****************************************************************************** * * * 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 331 001L1 TRANSPORTATION ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Abu-Lebdeh, Ghassan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 65.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 31.3 Junior 18 58.1 C 1 3.1 Senior 13 41.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 9.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 18 56.3 Required by my major 32 100.0 3 hours 9 28.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.1 6 - 7 hours 1 3.1 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 34 0.0 2.9 61.8 35.3 3.3 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 32 6.3 31.3 31.3 31.3 2.9 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 2.9 11.8 52.9 32.4 3.1 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 2.9 52.9 44.1 3.4 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 8.8 47.1 44.1 3.4 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 0.0 23.5 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 55.9 44.1 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 31 0.0 0.0 58.1 41.9 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 34 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 33 0.0 9.1 57.6 33.3 3.2 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 34 0.0 8.8 50.0 41.2 3.3 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 8.0 12.0 64.0 16.0 2.9 0.78 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 2.9 67.6 29.4 3.3 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 0.0 5.9 67.6 26.5 3.2 0.54 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 33 3.0 27.3 48.5 21.2 2.9 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 33 3.0 6.1 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 33 0.0 12.1 45.5 42.4 3.3 0.68. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 38 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 89.5 % 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 2001 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 3 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 57.1 Junior 1 14.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 42.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 42.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 3 42.9 3 hours 2 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 4 57.1 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 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 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 90.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 002L1 TOPICS IN CE:LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION PLANNING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- 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 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 50.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 25.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 50.0 Required by my major 2 50.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 50.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 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 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 16.7 33.3 16.7 33.3 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 2.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 33.3 16.7 33.3 2.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . . % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors 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 8 44.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 50.0 Junior 3 16.7 C 1 5.6 Senior 15 83.3 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 7 38.9 Required by my major 17 94.4 3 hours 6 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.6 4 - 5 hours 4 22.2 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 72.2 22.2 3.2 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.38 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 5.6 61.1 33.3 3.3 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 82.4 17.6 3.2 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 72.0 % 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors 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 10 47.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 42.9 Junior 7 33.3 C 2 9.5 Senior 13 61.9 D 0 0.0 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 2 9.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 23.8 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 7 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.8 4 - 5 hours 5 23.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 9.5 % % 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 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 0.0 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 5.0 0.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.72 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 10.0 55.0 35.0 3.3 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 3.2 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 52.4 33.3 3.2 0.68 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 19.0 47.6 33.3 3.1 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50. % % 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 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 25.0 25.0 0.0 50.0 2.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 95.5 % 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 783 001L1 STRUCTURAL FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 75.0 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 5 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 25.0 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 1 20.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 4 - 5 hours 4 80.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 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 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 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 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % % % 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 2001 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 15 39.5 Sophomore 1 2.6 B 21 55.3 Junior 25 64.1 C 2 5.3 Senior 12 30.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 2.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 20.5 Required by my major 35 89.7 3 hours 12 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 4 10.3 4 - 5 hours 13 33.3 6 - 7 hours 5 12.8 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 43 4.7 0.0 58.1 37.2 3.3 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 43 0.0 2.3 51.2 46.5 3.4 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 43 0.0 2.3 51.2 46.5 3.4 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 43 2.3 2.3 60.5 34.9 3.3 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 43 2.3 0.0 55.8 41.9 3.4 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 43 2.3 0.0 65.1 32.6 3.3 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 43 0.0 2.3 62.8 34.9 3.3 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 42 0.0 9.5 69.0 21.4 3.1 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 43 0.0 9.3 53.5 37.2 3.3 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 41 0.0 2.4 29.3 68.3 3.7 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 40 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 41 0.0 0.0 48.8 51.2 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 43 2.3 7.0 39.5 51.2 3.4 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 42 2.4 0.0 47.6 50.0 3.5 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 38 0.0 10.5 65.8 23.7 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 41 0.0 2.4 68.3 29.3 3.3 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 0.0 0.0 73.2 26.8 3.3 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 42 0.0 2.4 59.5 38.1 3.4 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 40 0.0 17.5 47.5 35.0 3.2 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 43 4.7 7.0 48.8 39.5 3.2 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 42 2.4 2.4 31.0 64.3 3.6 0.67. % % 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 = 49 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 43 Percent completed = 87.8 % 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 2001 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 0 0.0 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 3 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 100.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 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 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 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 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 6 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 001S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 8 100.0 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 7 87.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 8 100.0 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 75.0 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 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 002S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 73.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 26.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 24 100.0 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 21 87.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 12.5 Required by my major 24 100.0 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 24 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.38 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 8.7 8.7 82.6 0.0 2.7 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 13.6 81.8 4.5 2.9 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 9.1 22.7 68.2 0.0 2.6 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.28 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 4.3 95.7 0.0 3.0 0.21 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 10.5 73.7 15.8 3.1 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 4.3 13.0 65.2 17.4 3.0 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 8.3 54.2 37.5 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.44 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 0.0 86.4 13.6 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 87.0 13.0 3.1 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 9.1 36.4 50.0 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 24 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 96.0 % 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 2001 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 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 27.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 12 66.7 Senior 19 100.0 D 1 5.6 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 17.6 Required by my major 19 100.0 3 hours 8 47.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 2 11.8 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 15.0 70.0 15.0 3.0 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 21.1 26.3 47.4 5.3 2.4 0.90 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 15.0 30.0 50.0 5.0 2.5 0.83 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 5.0 30.0 55.0 10.0 2.7 0.73 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 2.9 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 25.0 55.0 15.0 5.0 2.0 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 25.0 30.0 35.0 10.0 2.3 0.98 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 21.1 68.4 10.5 2.9 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 25.0 55.0 20.0 3.0 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 30.0 40.0 25.0 5.0 2.1 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 27.3 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 10.5 15.8 68.4 5.3 2.7 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 10.0 25.0 55.0 10.0 2.7 0.81 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 30.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 1.9 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 25.0 25.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 30.0 15.0 50.0 5.0 2.3 0.98. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 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 2001 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 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 36.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 9.1 Studies Program 1 9.1 2 hours 5 45.5 Required by my major 2 18.2 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 8 72.7 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 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 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 45.5 0.0 27.3 27.3 2.4 1.36 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.84 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.79 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 % % % % 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 12 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 421 001L1 CIV ENG SYSTEMS ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 34.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 46.9 Junior 1 3.1 C 6 18.8 Senior 31 96.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 3.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 9.4 Required by my major 32 100.0 3 hours 12 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 11 34.4 6 - 7 hours 5 15.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 33 0.0 12.1 66.7 21.2 3.1 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 32 34.4 25.0 28.1 12.5 2.2 1.06 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 17.6 61.8 20.6 3.0 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 14.7 67.6 17.6 3.0 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 8.8 70.6 20.6 3.1 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 2.9 11.8 67.6 17.6 3.0 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 2.9 73.5 23.5 3.2 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 2.9 17.6 61.8 17.6 2.9 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 8.8 14.7 55.9 20.6 2.9 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 2.9 55.9 41.2 3.4 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 33 3.0 18.2 57.6 21.2 3.0 0.73 12. Satisfact answered class questions 34 2.9 8.8 67.6 20.6 3.1 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 33 6.1 33.3 45.5 15.2 2.7 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 34 5.9 35.3 44.1 14.7 2.7 0.81 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 6.7 23.3 53.3 16.7 2.8 0.81 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 6.1 15.2 57.6 21.2 2.9 0.79 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 9.1 12.1 57.6 21.2 2.9 0.84 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 6.1 15.2 60.6 18.2 2.9 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 33 9.1 30.3 45.5 15.2 2.7 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 32 3.1 40.6 34.4 21.9 2.8 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 32 12.5 15.6 43.8 28.1 2.9 0.98. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 41 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 82.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 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 10 45.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 54.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 19 86.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 13.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 22.7 Required by my major 14 63.6 3 hours 10 45.5 Other (e.g. elective) 8 36.4 4 - 5 hours 7 31.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 4.5 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 0.0 59.1 40.9 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 13.6 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 18.2 54.5 22.7 3.0 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 18.2 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 9.1 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 4.5 59.1 36.4 3.3 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 4.5 13.6 59.1 22.7 3.0 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 22 9.1 31.8 40.9 18.2 2.7 0.89 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51 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 22 4.5 27.3 54.5 13.6 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 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 19.0 23.8 57.1 3.4 0.80. % % 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 = 22 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 779 001L1 ADV GEOTECHNICAL ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 100.0 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 8 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 1 12.5 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 4 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 8 or more hours 2 25.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 25.0 12.5 62.5 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 586 001L1 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hill, Christopher D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 16.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 83.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 16.7 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 2 33.3 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 2 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . % % % % 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 569 001L1 WATER RESOURCES SYS DSN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = LINGIREDDY, SRINIVASA ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 7 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 85.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 641 001L1 MECHANICS LIQ FLOW PIPES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lingireddy, Srinivasa ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 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 1 16.7 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 16.7 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 4 66.7 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 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 2001 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 120 001A1 INTRO TO CIVIL ENGINEER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mahboub, Kamyar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 33.3 A 16 88.9 Sophomore 5 27.8 B 2 11.1 Junior 3 16.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 22.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 14 77.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 22.2 Required by my major 16 88.9 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 11.1 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 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 16.7 22.2 33.3 27.8 2.7 1.07 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 7.1 28.6 35.7 28.6 2.9 0.95 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 7.7 38.5 23.1 30.8 2.8 1.01 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6