****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 202 002L1 EFFECTIVE MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cramer, Walter ------------------------------------------------ SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 100.0 Sophomore 3 100.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 3 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 100.0 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 3 Number of forms scanned = 3 Number of forms with at least one student response = 3 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 & Institutional Data. ***************************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 202 003L1 EFFECTIVE MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fowler, Scott -------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 100.0 Sophomore 1 100.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 1 100.0 Studies Program 1 100.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 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 = 1 Number of forms scanned = 1 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1 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 & Institutional Data. ***************************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 302 001L1 ADVANCED TACTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fowler, Scott ---------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 25.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 25.0 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 75.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 25.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 100.0 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 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 4 Percent completed = 80.0 % 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 & Institutional Data. ***************************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 302 002L1 ADVANCED TACTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fowler, Scott ------------------------------------------ SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 100.0 Junior 1 100.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 1 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 100.0 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 1 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 = 1 Number of forms scanned = 1 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1 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 & Institutional Data. ***************************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 102 002L1 INTRO TO LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Highlander, Brian ------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 100.0 A 2 100.0 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 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 100.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 100.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 2 Number of forms scanned = 2 Number of forms with at least one student response = 2 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 & Institutional Data. ***************************************************************************************** ***************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 342 002L1 COMMAND MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Inman, Michael ----------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 100.0 4 - 5 hours 1 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 50.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 2 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 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 2 Number of forms scanned = 2 Number of forms with at least one student response = 2 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 & Institutional Data. **************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 342 401L1 COMMAND MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Inman, Michael --------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 100.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 100.0 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % 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 = 1 Percent completed = 20.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 & Institutional Data. **************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 202 001L1 EFFECTIVE MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Miller, Donald ------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 14.3 A 7 100.0 Sophomore 5 71.4 B 0 0.0 Junior 1 14.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 42.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 14.3 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 85.7 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 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 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 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 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 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 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 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 = 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 & Institutional Data. **************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 102 003L1 INTRO TO LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rankin, Harrison ------------------------------------------------ SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 66.7 A 3 100.0 Sophomore 1 33.3 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 66.7 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 100.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 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 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 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 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 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 & Institutional Data. **************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science DEPARTMENT = ROTC COURSE = AMS 102 001L1 INTRO TO LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Waters, Charles ------------------------------------------------ SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 11 68.8 A 15 93.8 Sophomore 4 25.0 B 1 6.3 Junior 1 6.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 10 62.5 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 1 6.3 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 4 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 15 93.8 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 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 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 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 16 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 6.3 12.5 31.3 50.0 3.3 0.93 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 84.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Institutional Data. **************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************