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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = HIS 240 401L1 HISTORY OF KENTUCKY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Appleton Jr, Thomas H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 48.6 Sophomore 5 13.5 B 17 45.9 Junior 12 32.4 C 1 2.7 Senior 15 40.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 4 10.8 Pass or Audit 1 2.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 21.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 29.7 Required by my major 15 40.5 3 hours 13 35.1 Other (e.g. elective) 22 59.5 4 - 5 hours 2 5.4 6 - 7 hours 2 5.4 8 or more hours 1 2.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 42 0.0 0.0 26.2 73.8 3.7 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 3.6 14.3 42.9 39.3 3.2 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 41 0.0 2.4 41.5 56.1 3.5 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 0.0 0.0 31.7 68.3 3.7 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 41 0.0 7.3 31.7 61.0 3.5 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 42 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 42 0.0 7.1 45.2 47.6 3.4 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 41 2.4 4.9 41.5 51.2 3.4 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 42 0.0 2.4 23.8 73.8 3.7 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 42 0.0 4.8 14.3 81.0 3.8 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 40 0.0 2.5 37.5 60.0 3.6 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 42 0.0 9.5 31.0 59.5 3.5 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 0.0 2.4 40.5 57.1 3.5 0.55 14. Encouraged class participation 41 0.0 0.0 24.4 75.6 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 41 2.4 0.0 43.9 53.7 3.5 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 37 0.0 2.7 43.2 54.1 3.5 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 30 0.0 10.0 46.7 43.3 3.3 0.66 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 0.0 2.5 27.5 70.0 3.7 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 42 0.0 9.5 33.3 57.1 3.5 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 42 0.0 2.4 28.6 69.0 3.7 0.53 21. Overall quality of teaching 42 0.0 7.1 19.0 73.8 3.7 0.61 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = HIS 240 401L1 HISTORY OF KENTUCKY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Appleton Jr, Thomas 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 55 Number of forms scanned = 42 Number of forms with at least one student response = 42 Percent completed = 76.4 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 462 001L1 NEW REPUBLIC, 1789-1820 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Banning, L G SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 19.2 Sophomore 3 10.7 B 17 65.4 Junior 7 25.0 C 4 15.4 Senior 18 64.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 10.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 21.4 Required by my major 20 71.4 3 hours 13 46.4 Other (e.g. elective) 8 28.6 4 - 5 hours 5 17.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 3.6 % % 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 6.7 50.0 43.3 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 3.3 0.0 56.7 40.0 3.3 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 3.4 6.9 41.4 48.3 3.3 0.77 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 3.3 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 3.4 48.3 48.3 3.4 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 6.7 50.0 43.3 3.4 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 3.3 13.3 56.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 6.9 44.8 48.3 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 3.3 23.3 36.7 36.7 3.1 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 16.7 53.3 30.0 3.1 0.68 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 17.9 53.6 28.6 3.1 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 17.2 51.7 31.0 3.1 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 23.1 42.3 34.6 3.1 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 3.4 3.4 55.2 37.9 3.3 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 0.0 30.0 33.3 36.7 3.1 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 0.0 13.8 58.6 27.6 3.1 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 13.3 50.0 36.7 3.2 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 462 001L1 NEW REPUBLIC, 1789-1820 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Banning, L G % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 41 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 Percent completed = 73.2 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 001L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 11.8 A 5 29.4 Sophomore 9 52.9 B 10 58.8 Junior 3 17.6 C 2 11.8 Senior 2 11.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 5.9 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 35.3 Studies Program 9 52.9 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 7 41.2 3 hours 6 35.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.9 4 - 5 hours 1 5.9 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 18 5.6 0.0 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.75 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 5.9 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 0.0 72.2 22.2 3.1 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 5.6 0.0 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 5.6 22.2 44.4 27.8 2.9 0.87 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 5.6 0.0 27.8 66.7 3.6 0.78 11. Was available for consultation 17 5.9 0.0 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 16.7 55.6 22.2 2.9 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 18 5.6 16.7 61.1 16.7 2.9 0.76 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 18.8 0.0 50.0 31.3 2.9 1.06 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 6.3 0.0 62.5 31.3 3.2 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 14.3 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 5.6 0.0 72.2 22.2 3.1 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 11.1 27.8 50.0 11.1 2.6 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 001L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F % % 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 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 2.6 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 20 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 002L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 26.7 A 7 46.7 Sophomore 7 46.7 B 8 53.3 Junior 2 13.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 13.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 13.3 Studies Program 6 40.0 2 hours 5 33.3 Required by my major 8 53.3 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 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 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 17.6 52.9 29.4 3.1 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 5.9 29.4 58.8 3.4 0.87 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 17.6 23.5 58.8 3.4 0.80 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 11.8 29.4 58.8 3.5 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 5.9 17.6 76.5 3.7 0.59 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 002L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F % % 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 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 005L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 54.5 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 1 9.1 B 2 18.2 Junior 2 18.2 C 2 18.2 Senior 2 18.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 9.1 Studies Program 3 27.3 2 hours 5 45.5 Required by my major 8 72.7 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 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 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 005L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F % % 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 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 55.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 006L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 56.3 A 3 18.8 Sophomore 6 37.5 B 10 62.5 Junior 1 6.3 C 2 12.5 Senior 0 0.0 D 1 6.3 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 9 56.3 Studies Program 11 73.3 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 4 26.7 3 hours 3 18.8 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 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 26.3 52.6 21.1 2.9 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 15.8 47.4 36.8 3.2 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 5.3 36.8 57.9 3.5 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 5.3 63.2 26.3 3.1 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 36.8 31.6 31.6 2.9 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 21.1 47.4 31.6 3.1 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 16.7 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 23.5 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 10.5 63.2 26.3 3.2 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 52.6 36.8 10.5 2.6 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 5.3 10.5 42.1 42.1 3.2 0.85 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 006L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 007L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 50.0 A 5 27.8 Sophomore 3 16.7 B 11 61.1 Junior 4 22.2 C 2 11.1 Senior 1 5.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 33.3 Studies Program 9 50.0 2 hours 5 27.8 Required by my major 7 38.9 3 hours 7 38.9 Other (e.g. elective) 2 11.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 15.8 47.4 36.8 3.2 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 15.8 84.2 3.8 0.37 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 5.3 42.1 47.4 3.3 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 18 5.6 11.1 44.4 38.9 3.2 0.86 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 5.9 0.0 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 5.6 5.6 72.2 16.7 3.0 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 12.5 12.5 56.3 18.8 2.8 0.91 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 21.1 52.6 21.1 2.9 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 5.3 0.0 31.6 63.2 3.5 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 105 007L1 HIS EUR MID 17 CENT-PRES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Betts, Raymond F % % 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 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 8 25.0 12.5 25.0 37.5 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 207 001L1 HIS OF MODERN LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chassen-Lopez, Francie R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 21.4 A 8 28.6 Sophomore 7 25.0 B 15 53.6 Junior 8 28.6 C 5 17.9 Senior 6 21.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.6 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 7 25.0 Studies Program 19 70.4 2 hours 7 25.0 Required by my major 4 14.8 3 hours 11 39.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 14.8 4 - 5 hours 2 7.1 6 - 7 hours 1 3.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 28 0.0 3.6 71.4 25.0 3.2 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 7.1 53.6 39.3 3.3 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 3.6 3.6 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 10.7 60.7 25.0 3.1 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 7.1 64.3 28.6 3.2 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 17.9 67.9 14.3 3.0 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 3.6 28.6 53.6 14.3 2.8 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 10.7 60.7 28.6 3.2 0.61 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 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 3.6 10.7 60.7 25.0 3.1 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 3.8 11.5 53.8 30.8 3.1 0.77 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 9.1 31.8 40.9 18.2 2.7 0.89 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 3.6 28.6 32.1 35.7 3.0 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 14.3 46.4 39.3 3.3 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 10.7 39.3 50.0 3.4 0.69 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 207 001L1 HIS OF MODERN LATIN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chassen-Lopez, Francie 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 2 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 13 7.7 7.7 84.6 0.0 2.8 0.60 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 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 = 37 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 75.7 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 595 003L1 STUDIES IN HISTORY: WOMEN IN LATIN AMERICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chassen-Lopez, Francie R SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 42.9 Junior 3 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 13.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 60.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.7 Pass or Audit 1 7.1 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 7.1 Required by my major 4 28.6 3 hours 2 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 10 71.4 4 - 5 hours 8 57.1 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 8 or more hours 1 7.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 6.7 6.7 86.7 3.8 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 7.1 0.0 28.6 64.3 3.5 0.85 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 14.3 21.4 64.3 3.5 0.76 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 20.0 66.7 3.5 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 13.3 80.0 3.7 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 20.0 73.3 3.7 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 20.0 73.3 3.7 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 6.7 6.7 20.0 66.7 3.5 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 6.7 86.7 3.8 0.56 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 595 003L1 STUDIES IN HISTORY: WOMEN IN LATIN AMERICA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chassen-Lopez, Francie 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 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 76.9 3.7 0.63 31. Developed abil to conduct research 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 108 401L1 HIST OF U.S. THRU 1865 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 10 43.5 A 4 17.4 Sophomore 3 13.0 B 13 56.5 Junior 6 26.1 C 6 26.1 Senior 4 17.4 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 8 34.8 Studies Program 20 87.0 2 hours 8 34.8 Required by my major 1 4.3 3 hours 4 17.4 Other (e.g. elective) 2 8.7 4 - 5 hours 3 13.0 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 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 10.7 60.7 28.6 3.2 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 0.0 67.9 32.1 3.3 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 17.9 60.7 21.4 3.0 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 18.5 63.0 14.8 2.9 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 10.7 53.6 35.7 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 3.6 10.7 42.9 42.9 3.3 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 27 11.1 25.9 51.9 11.1 2.6 0.84 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 8.3 70.8 20.8 3.1 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 8.0 76.0 16.0 3.1 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 15.8 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 88.0 12.0 3.1 0.33 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 3.8 15.4 65.4 15.4 2.9 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 3.6 7.1 75.0 14.3 3.0 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 3.6 3.6 39.3 53.6 3.4 0.74 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 108 401L1 HIST OF U.S. THRU 1865 INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric 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 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 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 = 47 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 59.6 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 584 001L1 HEALTH & DISEASE IN U.S. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 22.6 Sophomore 1 3.2 B 18 58.1 Junior 16 51.6 C 5 16.1 Senior 13 41.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 3.2 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 12.9 Studies Program 4 12.9 2 hours 13 41.9 Required by my major 8 25.8 3 hours 6 19.4 Other (e.g. elective) 19 61.3 4 - 5 hours 7 22.6 6 - 7 hours 1 3.2 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 34 0.0 2.9 55.9 41.2 3.4 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 2.9 44.1 52.9 3.5 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 8.8 50.0 41.2 3.3 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 0.0 44.1 55.9 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 2.9 52.9 44.1 3.4 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 33 0.0 3.0 54.5 42.4 3.4 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 33 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 0.46 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 0.0 5.9 50.0 44.1 3.4 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 26.5 73.5 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 29 3.4 3.4 58.6 34.5 3.2 0.69 12. Satisfact answered class questions 34 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 34 2.9 5.9 47.1 44.1 3.3 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 34 0.0 5.9 38.2 55.9 3.5 0.62 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 29 0.0 0.0 69.0 31.0 3.3 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 0.0 61.3 38.7 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 32 3.1 12.5 62.5 21.9 3.0 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 0.0 5.9 55.9 38.2 3.3 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 0.0 2.9 23.5 73.5 3.7 0.52 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 584 001L1 HEALTH & DISEASE IN U.S. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric 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 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 37 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 91.9 % 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 = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 652 401L1 READINGS IN AMERICAN HIS OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric H SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 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 5 83.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 16.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 6 100.0 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 8 or more hours 1 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 652 401L1 READINGS IN AMERICAN HIS OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Christianson, Eric 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 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 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 28. Guided student report preparation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 29. Students free to express opinions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 650 002S1 RDGS SPEC TOPS HISTORY: U.S SOCIAL HISTORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cooper, Pat SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 78.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 7.1 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 26.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 11 73.3 4 - 5 hours 5 33.3 6 - 7 hours 7 46.7 8 or more hours 3 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 0.0 9.1 90.9 3.9 0.30 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 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 = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = History FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = HIS 650 002S1 RDGS SPEC TOPS HISTORY: U.S SOCIAL HISTORY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cooper, Pat % % Strongly % % Strongly