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 DEPARTMENT = ROTC 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 DEPARTMENT = ROTC % % 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 DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 88 39.3 Sophomore 13 5.8 B 104 46.4 Junior 63 27.9 C 29 12.9 Senior 105 46.5 D 1 0.4 Graduate 44 19.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.4 Pass or Audit 2 0.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 39 17.5 Studies Program 7 3.1 2 hours 68 30.5 Required by my major 153 68.0 3 hours 61 27.4 Other (e.g. elective) 65 28.9 4 - 5 hours 38 17.0 6 - 7 hours 8 3.6 8 or more hours 9 4.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 239 0.0 7.5 55.6 36.8 3.3 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 220 7.3 23.2 47.7 21.8 2.8 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 235 2.6 10.6 54.5 32.3 3.2 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 234 1.3 6.4 56.8 35.5 3.3 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 234 2.1 8.1 56.0 33.8 3.2 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 231 0.4 9.5 61.5 28.6 3.2 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 233 0.4 9.0 51.1 39.5 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 229 2.2 13.5 52.8 31.4 3.1 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 238 6.3 11.3 46.2 36.1 3.1 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 238 0.0 0.4 43.3 56.3 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 227 0.0 2.2 52.0 45.8 3.4 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 237 1.3 5.5 51.5 41.8 3.3 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 239 5.4 15.5 41.8 37.2 3.1 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 239 1.3 8.8 43.5 46.4 3.4 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 207 2.4 12.6 55.6 29.5 3.1 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 235 2.1 6.0 53.2 38.7 3.3 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 229 2.2 8.7 56.8 32.3 3.2 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 237 3.0 5.5 48.5 43.0 3.3 0.71 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 233 4.3 21.5 42.1 32.2 3.0 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 236 6.4 12.7 45.8 35.2 3.1 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 237 7.2 10.5 37.6 44.7 3.2 0.90 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural 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 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = at least 310 Number of forms scanned = 240 Number of forms with at least one student response = 240 Percent completed = 77.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Education SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 75.9 Sophomore 7 23.3 B 5 17.2 Junior 4 13.3 C 1 3.4 Senior 7 23.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 36.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.3 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 3.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 26.7 Studies Program 1 3.3 2 hours 9 30.0 Required by my major 23 76.7 3 hours 6 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 20.0 4 - 5 hours 6 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 3.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 32 0.0 6.3 40.6 53.1 3.5 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 32 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 8.3 62.5 29.2 3.2 0.59 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 6.5 64.5 29.0 3.2 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.85 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 31.8 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 32 3.1 3.1 78.1 15.6 3.1 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 32 0.0 0.0 46.9 53.1 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 0.0 3.1 43.8 53.1 3.5 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 32 0.0 9.4 56.3 34.4 3.3 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 32 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 3.3 0.0 70.0 26.7 3.2 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 32 0.0 12.5 65.6 21.9 3.1 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 32 0.0 21.9 56.3 21.9 3.0 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 32 0.0 3.1 56.3 40.6 3.4 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 32 3.1 15.6 43.8 37.5 3.2 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 32 0.0 9.4 53.1 37.5 3.3 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 32 0.0 12.5 46.9 40.6 3.3 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 36 Number of forms scanned = 32 Number of forms with at least one student response = 32 Percent completed = 88.9 % 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 = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Engineering SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 1.3 A 52 65.8 Sophomore 7 9.0 B 16 20.3 Junior 21 26.9 C 8 10.1 Senior 35 44.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 17.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 3 3.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 9 11.4 Studies Program 1 1.2 2 hours 22 27.8 Required by my major 49 61.3 3 hours 23 29.1 Other (e.g. elective) 30 37.5 4 - 5 hours 17 21.5 6 - 7 hours 5 6.3 8 or more hours 3 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 86 0.0 3.5 37.2 59.3 3.6 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 77 7.8 11.7 36.4 44.2 3.2 0.92 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 86 1.2 3.5 38.4 57.0 3.5 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 83 0.0 2.4 42.2 55.4 3.5 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 86 1.2 1.2 43.0 54.7 3.5 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 86 1.2 5.8 46.5 46.5 3.4 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 85 7.1 7.1 44.7 41.2 3.2 0.86 8. Graded assignments included comments 85 1.2 14.1 43.5 41.2 3.2 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 86 2.3 8.1 39.5 50.0 3.4 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 86 0.0 3.5 25.6 70.9 3.7 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 85 3.5 0.0 31.8 64.7 3.6 0.68 12. Satisfact answered class questions 86 1.2 1.2 32.6 65.1 3.6 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 86 2.3 4.7 39.5 53.5 3.4 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 86 0.0 1.2 36.0 62.8 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 70 0.0 7.1 44.3 48.6 3.4 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 86 0.0 2.3 39.5 58.1 3.6 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 86 0.0 2.3 44.2 53.5 3.5 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 86 0.0 4.7 30.2 65.1 3.6 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 86 3.5 10.5 41.9 44.2 3.3 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 85 1.2 7.1 31.8 60.0 3.5 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 84 0.0 9.5 28.6 61.9 3.5 0.67 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 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 = at least 111 Number of forms scanned = 87 Number of forms with at least one student response = 86 Percent completed = 77.5 % 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 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 DEPARTMENT = Agronomy SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 98 38.7 Sophomore 20 7.7 B 110 43.5 Junior 46 17.7 C 43 17.0 Senior 122 46.9 D 2 0.8 Graduate 70 26.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.8 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 46 17.8 Studies Program 10 3.9 2 hours 69 26.6 Required by my major 201 77.6 3 hours 58 22.4 Other (e.g. elective) 48 18.5 4 - 5 hours 58 22.4 6 - 7 hours 19 7.3 8 or more hours 9 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 270 0.7 3.0 57.4 38.9 3.3 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 166 4.2 21.7 50.6 23.5 2.9 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 259 1.5 10.4 58.3 29.7 3.2 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 217 1.4 12.0 55.8 30.9 3.2 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 248 2.0 7.3 56.5 34.3 3.2 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 245 1.6 4.1 62.0 32.2 3.2 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 240 2.1 6.7 56.7 34.6 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 235 1.3 8.9 59.6 30.2 3.2 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 273 3.3 11.7 50.9 34.1 3.2 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 271 0.0 0.7 37.6 61.6 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 244 0.4 2.0 47.5 50.0 3.5 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 273 0.7 6.2 51.6 41.4 3.3 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 269 4.5 13.8 50.2 31.6 3.1 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 271 0.7 7.4 51.3 40.6 3.3 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 215 0.0 11.6 65.6 22.8 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 260 1.5 9.2 55.4 33.8 3.2 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 256 2.0 9.0 61.3 27.7 3.1 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 271 1.1 5.9 59.0 33.9 3.3 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 266 4.5 19.2 48.9 27.4 3.0 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 268 6.3 14.9 44.0 34.7 3.1 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 264 3.0 12.5 42.0 42.4 3.2 0.78 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agronomy % % 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 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 32 3.1 31.3 50.0 15.6 2.8 0.75 33. Amount of work appropriate 35 20.0 17.1 48.6 14.3 2.6 0.98 34. Instructor explained expectations 35 5.7 14.3 62.9 17.1 2.9 0.74 35. Instructor helped with my problems 34 2.9 14.7 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.67 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 31 0.0 6.5 61.3 32.3 3.3 0.58 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 27 40.7 33.3 14.8 11.1 0.0 2.0 1.02 38. Question 38 27 37.0 44.4 14.8 0.0 3.7 1.9 0.93 39. Question 39 27 14.8 11.1 22.2 18.5 33.3 3.4 1.45 40. Question 40 27 18.5 22.2 25.9 7.4 25.9 3.0 1.47 41. Question 41 26 38.5 38.5 11.5 7.7 3.8 2.0 1.10 42. Question 42 27 25.9 14.8 22.2 18.5 18.5 2.9 1.48 43. Question 43 10 10.0 10.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 4.1 1.45 44. Question 44 10 50.0 0.0 10.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 1.51 45. Question 45 10 60.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 0.0 1.9 1.29 46. Question 46 10 10.0 40.0 10.0 30.0 10.0 2.9 1.29 Number of forms preslugged = at least 322 Number of forms scanned = 273 Number of forms with at least one student response = 273 Percent completed = 84.8 % 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 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 DEPARTMENT = Animal Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 1.6 A 104 41.1 Sophomore 14 5.5 B 111 43.9 Junior 76 29.9 C 31 12.3 Senior 123 48.4 D 6 2.4 Graduate 33 13.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 4 1.6 Pass or Audit 1 0.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 32 12.7 Studies Program 1 0.4 2 hours 84 33.3 Required by my major 196 77.2 3 hours 74 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 57 22.4 4 - 5 hours 45 17.9 6 - 7 hours 13 5.2 8 or more hours 4 1.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 270 0.0 1.1 47.4 51.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 201 6.0 13.9 49.8 30.3 3.0 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 267 0.4 4.9 50.2 44.6 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 257 0.4 6.2 50.6 42.8 3.4 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 269 0.7 3.7 50.6 45.0 3.4 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 270 0.7 4.4 49.3 45.6 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 270 1.5 4.8 47.4 46.3 3.4 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 262 0.8 7.6 53.4 38.2 3.3 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 268 2.2 6.7 47.0 44.0 3.3 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 269 0.0 1.1 27.9 71.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 258 0.0 1.2 36.4 62.4 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 269 0.4 1.5 43.9 54.3 3.5 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 265 1.5 9.1 47.5 41.9 3.3 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 269 0.4 4.8 43.5 51.3 3.5 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 223 0.0 8.1 63.2 28.7 3.2 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 260 0.0 3.5 59.2 37.3 3.3 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 255 0.4 6.3 58.0 35.3 3.3 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 267 0.0 0.7 50.6 48.7 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 257 1.9 16.3 47.1 34.6 3.1 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 269 0.4 6.3 45.0 48.3 3.4 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 266 1.9 4.9 31.2 62.0 3.5 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Animal 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 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 67 4.5 7.5 41.8 46.3 3.3 0.80 33. Amount of work appropriate 66 1.5 1.5 48.5 48.5 3.4 0.61 34. Instructor explained expectations 67 0.0 1.5 46.3 52.2 3.5 0.53 35. Instructor helped with my problems 65 1.5 3.1 46.2 49.2 3.4 0.64 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 64 0.0 6.3 43.8 50.0 3.4 0.61 % 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 323 Number of forms scanned = 270 Number of forms with at least one student response = 270 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 = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 5.3 A 43 45.7 Sophomore 8 8.4 B 39 41.5 Junior 16 16.8 C 8 8.5 Senior 39 41.1 D 2 2.1 Graduate 27 28.4 E/Fail 1 1.1 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 1.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 27 28.4 Studies Program 6 6.3 2 hours 23 24.2 Required by my major 39 41.1 3 hours 26 27.4 Other (e.g. elective) 50 52.6 4 - 5 hours 14 14.7 6 - 7 hours 2 2.1 8 or more hours 3 3.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 98 0.0 4.1 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 66 9.1 12.1 51.5 27.3 3.0 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 90 1.1 8.9 55.6 34.4 3.2 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 90 2.2 10.0 52.2 35.6 3.2 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 95 3.2 5.3 45.3 46.3 3.3 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 93 2.2 5.4 49.5 43.0 3.3 0.68 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 92 0.0 15.2 42.4 42.4 3.3 0.71 8. Graded assignments included comments 94 5.3 7.4 51.1 36.2 3.2 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 93 4.3 10.8 45.2 39.8 3.2 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 97 0.0 0.0 34.0 66.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 89 0.0 1.1 42.7 56.2 3.6 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 96 0.0 4.2 52.1 43.8 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 98 3.1 13.3 44.9 38.8 3.2 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 97 5.2 9.3 46.4 39.2 3.2 0.81 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 70 2.9 14.3 52.9 30.0 3.1 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 89 2.2 10.1 59.6 28.1 3.1 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 83 2.4 15.7 56.6 25.3 3.0 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 98 2.0 4.1 44.9 49.0 3.4 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 97 3.1 20.6 47.4 28.9 3.0 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 98 2.0 10.2 46.9 40.8 3.3 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 98 4.1 8.2 34.7 53.1 3.4 0.80 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Entomology % % 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 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 35. Instructor helped with my problems 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 % 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 128 Number of forms scanned = 100 Number of forms with at least one student response = 99 Percent completed = 77.3 % 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 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 DEPARTMENT = Forestry SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 27 50.9 Sophomore 1 1.8 B 24 45.3 Junior 21 37.5 C 2 3.8 Senior 27 48.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 12.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 10.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 19 33.9 Required by my major 47 83.9 3 hours 18 32.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 16.1 4 - 5 hours 5 8.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 8 14.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 64 0.0 3.1 62.5 34.4 3.3 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 57 5.3 24.6 45.6 24.6 2.9 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 62 0.0 3.2 59.7 37.1 3.3 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 0.0 4.9 56.1 39.0 3.3 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 63 0.0 1.6 71.4 27.0 3.3 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 61 0.0 8.2 67.2 24.6 3.2 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 63 1.6 11.1 65.1 22.2 3.1 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 63 0.0 12.7 57.1 30.2 3.2 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 63 1.6 3.2 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 64 0.0 0.0 45.3 54.7 3.5 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 61 0.0 3.3 54.1 42.6 3.4 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 64 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 64 0.0 10.9 50.0 39.1 3.3 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 64 0.0 1.6 42.2 56.3 3.5 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 57 0.0 14.0 66.7 19.3 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 64 0.0 6.3 60.9 32.8 3.3 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 62 0.0 6.5 71.0 22.6 3.2 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 63 0.0 0.0 60.3 39.7 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 63 1.6 19.0 50.8 28.6 3.1 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 64 0.0 4.7 56.3 39.1 3.3 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 64 0.0 7.8 51.6 40.6 3.3 0.62 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Forestry % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 40 0.0 27.5 57.5 15.0 2.9 0.65 33. Amount of work appropriate 41 0.0 4.9 75.6 19.5 3.1 0.48 34. Instructor explained expectations 41 0.0 7.3 73.2 19.5 3.1 0.51 35. Instructor helped with my problems 41 0.0 9.8 68.3 22.0 3.1 0.56 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 35 0.0 2.9 74.3 22.9 3.2 0.47 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 27 18.5 33.3 40.7 7.4 0.0 2.4 0.88 38. Question 38 30 10.0 43.3 26.7 20.0 0.0 2.6 0.94 39. Question 39 28 7.1 39.3 14.3 28.6 10.7 3.0 1.20 40. Question 40 29 0.0 20.7 31.0 41.4 6.9 3.3 0.90 41. Question 41 30 16.7 20.0 10.0 33.3 20.0 3.2 1.42 42. Question 42 30 3.3 43.3 26.7 26.7 0.0 2.8 0.90 43. Question 43 26 30.8 30.8 26.9 7.7 3.8 2.2 1.11 44. Question 44 29 24.1 24.1 34.5 17.2 0.0 2.4 1.06 45. Question 45 29 27.6 13.8 41.4 17.2 0.0 2.5 1.09 46. Question 46 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 50.0 7.1 3.6 0.63 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 76 Number of forms scanned = 65 Number of forms with at least one student response = 64 Percent completed = 84.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 128 22.9 A 314 56.9 Sophomore 162 29.0 B 179 32.4 Junior 119 21.3 C 41 7.4 Senior 147 26.3 D 5 0.9 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 0.4 Pass or Audit 13 2.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 183 33.0 Studies Program 168 30.7 2 hours 183 33.0 Required by my major 335 61.2 3 hours 118 21.3 Other (e.g. elective) 44 8.0 4 - 5 hours 44 7.9 6 - 7 hours 12 2.2 8 or more hours 14 2.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 591 0.2 3.6 55.2 41.1 3.4 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 505 5.5 20.2 49.1 25.1 2.9 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 574 1.9 4.5 60.6 32.9 3.2 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 407 1.2 5.4 57.0 36.4 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 582 2.7 6.7 53.3 37.3 3.3 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 583 0.9 3.1 60.4 35.7 3.3 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 573 0.7 4.4 56.7 38.2 3.3 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 571 0.9 10.9 49.6 38.7 3.3 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 584 2.1 9.8 52.7 35.4 3.2 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 586 0.3 2.9 45.1 51.7 3.5 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 541 0.2 1.5 54.5 43.8 3.4 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 587 1.4 4.6 50.8 43.3 3.4 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 579 6.4 13.6 44.2 35.8 3.1 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 586 1.2 4.3 37.5 57.0 3.5 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 548 1.6 8.9 52.4 37.0 3.2 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 580 2.8 7.9 54.7 34.7 3.2 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 546 2.9 14.8 51.3 31.0 3.1 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 581 2.8 4.6 52.2 40.4 3.3 0.69 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 573 9.2 25.0 41.0 24.8 2.8 0.91 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 583 7.0 13.2 50.8 29.0 3.0 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 581 2.8 8.8 39.2 49.2 3.3 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = ZAgriculture GENERAL and CEX % % 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 136 3.7 13.2 74.3 8.8 2.9 0.60 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 173 1.7 7.5 72.8 17.9 3.1 0.57 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 173 2.3 11.0 67.6 19.1 3.0 0.63 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 80 3.8 20.0 61.3 15.0 2.9 0.70 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 107 9.3 28.0 49.5 13.1 2.7 0.82 SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 28. Guided student report preparation 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 29. Students free to express opinions 22 0.0 0.0 22.7 77.3 3.8 0.43 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 31. Developed abil to conduct research 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 35. Instructor helped with my problems 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = at least 711 Number of forms scanned = 594 Number of forms with at least one student response = 593 Percent completed = 83.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 2.3 A 67 39.6 Sophomore 16 9.4 B 79 46.7 Junior 32 18.7 C 19 11.2 Senior 104 60.8 D 2 1.2 Graduate 10 5.8 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 2 1.2 I 0 0.0 Other 3 1.8 Pass or Audit 2 1.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 9.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 35 20.3 Required by my major 130 76.0 3 hours 24 14.0 Other (e.g. elective) 41 24.0 4 - 5 hours 30 17.4 6 - 7 hours 14 8.1 8 or more hours 52 30.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 188 5.9 14.4 54.8 25.0 3.0 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 125 5.6 16.8 61.6 16.0 2.9 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 170 1.8 10.0 64.1 24.1 3.1 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 104 1.9 7.7 60.6 29.8 3.2 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 175 8.6 18.9 53.1 19.4 2.8 0.84 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 172 5.8 16.3 59.9 18.0 2.9 0.75 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 165 10.3 24.8 54.5 10.3 2.6 0.80 8. Graded assignments included comments 167 6.6 21.0 56.9 15.6 2.8 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 190 5.8 16.8 47.9 29.5 3.0 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 190 1.1 2.1 37.9 58.9 3.5 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 182 0.5 3.8 54.4 41.2 3.4 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 190 2.6 6.8 53.2 37.4 3.3 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 190 3.7 14.7 41.6 40.0 3.2 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 186 1.1 7.0 48.4 43.5 3.3 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 164 0.6 11.0 68.3 20.1 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 179 0.6 11.2 58.1 30.2 3.2 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 171 1.8 14.0 60.2 24.0 3.1 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 188 1.1 5.9 52.7 40.4 3.3 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 188 1.6 17.0 47.9 33.5 3.1 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 186 3.2 12.4 52.7 31.7 3.1 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 186 6.5 16.1 45.7 31.7 3.0 0.86 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Hort. & Landscape Architecture % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 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 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 42 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 33. Amount of work appropriate 42 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 34. Instructor explained expectations 42 0.0 7.1 54.8 38.1 3.3 0.60 35. Instructor helped with my problems 38 0.0 7.9 52.6 39.5 3.3 0.62 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 33 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 % 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 225 Number of forms scanned = 195 Number of forms with at least one student response = 190 Percent completed = 84.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 2.0 A 24 48.0 Sophomore 16 32.0 B 21 42.0 Junior 14 28.0 C 5 10.0 Senior 17 34.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 20.4 Studies Program 3 6.1 2 hours 16 32.7 Required by my major 38 77.6 3 hours 14 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 8 16.3 4 - 5 hours 9 18.4 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 51 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 41 4.9 22.0 46.3 26.8 3.0 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 52 1.9 0.0 55.8 42.3 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 52 0.0 1.9 46.2 51.9 3.5 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 52 0.0 1.9 46.2 51.9 3.5 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 52 0.0 1.9 34.6 63.5 3.6 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 52 0.0 3.8 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 50 2.0 12.0 50.0 36.0 3.2 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 52 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 52 0.0 1.9 21.2 76.9 3.8 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 50 0.0 2.0 44.0 54.0 3.5 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 52 0.0 1.9 42.3 55.8 3.5 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 52 0.0 5.8 40.4 53.8 3.5 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 50 2.0 10.0 46.0 42.0 3.3 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 47 0.0 14.9 53.2 31.9 3.2 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 50 0.0 4.0 56.0 40.0 3.4 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 50 2.0 2.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 52 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 50 2.0 6.0 54.0 38.0 3.3 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 52 1.9 1.9 46.2 50.0 3.4 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 52 0.0 3.8 25.0 71.2 3.7 0.55 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant and Soil 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 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 = at least 84 Number of forms scanned = 52 Number of forms with at least one student response = 52 Percent completed = 61.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 32.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 20.0 Junior 13 52.0 C 8 32.0 Senior 7 28.0 D 4 16.0 Graduate 5 20.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 12.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 36.0 Required by my major 18 75.0 3 hours 9 36.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.0 6 - 7 hours 2 8.0 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 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 3.7 81.5 14.8 3.1 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 3.6 78.6 17.9 3.1 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 7.1 75.0 17.9 3.1 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 3.7 77.8 18.5 3.1 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 82.1 17.9 3.2 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 18.5 70.4 11.1 2.9 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 42.9 50.0 7.1 2.6 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 7.1 60.7 32.1 3.3 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 17.9 64.3 17.9 3.0 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 28 3.6 10.7 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 9.5 81.0 9.5 3.0 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 7.7 73.1 19.2 3.1 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 14.8 66.7 18.5 3.0 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 17.9 64.3 17.9 3.0 0.61 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 28.6 46.4 25.0 3.0 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 3.6 17.9 60.7 17.9 2.9 0.72 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Plant Pathology % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 33. Amount of work appropriate 21 14.3 9.5 52.4 23.8 2.9 0.96 34. Instructor explained expectations 21 4.8 4.8 76.2 14.3 3.0 0.63 35. Instructor helped with my problems 21 0.0 4.8 85.7 9.5 3.0 0.38 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 20 0.0 5.0 90.0 5.0 3.0 0.32 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 30 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 93.3 % 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 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 DEPARTMENT = Veterinary Science SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 54.5 Sophomore 8 18.2 B 16 36.4 Junior 13 29.5 C 3 6.8 Senior 23 52.3 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 1 2.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 22 50.0 Studies Program 1 2.3 2 hours 10 22.7 Required by my major 16 36.4 3 hours 9 20.5 Other (e.g. elective) 27 61.4 4 - 5 hours 3 6.8 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 45 0.0 4.4 46.7 48.9 3.4 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 44 0.0 22.7 59.1 18.2 3.0 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 0.0 9.1 47.7 43.2 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 44 0.0 2.3 45.5 52.3 3.5 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 44 6.8 6.8 38.6 47.7 3.3 0.87 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 44 0.0 2.3 45.5 52.3 3.5 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 44 0.0 0.0 52.3 47.7 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 42 0.0 9.5 61.9 28.6 3.2 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 45 0.0 6.7 62.2 31.1 3.2 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 45 0.0 2.2 37.8 60.0 3.6 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 5.7 62.9 31.4 3.3 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 45 0.0 2.2 60.0 37.8 3.4 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 45 0.0 11.1 57.8 31.1 3.2 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 45 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 0.0 17.2 72.4 10.3 2.9 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 40 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 3.1 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 0.0 19.5 61.0 19.5 3.0 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 45 0.0 11.1 57.8 31.1 3.2 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 45 0.0 4.4 46.7 48.9 3.4 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 45 2.2 13.3 44.4 40.0 3.2 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Veterinary 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 53 Number of forms scanned = 45 Number of forms with at least one student response = 45 Percent completed = 84.9 % 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 DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 254 57.0 A 183 42.4 Sophomore 90 20.2 B 190 44.0 Junior 21 4.7 C 48 11.1 Senior 54 12.1 D 2 0.5 Graduate 23 5.2 E/Fail 2 0.5 Professional 3 0.7 I 0 0.0 Other 1 0.2 Pass or Audit 7 1.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 97 21.9 Studies Program 252 57.0 2 hours 106 24.0 Required by my major 36 8.1 3 hours 128 29.0 Other (e.g. elective) 154 34.8 4 - 5 hours 69 15.6 6 - 7 hours 27 6.1 8 or more hours 15 3.4