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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 257 401L1 INTRO FAM INTERVEN: WORK W/FAMILIES & INDIVID INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Boone, Barbara J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 76.0 Sophomore 1 4.0 B 6 24.0 Junior 10 40.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 56.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 24.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 32.0 Required by my major 24 96.0 3 hours 9 36.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.0 4 - 5 hours 1 4.0 6 - 7 hours 1 4.0 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 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 7.4 33.3 59.3 3.5 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 3.7 0.48 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 25 0.0 4.0 40.0 56.0 3.5 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 3.6 32.1 64.3 3.6 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 3.6 10.7 85.7 3.8 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 14.8 44.4 40.7 3.3 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 7.4 37.0 55.6 3.5 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 33.3 63.0 3.6 0.57 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 257 401L1 INTRO FAM INTERVEN: WORK W/FAMILIES & INDIVID INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Boone, Barbara J % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 685 001L1 PROF ISSUES IN MARRIAGE & FAMILY INTERVENTION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 12.5 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 75.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 5 62.5 6 - 7 hours 3 37.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 685 001L1 PROF ISSUES IN MARRIAGE & FAMILY INTERVENTION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R % % 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 001S1 PROSEM MARR & FAM THER: GENDER ISSUES IN MFT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 25.0 8 or more hours 3 75.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 001S1 PROSEM MARR & FAM THER: GENDER ISSUES IN MFT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Botkin, Darla R % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 686 001L1 THEORY/METHS IN MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 77.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 22.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 77.8 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 3 33.3 8 or more hours 3 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 686 001L1 THEORY/METHS IN MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W % % 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 90.0 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 002S1 PROSEM MARR & FAM THER: TREATMENT OF FAM VIOLENC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 80.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 9 90.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 10.0 0.0 30.0 60.0 3.4 0.97 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 776 002S1 PROSEM MARR & FAM THER: TREATMENT OF FAM VIOLENC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Gregory W % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 252 201L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE AND FAMILY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burchfield, Meredith H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 8.7 A 16 69.6 Sophomore 4 17.4 B 4 17.4 Junior 2 8.7 C 3 13.0 Senior 14 60.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 4.3 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 9 40.9 Studies Program 6 27.3 2 hours 7 31.8 Required by my major 4 18.2 3 hours 5 22.7 Other (e.g. elective) 12 54.5 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 8.7 65.2 26.1 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 4.3 30.4 65.2 3.6 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 4.3 47.8 47.8 3.4 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 8.7 47.8 43.5 3.3 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 4.3 8.7 47.8 39.1 3.2 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 21 4.8 9.5 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.77 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 8.7 52.2 39.1 3.3 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 8.7 52.2 39.1 3.3 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 8.7 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 8.7 69.6 21.7 3.1 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 21.7 47.8 30.4 3.1 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 13.0 43.5 43.5 3.3 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 13.0 43.5 43.5 3.3 0.70 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 252 201L1 THE INDIVIDUAL, MARRIAGE AND FAMILY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burchfield, Meredith H % % 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 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 71.9 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 486 201L1 FIELD EXPER IN FAMILY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burke, Ellen SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 8 88.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = FAM 486 201L1 FIELD EXPER IN FAMILY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Burke, Ellen % % 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 350 001L1 CURR PLAN EARLY CHILD ED INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crum, Ruth A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 Sophomore 1 16.7 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 0.0 62.5 25.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 350 001L1 CURR PLAN EARLY CHILD ED INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Crum, Ruth A % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 544 001L1 CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN AMER CHILDREN & FAMILIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Edwards, Carolyn SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 24 77.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 19.4 Junior 1 3.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 23 74.2 D 1 3.2 Graduate 6 19.4 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.2 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 9.7 Studies Program 2 6.5 2 hours 6 19.4 Required by my major 19 61.3 3 hours 5 16.1 Other (e.g. elective) 10 32.3 4 - 5 hours 7 22.6 6 - 7 hours 5 16.1 8 or more hours 5 16.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 35 2.9 22.9 48.6 25.7 3.0 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 0.0 2.9 60.0 37.1 3.3 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 14.3 11.4 54.3 20.0 2.8 0.93 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 11.8 44.1 44.1 3.3 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 2.9 8.8 55.9 32.4 3.2 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 33 6.1 12.1 48.5 33.3 3.1 0.84 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 0.0 0.0 62.9 37.1 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 4.5 81.8 13.6 3.1 0.43 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 2.9 31.4 40.0 25.7 2.9 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 37.1 62.9 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 0.0 39.4 60.6 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 34 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 8.6 14.3 45.7 31.4 3.0 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 2.9 48.6 48.6 3.5 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 35 2.9 2.9 45.7 48.6 3.4 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 3.0 6.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 15.2 54.5 30.3 3.2 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 8.8 55.9 35.3 3.3 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 5.9 23.5 41.2 29.4 2.9 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 2.9 22.9 42.9 31.4 3.0 0.82 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 8.8 14.7 41.2 35.3 3.0 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 544 001L1 CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN AMER CHILDREN & FAMILIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Edwards, Carolyn % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 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 = 47 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 74.5 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 563 401L1 FAMILIES, LEGISLATION & PUBLIC POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Forgue, Raymond E SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 54.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 45.5 Junior 2 18.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 81.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 6 54.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 23.1 30.8 46.2 3.2 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 3.5 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 563 401L1 FAMILIES, LEGISLATION & PUBLIC POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Forgue, Raymond E % % 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 86.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available 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 DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 251 001L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 33.3 Sophomore 8 22.2 B 19 52.8 Junior 11 30.6 C 2 5.6 Senior 16 44.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.8 Pass or Audit 3 8.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 10 27.8 Studies Program 1 2.8 2 hours 11 30.6 Required by my major 11 30.6 3 hours 11 30.6 Other (e.g. elective) 24 66.7 4 - 5 hours 4 11.1 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 40 0.0 2.5 57.5 40.0 3.4 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 40 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 40 2.5 0.0 72.5 25.0 3.2 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 40 0.0 12.5 67.5 20.0 3.1 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 0.0 2.6 74.4 23.1 3.2 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 40 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 3.1 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 0.0 0.0 59.0 41.0 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 2.9 17.1 65.7 14.3 2.9 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 40 0.0 12.5 72.5 15.0 3.0 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 40 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 0.0 51.3 48.7 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 40 0.0 5.0 62.5 32.5 3.3 0.55 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 39 2.6 28.2 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 40 5.0 20.0 57.5 17.5 2.9 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 0.0 23.5 61.8 14.7 2.9 0.62 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 39 0.0 10.3 61.5 28.2 3.2 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 39 0.0 17.9 64.1 17.9 3.0 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 0.0 0.0 82.5 17.5 3.2 0.38 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 40 2.5 30.0 55.0 12.5 2.8 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 40 0.0 5.0 62.5 32.5 3.3 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 40 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.58 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 251 001L1 PERSONAL/FAMILY FINANCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia % % 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 = 72 Number of forms scanned = 40 Number of forms with at least one student response = 40 Percent completed = 55.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 603 001L1 THEORY & RESEARCH IN FAM ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 76.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 7.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 84.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 2 15.4 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 15.4 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 38.5 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 4 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 2 16.7 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 8 or more hours 1 7.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 7.1 7.1 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.83 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 46.2 38.5 7.7 2.5 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 14.3 21.4 50.0 14.3 2.6 0.93 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 8.3 0.0 58.3 33.3 3.2 0.83 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 28.6 14.3 35.7 21.4 2.5 1.16 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 14.3 28.6 42.9 14.3 2.6 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 16.7 8.3 41.7 33.3 2.9 1.08 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 23.1 38.5 30.8 7.7 2.2 0.93 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 21.4 7.1 50.0 21.4 2.7 1.07 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 21.4 28.6 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 21.4 28.6 35.7 14.3 2.4 1.02 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 21.4 21.4 42.9 14.3 2.5 1.02 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 603 001L1 THEORY & RESEARCH IN FAM ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hayhoe, Celia % % 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 70.0 % 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 = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 255 001L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Jaesook SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 72.4 Sophomore 3 10.3 B 6 20.7 Junior 15 51.7 C 1 3.4 Senior 11 37.9 D 1 3.4 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 10.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 31.0 Required by my major 19 65.5 3 hours 11 37.9 Other (e.g. elective) 10 34.5 4 - 5 hours 5 17.2 6 - 7 hours 1 3.4 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 6.7 43.3 50.0 3.4 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 16.7 36.7 46.7 3.3 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 3.3 36.7 60.0 3.6 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 30 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 3.3 6.7 43.3 46.7 3.3 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 3.3 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 30 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 0.0 10.3 44.8 44.8 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 30 0.0 3.3 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 6.7 43.3 50.0 3.4 0.63 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Human Environmental Sciences DEPARTMENT = Family Studies FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = FAM 255 001L1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Jaesook % %