****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 402L1 TOPICS IN CE:INTELLIGENT TRANSP SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Abu-Lebdeh, Ghassan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 10.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 90.0 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 10.0 2 hours 1 10.0 Required by my major 2 20.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 70.0 4 - 5 hours 2 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 20.0 8 or more hours 1 10.0 % % 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 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 4 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 2.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 50.0 40.0 10.0 2.6 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 30.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 50.0 30.0 20.0 2.7 0.82. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 525 001L1 CE APPLICATIONS OF GEOGRAPHIC INFO SYS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- 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 3 60.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 40.0 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 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 40.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 631 001L1 URB TRANSPORTATION PLAN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 20.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 20.0 2 hours 1 20.0 Required by my major 1 20.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 60.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 = 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G001L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 42.9 Junior 2 9.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 19 90.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 33.3 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 9 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.8 4 - 5 hours 4 19.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 4.8 33.3 61.9 3.6 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 3.2 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 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 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 47.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 47.8 Junior 4 17.4 C 1 4.3 Senior 19 82.6 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 3 13.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 13.0 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 8 34.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 6 26.1 6 - 7 hours 2 8.7 8 or more hours 1 4.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 13.0 60.9 26.1 3.1 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 4.5 59.1 36.4 3.3 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.54 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.54 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 8.7 65.2 26.1 3.2 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 351 001L1 INTRO ENVIRONMENTAL EGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 38.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 47.6 Junior 14 70.0 C 3 14.3 Senior 6 30.0 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 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 3 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.8 4 - 5 hours 11 52.4 6 - 7 hours 3 14.3 8 or more hours 1 4.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 9.1 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 72.7 22.7 3.2 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 40.9 36.4 22.7 2.8 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 27.3 50.0 22.7 3.0 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 9.5 42.9 42.9 4.8 2.4 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 13.6 63.6 22.7 3.1 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 9.1 18.2 72.7 3.6 0.66 11. Was available for consultation 19 5.3 5.3 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.76 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 4.5 9.1 59.1 27.3 3.1 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 40.9 22.7 31.8 2.8 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 90.9 4.5 3.0 0.31 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 81.3 12.5 3.1 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 81.0 14.3 3.1 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 4.5 68.2 27.3 3.2 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 50.0 30.0 20.0 2.7 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 4.5 27.3 31.8 36.4 3.0 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 9.1 22.7 27.3 40.9 3.0 1.02. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 68.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 699 002L1 TOPS IN CE: WATER, SANITATION, AND HEALTH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 80.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 20.0 Pass or Audit 2 40.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 40.0 3 hours 1 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 60.0 4 - 5 hours 1 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 25.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 401S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 90.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 9.1 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 63.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 25.0 41.7 33.3 3.1 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 46.2 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 402S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 90.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 9.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 100.0 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 11 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 15.4 53.8 30.8 3.2 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 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 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 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 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 86.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 351 002L1 INTRO ENVIRONMENTAL EGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Deitsch, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 27.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 17 58.6 Junior 11 37.9 C 4 13.8 Senior 17 58.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.4 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 10.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 27.6 Required by my major 29 100.0 3 hours 10 34.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 20.7 6 - 7 hours 2 6.9 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 16.7 63.3 20.0 3.0 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 3.3 73.3 23.3 3.2 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 3.3 73.3 23.3 3.2 0.48 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 3.3 63.3 33.3 3.3 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 76.7 23.3 3.2 0.43 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 3.3 23.3 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 0.0 16.7 60.0 23.3 3.1 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 9.5 71.4 19.0 3.1 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 30 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 0.0 76.7 23.3 3.2 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 3.3 73.3 23.3 3.2 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 6.7 20.0 56.7 16.7 2.8 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 3.3 10.0 70.0 16.7 3.0 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 35 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 482 001L1 ELEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 15.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 30.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 8 40.0 Senior 20 95.2 D 3 15.0 Graduate 1 4.8 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 21 100.0 3 hours 8 38.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 9 42.9 6 - 7 hours 2 9.5 8 or more hours 1 4.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 0.0 95.5 4.5 3.0 0.21 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 9.1 22.7 63.6 4.5 2.6 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 4.5 22.7 68.2 4.5 2.7 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 18.2 77.3 4.5 2.9 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 4.5 86.4 9.1 3.0 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 18.2 77.3 4.5 2.9 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 45.5 45.5 4.5 2.5 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 13.6 50.0 31.8 4.5 2.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 4.5 13.6 59.1 22.7 3.0 0.76 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 4.8 47.6 38.1 9.5 2.5 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 4.8 81.0 14.3 3.1 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 6.7 13.3 73.3 6.7 2.8 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 18.2 77.3 4.5 2.9 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 19.0 76.2 4.8 2.9 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 4.5 18.2 72.7 4.5 2.8 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 9.1 40.9 45.5 4.5 2.5 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 4.8 23.8 66.7 4.8 2.7 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 22.7 18.2 50.0 9.1 2.5 0.96. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 68.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 001A2 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 57.1 Junior 4 19.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 17 81.0 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 14.3 Studies Program 1 4.8 2 hours 10 47.6 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 5 23.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 14.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 4.5 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 68.2 31.8 3.3 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 4.5 77.3 13.6 3.0 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 4.5 77.3 18.2 3.1 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 68.2 31.8 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 84.2 15.8 3.2 0.37 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 4.5 0.0 68.2 27.3 3.2 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 18.2 72.7 4.5 2.8 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 81.8 13.6 3.1 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 11.1 83.3 5.6 2.9 0.42 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 0.0 86.4 13.6 3.1 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 4.5 77.3 18.2 3.1 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 4.5 18.2 72.7 4.5 2.8 0.61 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 9.1 77.3 13.6 3.0 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 18 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 33. Amount of work appropriate 18 0.0 5.6 83.3 11.1 3.1 0.42 34. Instructor explained expectations 18 5.6 0.0 72.2 22.2 3.1 0.68 35. Instructor helped with my problems 17 5.9 0.0 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.66 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 91.7 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 002A2 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 50.0 Junior 8 34.8 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 60.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 21.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 47.8 Required by my major 23 100.0 3 hours 5 21.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 5.0 75.0 20.0 3.2 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 85.0 15.0 3.2 0.37 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 5.0 80.0 15.0 3.1 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 5.0 0.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 17.6 58.8 23.5 3.1 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 5.0 20.0 60.0 15.0 2.9 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 4.8 9.5 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 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 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 33. Amount of work appropriate 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 34. Instructor explained expectations 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 35. Instructor helped with my problems 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 45. Question 45 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 46. Question 46 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 47. Question 47 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 48. Question 48 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 49. Question 49 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 605 001L1 NEW ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hancher, Donn E. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 44.4 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 0 0.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 3 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 7 77.8 4 - 5 hours 4 44.4 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 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 33.3 11.1 55.6 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 382 001L1 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 38.2 Junior 14 41.2 C 3 8.8 Senior 19 55.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 2.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 2.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 2.9 Required by my major 33 97.1 3 hours 14 41.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.9 4 - 5 hours 13 38.2 6 - 7 hours 2 5.9 8 or more hours 3 8.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 35 2.9 8.6 68.6 20.0 3.1 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 14.3 25.7 51.4 8.6 2.5 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 2.9 2.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 35 0.0 2.9 60.0 37.1 3.3 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 8.6 14.3 57.1 20.0 2.9 0.83 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 5.7 8.6 65.7 20.0 3.0 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 33 12.1 0.0 63.6 24.2 3.0 0.87 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 15.2 21.2 48.5 15.2 2.6 0.93 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 11.4 11.4 48.6 28.6 2.9 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 5.7 0.0 57.1 37.1 3.3 0.74 11. Was available for consultation 34 11.8 14.7 44.1 29.4 2.9 0.97 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 5.7 2.9 62.9 28.6 3.1 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 8.6 22.9 45.7 22.9 2.8 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 35 5.7 17.1 54.3 22.9 2.9 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 7.4 18.5 63.0 11.1 2.8 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 5.7 0.0 71.4 22.9 3.1 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 5.7 0.0 68.6 25.7 3.1 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 5.7 0.0 71.4 22.9 3.1 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 33 6.1 24.2 57.6 12.1 2.8 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 5.7 11.4 57.1 25.7 3.0 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 8.6 14.3 48.6 28.6 3.0 0.89. % % 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 = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 81.4 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 579 001L1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 46.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 7.1 Senior 20 69.0 D 1 3.6 Graduate 9 31.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 3.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 10.7 Required by my major 12 42.9 3 hours 11 39.3 Other (e.g. elective) 16 57.1 4 - 5 hours 10 35.7 6 - 7 hours 2 7.1 8 or more hours 1 3.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 31 0.0 3.2 71.0 25.8 3.2 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 3.2 0.0 48.4 48.4 3.4 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 43.3 56.7 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 3.3 16.7 63.3 16.7 2.9 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 3.3 3.3 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.72 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 28 0.0 10.7 50.0 39.3 3.3 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 6.7 70.0 23.3 3.2 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 3.3 6.7 63.3 26.7 3.1 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 30 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 4.8 0.0 71.4 23.8 3.1 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 3.4 0.0 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 3.6 0.0 60.7 35.7 3.3 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 3.3 0.0 66.7 30.0 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 3.4 6.9 62.1 27.6 3.1 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 3.3 0.0 50.0 46.7 3.4 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 3.3 0.0 36.7 60.0 3.5 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 91.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 586 001L1 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harik, Issam E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 50.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 10.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 4 40.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 60.0 4 - 5 hours 4 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 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 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 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 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 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 341 001L1 FLUID MECHANICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lingireddy, Srinivasa ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 25.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 25 64.1 Junior 22 55.0 C 4 10.3 Senior 18 45.0 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 2.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 17.9 Required by my major 39 100.0 3 hours 14 35.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 12 30.8 6 - 7 hours 4 10.3 8 or more hours 1 2.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 44 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 42 28.6 33.3 28.6 9.5 2.2 0.97 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 43 0.0 4.7 74.4 20.9 3.2 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 44 0.0 2.3 59.1 38.6 3.4 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 44 0.0 0.0 65.9 34.1 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 44 0.0 4.5 65.9 29.5 3.3 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 44 2.3 4.5 65.9 27.3 3.2 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 44 2.3 36.4 59.1 2.3 2.6 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 44 0.0 20.5 56.8 22.7 3.0 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 44 0.0 0.0 52.3 47.7 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 42 0.0 2.4 57.1 40.5 3.4 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 44 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 44 2.3 11.4 65.9 20.5 3.0 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 44 0.0 15.9 68.2 15.9 3.0 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 0.0 8.8 79.4 11.8 3.0 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 43 0.0 7.0 72.1 20.9 3.1 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 44 0.0 2.3 75.0 22.7 3.2 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 44 0.0 4.5 72.7 22.7 3.2 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 44 4.5 43.2 43.2 9.1 2.6 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 42 0.0 11.9 66.7 21.4 3.1 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 41 0.0 9.8 56.1 34.1 3.2 0.62. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 53 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 44 Percent completed = 83.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 681 001L1 ADV CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mahboub, Kamyar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 100.0 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 2 28.6 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 2 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 8 or more hours 2 28.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0