1****************************************************************************** * * * 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). * * * ****************************************************************************** 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 19 35.2 A 45 84.9 Sophomore 6 11.1 B 7 13.2 Junior 19 35.2 C 1 1.9 Senior 10 18.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 33 61.1 Studies Program 2 3.7 2 hours 14 25.9 Required by my major 4 7.4 3 hours 4 7.4 Other (e.g. elective) 48 88.9 4 - 5 hours 3 5.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 57 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 57 1.8 14.0 52.6 31.6 3.1 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 57 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 58 0.0 0.0 48.3 51.7 3.5 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 58 0.0 1.7 34.5 63.8 3.6 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 58 0.0 1.7 51.7 46.6 3.4 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 58 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 56 0.0 7.1 44.6 48.2 3.4 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 57 0.0 3.5 36.8 59.6 3.6 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 58 0.0 0.0 31.0 69.0 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 58 0.0 3.4 29.3 67.2 3.6 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 58 0.0 0.0 34.5 65.5 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 58 0.0 3.4 37.9 58.6 3.6 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 58 0.0 0.0 32.8 67.2 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 53 0.0 5.7 60.4 34.0 3.3 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 53 0.0 5.7 58.5 35.8 3.3 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 50 0.0 6.0 54.0 40.0 3.3 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 58 0.0 0.0 36.2 63.8 3.6 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 55 0.0 16.4 50.9 32.7 3.2 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 55 0.0 1.8 43.6 54.5 3.5 0.54 21. Overall quality of teaching 54 0.0 1.9 25.9 72.2 3.7 0.50 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Aerospace Studies % % 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 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = at least 72 Number of forms scanned = 60 Number of forms with at least one student response = 58 Percent completed = 80.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 143 7.7 A 871 47.7 Sophomore 272 14.7 B 709 38.8 Junior 438 23.7 C 198 10.8 Senior 756 40.9 D 22 1.2 Graduate 222 12.0 E/Fail 1 0.1 Professional 3 0.2 I 0 0.0 Other 13 0.7 Pass or Audit 24 1.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 402 21.9 Studies Program 198 10.8 2 hours 547 29.8 Required by my major 1,245 67.9 3 hours 440 23.9 Other (e.g. elective) 391 21.3 4 - 5 hours 271 14.7 6 - 7 hours 76 4.1 8 or more hours 102 5.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,962 0.7 4.6 53.0 41.7 3.4 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,532 5.7 19.1 49.9 25.3 2.9 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,898 1.5 6.6 57.1 34.8 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,581 1.0 6.6 54.7 37.6 3.3 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,900 2.6 6.9 53.4 37.1 3.2 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,895 1.3 5.8 57.4 35.5 3.3 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,869 2.1 8.1 53.5 36.3 3.2 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,847 1.8 11.8 53.2 33.2 3.2 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,952 3.1 10.3 50.4 36.2 3.2 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,958 0.2 1.6 38.4 59.8 3.6 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 1,827 0.3 1.9 48.8 49.0 3.5 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,959 1.0 4.3 49.9 44.8 3.4 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,947 4.0 12.6 45.7 37.8 3.2 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 1,953 1.1 5.8 43.8 49.2 3.4 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,681 1.1 10.3 58.7 30.0 3.2 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,901 1.5 7.5 56.0 35.1 3.2 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,838 1.8 11.0 56.5 30.7 3.2 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,948 1.5 4.1 51.7 42.7 3.4 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,918 4.8 19.7 45.5 30.0 3.0 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,946 4.3 11.3 47.5 36.8 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,937 3.3 9.8 38.8 48.1 3.3 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture % % 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 170 2.9 11.2 74.7 11.2 2.9 0.58 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 210 2.9 8.6 70.0 18.6 3.0 0.62 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 207 1.9 9.2 68.1 20.8 3.1 0.61 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 92 3.3 17.4 63.0 16.3 2.9 0.68 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 119 8.4 26.9 50.4 14.3 2.7 0.82 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 43 0.0 0.0 55.8 44.2 3.4 0.50 28. Guided student report preparation 41 0.0 2.4 51.2 46.3 3.4 0.55 29. Students free to express opinions 43 0.0 0.0 25.6 74.4 3.7 0.44 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 45 0.0 4.4 31.1 64.4 3.6 0.58 31. Developed abil to conduct research 37 0.0 5.4 45.9 48.6 3.4 0.60 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 234 1.7 13.2 50.0 35.0 3.2 0.72 33. Amount of work appropriate 238 4.6 6.7 53.4 35.3 3.2 0.76 34. Instructor explained expectations 239 1.3 5.9 56.1 36.8 3.3 0.63 35. Instructor helped with my problems 231 0.9 6.5 56.7 35.9 3.3 0.62 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 211 0.0 3.8 57.3 38.9 3.4 0.55 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 55 29.1 32.7 27.3 9.1 1.8 2.2 1.03 38. Question 38 58 22.4 43.1 20.7 10.3 3.4 2.3 1.04 39. Question 39 56 10.7 25.0 17.9 23.2 23.2 3.2 1.35 40. Question 40 57 8.8 21.1 28.1 24.6 17.5 3.2 1.22 41. Question 41 56 26.8 28.6 10.7 21.4 12.5 2.6 1.41 42. Question 42 57 14.0 29.8 24.6 22.8 8.8 2.8 1.20 43. Question 43 36 25.0 25.0 19.4 11.1 19.4 2.8 1.46 44. Question 44 39 30.8 17.9 28.2 23.1 0.0 2.4 1.17 45. Question 45 39 35.9 12.8 33.3 17.9 0.0 2.3 1.15 46. Question 46 24 4.2 16.7 29.2 41.7 8.3 3.3 1.01 47. Question 47 12 25.0 16.7 41.7 16.7 0.0 2.5 1.09 48. Question 48 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 2409 Number of forms scanned = 1981 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1972 Percent completed = 81.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2,644 22.3 A 4,519 38.8 Sophomore 2,278 19.2 B 5,032 43.2 Junior 2,494 21.0 C 1,616 13.9 Senior 3,215 27.1 D 204 1.8 Graduate 1,062 9.0 E/Fail 33 0.3 Professional 20 0.2 I 4 0.0 Other 149 1.3 Pass or Audit 233 2.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2,502 21.2 Studies Program 3,177 27.1 2 hours 3,066 26.0 Required by my major 5,634 48.1 3 hours 2,986 25.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2,909 24.8 4 - 5 hours 2,006 17.0 6 - 7 hours 727 6.2 8 or more hours 500 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12,694 0.6 3.0 52.2 44.2 3.4 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11,946 3.8 11.0 51.3 34.0 3.2 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11,894 1.9 8.0 54.8 35.3 3.2 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11,636 2.8 8.6 49.7 38.9 3.2 0.73 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12,410 2.4 8.4 51.0 38.1 3.2 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11,796 1.4 5.6 55.5 37.5 3.3 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12,153 2.3 8.0 52.2 37.4 3.2 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 10,872 4.1 17.1 47.9 30.9 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12,652 3.5 10.5 42.9 43.1 3.3 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12,706 0.5 1.6 32.9 65.0 3.6 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 11,350 0.9 3.6 50.2 45.3 3.4 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12,578 1.7 5.5 46.3 46.6 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12,538 5.5 15.6 40.6 38.2 3.1 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 12,427 2.6 10.8 43.6 43.0 3.3 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10,361 2.1 9.9 58.2 29.9 3.2 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11,765 2.0 9.8 55.8 32.4 3.2 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10,655 2.5 15.1 54.0 28.4 3.1 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12,345 1.7 5.3 54.8 38.2 3.3 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12,147 7.4 25.3 40.1 27.2 2.9 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12,611 3.7 13.4 45.2 37.7 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 12,548 4.2 11.4 33.2 51.2 3.3 0.83 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences % % 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 2,059 2.7 13.5 58.5 25.3 3.1 0.70 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2,830 2.9 13.4 59.9 23.9 3.0 0.70 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2,651 3.7 9.8 58.7 27.8 3.1 0.72 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1,311 2.7 8.2 51.6 37.4 3.2 0.71 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1,197 2.5 11.3 56.4 29.8 3.1 0.70 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 674 2.7 7.9 45.8 43.6 3.3 0.73 28. Guided student report preparation 708 2.0 9.2 47.5 41.4 3.3 0.71 29. Students free to express opinions 853 1.5 2.7 33.1 62.7 3.6 0.63 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 857 2.0 6.4 34.4 57.2 3.5 0.70 31. Developed abil to conduct research 720 2.4 7.5 42.8 47.4 3.4 0.72 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 485 6.6 13.4 50.9 29.1 3.0 0.83 33. Amount of work appropriate 488 4.7 9.0 57.2 29.1 3.1 0.75 34. Instructor explained expectations 487 6.2 12.1 52.2 29.6 3.1 0.81 35. Instructor helped with my problems 460 6.1 12.8 52.2 28.9 3.0 0.81 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 300 7.7 8.3 54.0 30.0 3.1 0.83 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 103 14.6 58.3 26.2 1.0 0.0 2.1 0.66 38. Question 38 118 12.7 61.0 26.3 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.61 39. Question 39 124 13.7 52.4 33.9 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.66 40. Question 40 118 4.2 33.1 62.7 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.57 41. Question 41 89 14.6 60.7 24.7 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.62 42. Question 42 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 44. Question 44 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 4.0 . 45. Question 45 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 46. Question 46 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 47. Question 47 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 48. Question 48 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 20589 Number of forms scanned = 13937 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12788 Percent completed = 62.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 61 1.6 A 1,660 44.7 Sophomore 425 11.4 B 1,555 41.9 Junior 926 24.8 C 410 11.0 Senior 1,764 47.2 D 25 0.7 Graduate 522 14.0 E/Fail 5 0.1 Professional 10 0.3 I 1 0.0 Other 30 0.8 Pass or Audit 57 1.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 748 20.0 Studies Program 90 2.4 2 hours 1,086 29.1 Required by my major 2,935 78.8 3 hours 1,056 28.3 Other (e.g. elective) 701 18.8 4 - 5 hours 593 15.9 6 - 7 hours 143 3.8 8 or more hours 107 2.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 3,910 0.3 2.1 52.6 45.0 3.4 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3,799 3.3 11.8 56.4 28.5 3.1 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3,753 1.5 6.5 53.9 38.2 3.3 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3,779 2.0 8.5 48.8 40.7 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3,877 1.1 5.9 51.0 42.0 3.3 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3,705 1.5 5.8 52.2 40.4 3.3 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3,843 0.3 2.3 49.5 47.9 3.5 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 3,557 2.8 17.7 49.7 29.8 3.1 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 3,910 2.3 9.8 44.1 43.8 3.3 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 3,910 0.2 1.0 32.9 65.9 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 3,655 0.5 1.9 47.0 50.7 3.5 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3,900 0.7 4.9 46.6 47.8 3.4 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 3,865 3.9 15.3 41.3 39.4 3.2 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 3,885 0.8 6.1 44.7 48.4 3.4 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3,196 1.4 9.8 62.3 26.5 3.1 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 3,777 1.1 7.2 57.4 34.3 3.2 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3,689 1.1 9.3 58.3 31.4 3.2 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3,859 1.0 4.1 56.7 38.2 3.3 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3,765 5.7 24.8 44.6 24.9 2.9 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 3,883 2.2 11.7 47.3 38.8 3.2 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 3,872 2.9 10.7 33.8 52.6 3.4 0.79 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Business and Economics % % 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 71 2.8 12.7 52.1 32.4 3.1 0.74 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 93 6.5 7.5 59.1 26.9 3.1 0.78 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 79 1.3 12.7 55.7 30.4 3.2 0.68 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 37 5.4 13.5 48.6 32.4 3.1 0.83 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 36 0.0 13.9 47.2 38.9 3.3 0.69 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 60 0.0 1.7 41.7 56.7 3.6 0.53 28. Guided student report preparation 65 0.0 3.1 50.8 46.2 3.4 0.56 29. Students free to express opinions 69 0.0 1.4 29.0 69.6 3.7 0.50 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 69 0.0 1.4 39.1 59.4 3.6 0.53 31. Developed abil to conduct research 62 0.0 4.8 46.8 48.4 3.4 0.59 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 26 3.8 0.0 46.2 50.0 3.4 0.70 33. Amount of work appropriate 25 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 34. Instructor explained expectations 24 0.0 4.2 37.5 58.3 3.5 0.59 35. Instructor helped with my problems 25 4.0 8.0 20.0 68.0 3.5 0.82 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 35.0 5.0 3.4 0.68 38. Question 38 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 40.0 5.0 3.4 0.75 39. Question 39 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 35.0 5.0 3.4 0.68 40. Question 40 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 45.0 5.0 3.5 0.69 41. Question 41 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 0.0 3.6 0.51 42. Question 42 19 5.3 10.5 47.4 36.8 0.0 3.2 0.83 43. Question 43 19 5.3 5.3 26.3 63.2 0.0 3.5 0.84 44. Question 44 18 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 0.0 2.7 0.84 Number of forms preslugged = at least 5746 Number of forms scanned = 3922 Number of forms with at least one student response = 3917 Percent completed = 68.2 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Communications & Info Studies SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 172 10.4 A 796 49.2 Sophomore 284 17.2 B 682 42.2 Junior 356 21.6 C 118 7.3 Senior 444 26.9 D 7 0.4 Graduate 373 22.6 E/Fail 1 0.1 Professional 10 0.6 I 4 0.2 Other 12 0.7 Pass or Audit 9 0.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 334 20.3 Studies Program 302 18.4 2 hours 431 26.2 Required by my major 760 46.4 3 hours 418 25.4 Other (e.g. elective) 575 35.1 4 - 5 hours 295 17.9 6 - 7 hours 102 6.2 8 or more hours 67 4.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,780 0.9 4.4 48.0 46.7 3.4 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,604 4.4 11.2 48.1 36.3 3.2 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,754 2.2 9.5 48.3 40.0 3.3 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,303 3.5 9.1 44.7 42.7 3.3 0.77 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,705 4.0 10.3 47.4 38.2 3.2 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,743 2.0 8.4 51.5 38.2 3.3 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,696 2.5 9.1 48.6 39.7 3.3 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,654 3.9 13.5 44.3 38.3 3.2 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,785 5.1 14.5 38.0 42.4 3.2 0.86 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,786 1.3 2.4 33.1 63.3 3.6 0.61 11. Was available for consultation 1,590 2.0 5.0 44.4 48.6 3.4 0.68 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,762 2.3 6.8 42.5 48.4 3.4 0.71 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,768 7.2 16.6 33.7 42.5 3.1 0.93 14. Encouraged class participation 1,771 2.7 8.2 39.2 49.9 3.4 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,549 3.0 7.9 53.9 35.2 3.2 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,660 2.7 9.3 49.9 38.2 3.2 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,515 2.7 15.6 48.7 32.9 3.1 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,742 2.6 5.2 47.9 44.3 3.3 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,697 7.8 20.9 37.6 33.6 3.0 0.93 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,766 5.9 13.0 37.1 43.9 3.2 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,761 7.0 14.2 29.2 49.6 3.2 0.93 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Communications & Info Studies % % 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 171 9.4 28.7 41.5 20.5 2.7 0.89 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 249 6.4 12.4 57.4 23.7 3.0 0.79 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 249 10.0 11.6 54.2 24.1 2.9 0.87 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 55 3.6 10.9 45.5 40.0 3.2 0.79 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 50 2.0 8.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.70 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 62 1.6 8.1 43.5 46.8 3.4 0.70 28. Guided student report preparation 70 2.9 7.1 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.72 29. Students free to express opinions 84 1.2 0.0 34.5 64.3 3.6 0.56 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 84 1.2 3.6 35.7 59.5 3.5 0.63 31. Developed abil to conduct research 77 1.3 6.5 53.2 39.0 3.3 0.65 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 63 3.2 11.1 38.1 47.6 3.3 0.80 33. Amount of work appropriate 63 0.0 4.8 46.0 49.2 3.4 0.59 34. Instructor explained expectations 63 1.6 3.2 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.64 35. Instructor helped with my problems 62 1.6 3.2 40.3 54.8 3.5 0.65 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 35 2.9 8.6 42.9 45.7 3.3 0.76 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 38. Question 38 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 45. Question 45 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 47. Question 47 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 2279 Number of forms scanned = 1797 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1794 Percent completed = 78.7 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 21 1.0 A 1,616 75.0 Sophomore 133 6.1 B 455 21.1 Junior 280 12.8 C 51 2.4 Senior 677 31.0 D 2 0.1 Graduate 1,006 46.1 E/Fail 1 0.0 Professional 45 2.1 I 2 0.1 Other 22 1.0 Pass or Audit 29 1.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 450 20.6 Studies Program 61 2.8 2 hours 498 22.8 Required by my major 1,593 73.6 3 hours 490 22.4 Other (e.g. elective) 511 23.6 4 - 5 hours 409 18.7 6 - 7 hours 159 7.3 8 or more hours 177 8.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 2,316 0.3 1.2 36.7 61.8 3.6 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2,054 1.7 7.0 43.9 47.4 3.4 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 2,226 0.6 3.4 44.7 51.3 3.5 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,745 0.9 4.4 43.4 51.3 3.5 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2,212 1.0 3.4 38.9 56.7 3.5 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2,234 1.5 4.2 39.7 54.6 3.5 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2,202 1.4 5.1 38.0 55.5 3.5 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 2,134 1.1 6.6 36.9 55.4 3.5 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 2,309 0.9 6.3 37.7 55.2 3.5 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 2,313 0.3 1.0 24.9 73.8 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 2,191 0.5 2.3 35.7 61.5 3.6 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 2,302 0.6 3.2 33.2 62.9 3.6 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 2,300 1.7 6.7 35.5 56.1 3.5 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 2,300 0.6 2.7 29.1 67.6 3.6 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2,116 0.6 2.8 45.7 50.9 3.5 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 2,215 0.7 3.9 44.5 50.9 3.5 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 2,131 0.8 6.5 47.4 45.3 3.4 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 2,284 0.7 2.2 39.8 57.2 3.5 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 2,246 1.8 11.6 42.2 44.4 3.3 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 2,283 1.3 6.5 33.7 58.5 3.5 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 2,273 1.2 5.8 26.7 66.3 3.6 0.66 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Education % % 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 56 1.8 1.8 51.8 44.6 3.4 0.62 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 73 2.7 2.7 53.4 41.1 3.3 0.67 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 68 0.0 4.4 50.0 45.6 3.4 0.58 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 47 0.0 12.8 46.8 40.4 3.3 0.68 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 45 2.2 4.4 48.9 44.4 3.4 0.68 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 128 3.1 4.7 36.7 55.5 3.4 0.73 28. Guided student report preparation 147 0.7 6.8 39.5 53.1 3.4 0.65 29. Students free to express opinions 161 1.9 0.6 30.4 67.1 3.6 0.60 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 159 0.6 1.9 27.7 69.8 3.7 0.55 31. Developed abil to conduct research 129 3.1 7.8 40.3 48.8 3.3 0.76 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 48 2.1 4.2 29.2 64.6 3.6 0.68 33. Amount of work appropriate 49 4.1 6.1 22.4 67.3 3.5 0.79 34. Instructor explained expectations 48 0.0 4.2 25.0 70.8 3.7 0.56 35. Instructor helped with my problems 47 2.1 2.1 25.5 70.2 3.6 0.64 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 46 0.0 4.3 28.3 67.4 3.6 0.57 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 2777 Number of forms scanned = 2341 Number of forms with at least one student response = 2322 Percent completed = 83.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 236 6.9 A 1,546 45.5 Sophomore 325 9.4 B 1,288 37.9 Junior 803 23.3 C 437 12.9 Senior 1,633 47.4 D 54 1.6 Graduate 422 12.3 E/Fail 4 0.1 Professional 4 0.1 I 2 0.1 Other 21 0.6 Pass or Audit 65 1.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 367 10.7 Studies Program 67 2.0 2 hours 556 16.3 Required by my major 2,713 79.1 3 hours 877 25.7 Other (e.g. elective) 651 19.0 4 - 5 hours 928 27.2 6 - 7 hours 378 11.1 8 or more hours 312 9.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 3,665 1.3 4.2 60.3 34.2 3.3 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3,454 8.5 16.0 52.2 23.3 2.9 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3,578 2.2 7.6 56.0 34.2 3.2 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3,360 2.6 8.1 54.8 34.6 3.2 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 3,575 3.2 10.2 54.7 31.9 3.2 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3,580 1.9 6.8 58.2 33.1 3.2 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 3,539 2.3 8.8 55.8 33.1 3.2 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 3,417 6.1 24.7 47.6 21.6 2.8 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 3,666 5.3 14.4 50.1 30.2 3.1 0.81 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 3,665 1.1 2.3 42.7 53.9 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 3,472 1.6 4.9 53.7 39.8 3.3 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3,635 2.1 8.0 55.0 34.8 3.2 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 3,616 6.9 18.6 45.9 28.7 3.0 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 3,595 3.3 14.3 51.0 31.3 3.1 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2,566 3.2 13.8 60.8 22.3 3.0 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 3,480 1.9 8.7 59.3 30.1 3.2 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3,478 1.8 9.3 58.3 30.6 3.2 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3,556 2.2 7.1 58.0 32.7 3.2 0.66 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3,479 8.4 25.0 45.7 21.0 2.8 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 3,626 5.7 14.7 47.2 32.3 3.1 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 3,614 5.9 15.6 40.5 38.1 3.1 0.87 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering % % 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 99 5.1 12.1 53.5 29.3 3.1 0.79 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 95 5.3 11.6 62.1 21.1 3.0 0.74 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 81 6.2 7.4 58.0 28.4 3.1 0.78 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 63 4.8 20.6 46.0 28.6 3.0 0.83 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 62 4.8 11.3 53.2 30.6 3.1 0.78 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 59 3.4 10.2 40.7 45.8 3.3 0.79 28. Guided student report preparation 61 4.9 3.3 49.2 42.6 3.3 0.76 29. Students free to express opinions 68 2.9 4.4 44.1 48.5 3.4 0.71 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 66 6.1 3.0 42.4 48.5 3.3 0.81 31. Developed abil to conduct research 59 5.1 18.6 42.4 33.9 3.1 0.86 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 131 4.6 9.9 51.1 34.4 3.2 0.78 33. Amount of work appropriate 129 7.0 14.0 48.1 31.0 3.0 0.86 34. Instructor explained expectations 129 6.2 7.0 56.6 30.2 3.1 0.78 35. Instructor helped with my problems 122 7.4 8.2 54.9 29.5 3.1 0.82 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 125 6.4 6.4 56.0 31.2 3.1 0.79 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 97 6.2 13.4 30.9 35.1 14.4 3.4 1.08 38. Question 38 81 11.1 12.3 34.6 35.8 6.2 3.1 1.08 39. Question 39 77 6.5 18.2 28.6 40.3 6.5 3.2 1.03 40. Question 40 37 8.1 10.8 35.1 43.2 2.7 3.2 0.98 41. Question 41 43 7.0 14.0 37.2 39.5 2.3 3.2 0.95 42. Question 42 45 4.4 8.9 33.3 53.3 0.0 3.4 0.83 43. Question 43 45 4.4 6.7 40.0 46.7 2.2 3.4 0.83 44. Question 44 45 0.0 11.1 31.1 51.1 6.7 3.5 0.79 45. Question 45 46 6.5 2.2 37.0 45.7 8.7 3.5 0.94 46. Question 46 45 6.7 11.1 22.2 51.1 8.9 3.4 1.03 47. Question 47 37 10.8 16.2 21.6 40.5 10.8 3.2 1.19 48. Question 48 30 10.0 3.3 30.0 46.7 10.0 3.4 1.07 49. Question 49 35 8.6 8.6 17.1 48.6 17.1 3.6 1.14 Number of forms preslugged = at least 5387 Number of forms scanned = 5111 Number of forms with at least one student response = 3698 Percent completed = 68.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 89 5.9 A 769 52.0 Sophomore 217 14.5 B 573 38.7 Junior 379 25.3 C 103 7.0 Senior 626 41.8 D 10 0.7 Graduate 170 11.3 E/Fail 1 0.1 Professional 4 0.3 I 0 0.0 Other 13 0.9 Pass or Audit 23 1.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 458 30.7 Studies Program 153 10.3 2 hours 424 28.4 Required by my major 1,063 71.6 3 hours 340 22.8 Other (e.g. elective) 269 18.1 4 - 5 hours 157 10.5 6 - 7 hours 58 3.9 8 or more hours 56 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 1,598 0.6 3.9 51.9 43.6 3.4 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1,465 5.6 11.9 50.7 31.8 3.1 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 1,551 2.9 9.3 56.9 30.9 3.2 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1,501 2.5 10.5 52.7 34.3 3.2 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 1,561 1.6 9.4 53.0 35.9 3.2 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 1,561 1.4 7.4 57.7 33.4 3.2 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1,564 1.6 8.0 54.3 36.1 3.2 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 1,413 3.7 19.5 47.9 28.9 3.0 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 1,588 3.8 12.2 48.9 35.1 3.2 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 1,591 0.4 2.6 42.7 54.3 3.5 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 1,437 0.9 2.9 52.6 43.6 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 1,586 1.3 6.6 50.7 41.4 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 1,573 5.8 17.9 43.1 33.1 3.0 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 1,574 2.3 10.0 47.6 40.2 3.3 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1,392 1.9 10.2 59.6 28.3 3.1 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 1,483 2.9 11.0 57.2 28.9 3.1 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 1,389 3.1 17.9 54.1 24.9 3.0 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 1,579 1.6 4.8 58.3 35.2 3.3 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 1,540 6.2 21.5 46.1 26.2 2.9 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 1,585 5.4 15.8 44.7 34.1 3.1 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 1,574 5.1 14.0 40.0 40.9 3.2 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences % % 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 146 6.2 26.7 52.1 15.1 2.8 0.78 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 198 3.5 16.7 60.1 19.7 3.0 0.71 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 195 4.1 12.3 65.1 18.5 3.0 0.69 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 118 3.4 22.0 55.1 19.5 2.9 0.74 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 96 4.2 14.6 61.5 19.8 3.0 0.72 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 29 6.9 0.0 44.8 48.3 3.3 0.81 28. Guided student report preparation 28 0.0 10.7 35.7 53.6 3.4 0.69 29. Students free to express opinions 32 9.4 3.1 28.1 59.4 3.4 0.94 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 34 5.9 2.9 38.2 52.9 3.4 0.82 31. Developed abil to conduct research 26 7.7 3.8 53.8 34.6 3.2 0.83 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 45 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.55 33. Amount of work appropriate 48 0.0 10.4 54.2 35.4 3.3 0.64 34. Instructor explained expectations 47 6.4 12.8 46.8 34.0 3.1 0.86 35. Instructor helped with my problems 44 6.8 11.4 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.85 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 40 2.5 12.5 52.5 32.5 3.2 0.74 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 2250 Number of forms scanned = 1651 Number of forms with at least one student response = 1612 Percent completed = 71.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Lexington Campus Graduate School SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 160 62.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 90 34.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 4 1.6 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 246 91.8 E/Fail 2 0.8 Professional 5 1.9 I 1 0.4 Other 17 6.3 Pass or Audit 1 0.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 27 10.2 Studies Program 6 2.3 2 hours 50 18.9 Required by my major 187 71.6 3 hours 86 32.5 Other (e.g. elective) 68 26.1 4 - 5 hours 64 24.2 6 - 7 hours 24 9.1 8 or more hours 14 5.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 286 2.1 3.8 47.2 46.9 3.4 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 251 4.4 11.6 46.6 37.5 3.2 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 279 2.5 5.4 46.6 45.5 3.4 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 232 0.4 4.7 44.8 50.0 3.4 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 276 2.2 8.3 43.8 45.7 3.3 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 280 2.1 9.3 44.6 43.9 3.3 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 280 1.8 5.7 41.8 50.7 3.4 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 268 4.1 12.3 44.8 38.8 3.2 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 283 3.2 9.9 41.7 45.2 3.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 285 0.0 1.1 27.0 71.9 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 255 1.2 2.7 42.4 53.7 3.5 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 283 1.4 6.4 37.1 55.1 3.5 0.68 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 282 2.8 13.1 39.0 45.0 3.3 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 284 1.4 3.9 34.2 60.6 3.5 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 235 0.9 3.8 57.9 37.4 3.3 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 283 2.5 4.9 47.0 45.6 3.4 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 271 3.0 6.3 54.6 36.2 3.2 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 285 2.5 5.3 45.6 46.7 3.4 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 281 7.1 13.2 47.0 32.7 3.1 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 282 2.8 12.1 35.5 49.6 3.3 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 277 5.1 12.3 27.4 55.2 3.3 0.88 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Lexington Campus Graduate School % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 16.7 0.0 16.7 66.7 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 18 5.6 16.7 38.9 38.9 3.1 0.90 28. Guided student report preparation 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79 29. Students free to express opinions 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 31. Developed abil to conduct research 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 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 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 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 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 326 Number of forms scanned = 295 Number of forms with at least one student response = 287 Percent completed = 88.0 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 11 30.6 A 27 75.0 Sophomore 9 25.0 B 7 19.4 Junior 14 38.9 C 1 2.8 Senior 2 5.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 2.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 15 41.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 12 33.3 Required by my major 2 5.6 3 hours 4 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 34 94.4 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 5 13.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 37 0.0 0.0 40.5 59.5 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 0.0 3.8 34.6 61.5 3.6 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 37 2.7 5.4 48.6 43.2 3.3 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 0.0 2.7 40.5 56.8 3.5 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 0.0 10.8 43.2 45.9 3.4 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 10.8 8.1 45.9 35.1 3.1 0.94 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 37 0.0 5.4 56.8 37.8 3.3 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 8.3 55.6 36.1 3.3 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 37 0.0 2.7 43.2 54.1 3.5 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 37 0.0 0.0 24.3 75.7 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 36 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 0.0 37.8 62.2 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 0.0 8.3 38.9 52.8 3.4 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 37 0.0 0.0 35.1 64.9 3.6 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 3.6 7.1 67.9 21.4 3.1 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 37 0.0 5.4 54.1 40.5 3.4 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 8.6 54.3 37.1 3.3 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 37 0.0 5.4 40.5 54.1 3.5 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 2.7 21.6 48.6 27.0 3.0 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 37 2.7 2.7 48.6 45.9 3.4 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 37 0.0 2.7 29.7 67.6 3.6 0.54 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Military Science % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 39 Number of forms scanned = 38 Number of forms with at least one student response = 37 Percent completed = 94.9 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 0.9 A 499 67.4 Sophomore 39 5.2 B 207 28.0 Junior 114 15.1 C 27 3.6 Senior 185 24.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 399 52.8 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 7 0.9 I 0 0.0 Other 5 0.7 Pass or Audit 7 0.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 176 23.6 Studies Program 23 3.1 2 hours 215 28.8 Required by my major 443 59.5 3 hours 189 25.3 Other (e.g. elective) 279 37.4 4 - 5 hours 109 14.6 6 - 7 hours 32 4.3 8 or more hours 26 3.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 817 0.5 2.6 40.9 56.1 3.5 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 651 2.8 9.2 45.8 42.2 3.3 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 786 1.3 5.5 49.2 44.0 3.4 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 635 1.9 3.3 43.5 51.3 3.4 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 766 1.8 5.0 43.3 49.9 3.4 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 797 1.3 5.5 44.9 48.3 3.4 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 762 2.1 6.2 43.8 47.9 3.4 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 736 2.3 6.4 41.4 49.9 3.4 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 814 1.7 6.8 40.2 51.4 3.4 0.69 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 819 0.4 0.9 27.2 71.6 3.7 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 720 1.1 5.3 36.9 56.7 3.5 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 815 0.7 2.9 34.1 62.2 3.6 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 815 1.6 6.7 37.4 54.2 3.4 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 814 0.6 2.6 31.9 64.9 3.6 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 791 0.9 3.2 46.5 49.4 3.4 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 805 1.1 4.0 44.5 50.4 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 791 0.9 6.3 46.8 46.0 3.4 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 811 1.0 3.2 44.6 51.2 3.5 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 802 2.2 12.6 40.5 44.6 3.3 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 810 2.5 8.3 33.7 55.6 3.4 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 804 1.2 7.7 27.1 63.9 3.5 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Social Work % % 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 29 0.0 3.4 44.8 51.7 3.5 0.57 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 30 0.0 6.7 43.3 50.0 3.4 0.63 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 27 3.7 0.0 29.6 66.7 3.6 0.69 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 17 5.9 0.0 35.3 58.8 3.5 0.80 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 82 1.2 4.9 48.8 45.1 3.4 0.64 28. Guided student report preparation 87 1.1 5.7 43.7 49.4 3.4 0.66 29. Students free to express opinions 99 1.0 1.0 38.4 59.6 3.6 0.57 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 97 2.1 8.2 40.2 49.5 3.4 0.73 31. Developed abil to conduct research 77 3.9 5.2 57.1 33.8 3.2 0.71 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 1055 Number of forms scanned = 824 Number of forms with at least one student response = 823 Percent completed = 78.0 % 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 from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO".