3.2 0.76. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 300 006L1 QUANT ANALY IN OPS MGT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 28.0 Junior 6 24.0 C 3 12.0 Senior 19 76.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 16 64.0 Studies Program 1 4.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 22 88.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 8.0 4 - 5 hours 1 4.0 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 26 7.7 15.4 57.7 19.2 2.9 0.82 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 11.1 55.6 25.9 7.4 2.3 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 3.8 15.4 69.2 11.5 2.9 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 3.7 14.8 66.7 14.8 2.9 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 14.8 22.2 51.9 11.1 2.6 0.89 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 22.2 63.0 14.8 2.9 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 11.1 40.7 40.7 7.4 2.4 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 25.9 25.9 37.0 11.1 2.3 1.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 18.5 66.7 14.8 3.0 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 11.1 70.4 18.5 3.1 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 14.8 18.5 55.6 11.1 2.6 0.88 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 33.3 40.7 18.5 7.4 2.0 0.92 14. Encouraged class participation 27 11.1 33.3 40.7 14.8 2.6 0.89 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 15.0 20.0 55.0 10.0 2.6 0.88 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 3.7 22.2 59.3 14.8 2.9 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 11.1 18.5 55.6 14.8 2.7 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 19.2 11.5 53.8 15.4 2.7 0.98 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 34.6 46.2 19.2 0.0 1.8 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 23.1 26.9 42.3 7.7 2.3 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 30.8 26.9 34.6 7.7 2.2 0.98. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 44 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 61.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 622 001L1 BUS DATA SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Post, Anita ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 70.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 30.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 20.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 80.0 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 10.0 Studies Program 1 10.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 70.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 2 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 2 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 11.1 0.0 44.4 44.4 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 1.04 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 0.94 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 8.3 58.3 25.0 3.0 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 8.3 0.0 33.3 58.3 3.4 0.90 11. Was available for consultation 12 16.7 8.3 41.7 33.3 2.9 1.08 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 8.3 0.0 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 0.0 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 0.0 55.6 33.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 50.0 3.3 0.89 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 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 = at least 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 450 001L1 DECISION ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Muralidhar, K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 47.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 26.1 Junior 1 4.3 C 5 21.7 Senior 22 95.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 4.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.3 Studies Program 1 4.3 2 hours 4 17.4 Required by my major 18 78.3 3 hours 6 26.1 Other (e.g. elective) 4 17.4 4 - 5 hours 9 39.1 6 - 7 hours 1 4.3 8 or more hours 2 8.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 26 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 35.0 20.0 40.0 5.0 2.2 0.99 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 3.8 11.5 57.7 26.9 3.1 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 19.2 50.0 30.8 3.1 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 3.8 11.5 61.5 23.1 3.0 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 0.0 65.4 34.6 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 4.0 16.0 68.0 12.0 2.9 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 3.8 23.1 61.5 11.5 2.8 0.69 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 3.8 42.3 53.8 3.5 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 3.8 11.5 73.1 11.5 2.9 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 7.7 7.7 57.7 26.9 3.0 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 26 3.8 7.7 53.8 34.6 3.2 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 0.0 76.0 24.0 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 8.0 72.0 20.0 3.1 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 8.0 68.0 24.0 3.2 0.55 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 3.8 0.0 61.5 34.6 3.3 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 11.5 11.5 53.8 23.1 2.9 0.91. % % 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 = 26 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 68.4 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 001L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pakath, Ramakrishnan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 27.8 Junior 5 27.8 C 1 5.6 Senior 13 72.2 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 2 11.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 52.9 Required by my major 13 72.2 3 hours 4 23.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 27.8 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 4.5 0.0 72.7 22.7 3.1 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 0.0 13.6 63.6 22.7 3.1 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 19.0 61.9 14.3 2.9 0.73 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 9.1 13.6 72.7 4.5 2.7 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 5.0 10.0 60.0 25.0 3.1 0.76 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 4.5 81.8 13.6 3.1 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 4.5 90.9 4.5 3.0 0.31 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 28.6 66.7 4.8 2.8 0.54 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 9.1 22.7 54.5 13.6 2.7 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 18 11.1 5.6 55.6 27.8 3.0 0.91 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 13.6 77.3 9.1 3.0 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 13.6 40.9 36.4 9.1 2.4 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 22 4.5 36.4 54.5 4.5 2.6 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 4.8 38.1 57.1 0.0 2.5 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 9.1 72.7 13.6 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 4.8 19.0 57.1 19.0 2.9 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 4.5 4.5 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 13.6 40.9 40.9 4.5 2.4 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 4.5 31.8 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.72 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 9.1 27.3 50.0 13.6 2.7 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 0.0 3.8 0.44 38. Question 38 21 4.8 0.0 33.3 61.9 0.0 3.5 0.75 39. Question 39 21 4.8 14.3 42.9 38.1 0.0 3.1 0.85 40. Question 40 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 0.0 3.2 0.70 41. Question 41 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 0.0 3.6 0.50 42. Question 42 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 0.0 3.4 0.59 43. Question 43 21 4.8 19.0 57.1 19.0 0.0 2.9 0.77 44. Question 44 21 9.5 33.3 42.9 14.3 0.0 2.6 0.86 Number of forms preslugged = 31 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 71.0 % 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 002L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pakath, Ramakrishnan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 37.5 Junior 6 37.5 C 2 12.5 Senior 10 62.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 12.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 18.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 31.3 Required by my major 9 56.3 3 hours 6 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 7 43.8 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 17 5.9 11.8 70.6 11.8 2.9 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 17.6 64.7 11.8 2.8 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 11.8 17.6 64.7 5.9 2.6 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 41.2 52.9 5.9 2.6 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 82.4 11.8 3.1 0.43 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 11.8 82.4 5.9 2.9 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 5.9 11.8 70.6 11.8 2.9 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 11.8 41.2 41.2 5.9 2.4 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 23.5 29.4 29.4 17.6 2.4 1.06 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 6.3 31.3 43.8 18.8 2.8 0.86 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 47.1 11.8 29.4 11.8 2.1 1.14 14. Encouraged class participation 16 25.0 25.0 31.3 18.8 2.4 1.09 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 6.7 33.3 46.7 13.3 2.7 0.82 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 6.3 31.3 56.3 6.3 2.6 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 6.3 43.8 37.5 12.5 2.6 0.81 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 17.6 29.4 41.2 11.8 2.5 0.94 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 41.2 11.8 29.4 17.6 2.2 1.20 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 23.5 35.3 23.5 17.6 2.4 1.06 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 23.5 41.2 11.8 23.5 2.4 1.11. % % 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 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 0.0 3.5 0.51 38. Question 38 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 0.0 3.4 0.51 39. Question 39 17 5.9 41.2 17.6 35.3 0.0 2.8 1.01 40. Question 40 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 0.0 3.1 0.60 41. Question 41 17 5.9 0.0 47.1 47.1 0.0 3.4 0.79 42. Question 42 17 11.8 17.6 41.2 29.4 0.0 2.9 0.99 43. Question 43 17 5.9 41.2 23.5 29.4 0.0 2.8 0.97 44. Question 44 17 41.2 23.5 11.8 23.5 0.0 2.2 1.24 Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 53.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 003L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 45.8 Junior 4 16.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 18 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 8.3 E/Fail 1 4.2 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 8.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 13 54.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 25.0 Required by my major 13 54.2 3 hours 2 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 45.8 4 - 5 hours 1 4.2 6 - 7 hours 1 4.2 8 or more hours 1 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 14.3 28.6 47.6 9.5 2.5 0.87 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 24 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 8.3 70.8 20.8 3.1 0.54 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 4.2 12.5 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 4.8 14.3 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.77 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 4.2 25.0 50.0 20.8 2.9 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 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 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 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 77.4 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Decision Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = DIS 320 004L1 MANAGEMENT INFO SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Santhanam, Radhika ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 54.5 Junior 2 18.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 81.8 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 63.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 5 45.5 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 54.5 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 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 27.3 54.5 9.1 2.6 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 3.6 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 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 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 27.3 54.5 18.2 2.9 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 36.4 36.4 3.1 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 3.6 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 61.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = B&E 309 401L1 INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Debin, George J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 32.1 Junior 10 37.0 C 1 3.6 Senior 17 63.0 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 4 14.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 14 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 28.6 Required by my major 4 14.3 3 hours 5 17.9 Other (e.g. elective) 24 85.7 4 - 5 hours 1 3.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 3.4 62.1 34.5 3.3 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 3.4 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 34.8 47.8 17.4 2.8 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 3.3 23.3 73.3 3.7 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 7.4 74.1 18.5 3.1 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 3.4 31.0 65.5 3.6 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 30 3.3 0.0 26.7 70.0 3.6 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 7.7 73.1 19.2 3.1 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 0.0 0.0 65.5 34.5 3.3 0.48 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 3.3 3.3 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.73. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 36 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 706 001L1 INTRO ECONOMETRICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ali, Mukhtar M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 9.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 83.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 16.7 Pass or Audit 3 27.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 41.7 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 50.0 4 - 5 hours 1 8.3 6 - 7 hours 3 25.0 8 or more hours 5 41.7 % % 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 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26. % % 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 = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 790 001L1 TIME SERIES ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ali, Mukhtar M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 12.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 12.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 37.5 3 hours 1 12.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 62.5 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 3 37.5 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 66.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ECO 499 001S1 SEM ECONOMICS: THE KENTUCKY ECONOMY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Berger, Mark C ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 91.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 8.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 12 100.0 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 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 25.0 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 5 41.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 16.7 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 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 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39. % % 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 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 28. Guided student report preparation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 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 = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 70.6 % 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 - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics DEPARTMENT = Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ECO 391 401L1 ECON & BUS STATISTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bewley, William ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 20 95.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 4.8 Junior 12 57.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 42.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 38.1 Studies Program 2 9.5 2 hours 2 9.5 Required by my major 19 90.5 3 hours 7 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 14.3 6 - 7 hours 1 4.8 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 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 4.3 17.4 43.5 34.8 3.1 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 17.4 47.8 34.8 3.2 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 4.3 4.3 39.1 52.2 3.4 0.78 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 4.3 0.0 39.1 56.5 3.5 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 4.3 47.8 47.8 3.4 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 15.0 55.0 30.0 3.2 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 17.4 56.5 26.1 3.1 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 13.0 52.2 34.8 3.2 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 13.0 47.8 39.1 3.3 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 38.1 38.1 23.8 2.9 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 4.3 47.8 47.8 3.4 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 5.3 15.8 63.2 15.8 2.9 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 17.4 60.9 21.7 3.0 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 13.0 56.5 30.4 3.2 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 47.6 38.1 9.5 2.5 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 4.3 26.1 56.5 13.0 2.8 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 4.3 13.0 47.8 34.8 3.1 0.81. % % 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 ITE