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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 002L1 SPECIAL COURSE: ENVIRONMENTAL PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley J SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 36.4 Junior 2 16.7 C 2 18.2 Senior 10 83.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 16.7 Required by my major 7 58.3 3 hours 5 41.7 Other (e.g. elective) 5 41.7 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 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 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 10.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 2.8 1.03 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.79 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 7.7 15.4 38.5 38.5 3.1 0.95 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 23.1 38.5 38.5 3.2 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 15.4 23.1 30.8 30.8 2.8 1.09 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 10 10.0 0.0 40.0 50.0 3.3 0.95 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 23.1 38.5 38.5 3.2 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 23.1 30.8 46.2 3.2 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 7.7 15.4 38.5 38.5 3.1 0.95 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 002L1 SPECIAL COURSE: ENVIRONMENTAL PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Birge, Wesley 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 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 52.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 302 001L1 MINI-COLLEGE IVB:GLOBAL STDS I:INDIVIDUALISM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Howard, Don A SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 19.2 Sophomore 25 96.2 B 18 69.2 Junior 1 3.8 C 3 11.5 Senior 0 0.0 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 4 15.4 Studies Program 24 92.3 2 hours 8 30.8 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 9 34.6 Other (e.g. elective) 2 7.7 4 - 5 hours 3 11.5 6 - 7 hours 1 3.8 8 or more hours 1 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 26 0.0 3.8 65.4 30.8 3.3 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 12.0 64.0 24.0 3.1 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 3.8 19.2 57.7 19.2 2.9 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 0.0 37.5 50.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 3.8 19.2 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 3.8 7.7 69.2 19.2 3.0 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 3.8 61.5 34.6 3.3 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 26 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 7.7 57.7 34.6 3.3 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 30.8 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 15.4 65.4 19.2 3.0 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 7.7 26.9 50.0 15.4 2.7 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 32.0 44.0 24.0 2.9 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 12.0 48.0 40.0 3.3 0.68 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 302 001L1 MINI-COLLEGE IVB:GLOBAL STDS I:INDIVIDUALISM INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Howard, Don 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 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 12 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 73.0 % 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 002L2 SPECIAL COURSE: ENVIRONMENTAL PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = HOGSTRAND, CHRISTER J.L. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 45.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 35.0 Junior 2 9.5 C 2 10.0 Senior 19 90.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 2 10.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 23.8 Required by my major 13 61.9 3 hours 10 47.6 Other (e.g. elective) 8 38.1 4 - 5 hours 4 19.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 9.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 20.0 26.7 20.0 33.3 2.7 1.18 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 6.3 12.5 43.8 37.5 3.1 0.89 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 13.6 45.5 40.9 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 3.1 0.85 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 22.7 27.3 50.0 3.3 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 12.5 43.8 43.8 3.3 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 9.1 50.0 40.9 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 27.3 31.8 40.9 3.1 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 13.6 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 19.0 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 9.5 61.9 28.6 3.2 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 33.3 38.1 28.6 3.0 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 9.1 4.5 50.0 36.4 3.1 0.89 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.77 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 002L2 SPECIAL COURSE: ENVIRONMENTAL PHYSIOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = HOGSTRAND, CHRISTER J.L. % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 25 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 88.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L1 SPEC COURSE:INTERDISC READ IN GER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, Michael T. SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 20.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 80.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 20.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 20.0 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 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 100.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 3 60.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 500 001L1 SPEC COURSE:INTERDISC READ IN GER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jones, Michael T. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 001L1 SPECIAL COURSE:INTRO TO JAPAN'S SOCIETY/CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.9 A 7 41.2 Sophomore 5 29.4 B 8 47.1 Junior 4 23.5 C 2 11.8 Senior 7 41.2 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 5 29.4 Studies Program 10 58.8 2 hours 5 29.4 Required by my major 2 11.8 3 hours 6 35.3 Other (e.g. elective) 5 29.4 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 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 6.3 68.8 25.0 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 10.5 36.8 52.6 3.4 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 21.1 31.6 42.1 3.1 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 5.3 36.8 47.4 3.2 0.98 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 11.1 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 35.7 35.7 21.4 2.7 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 18 5.6 11.1 44.4 38.9 3.2 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 26.3 31.6 42.1 3.2 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 15.8 36.8 47.4 3.3 0.75 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 001L1 SPECIAL COURSE:INTRO TO JAPAN'S SOCIETY/CULTURE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Karan, P P % % 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 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 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 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 65.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 009L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 100.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 80.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 20.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 5 83.3 Studies Program 5 83.3 2 hours 1 16.7 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 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 11 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 9.1 90.9 0.0 2.9 0.30 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 27.3 54.5 18.2 2.9 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 18.2 36.4 36.4 9.1 2.4 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 36.4 36.4 18.2 2.6 0.92 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 009L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 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 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 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 59.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 010L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 100.0 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 22.2 Senior 0 0.0 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 4 44.4 Studies Program 8 88.9 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 1 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 12 8.3 41.7 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 16.7 25.0 33.3 25.0 2.7 1.07 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 8.3 8.3 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 41.7 25.0 25.0 8.3 2.0 1.04 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 25.0 25.0 41.7 8.3 2.3 0.98 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 50.0 8.3 33.3 8.3 2.0 1.13 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.90 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 22.2 33.3 33.3 11.1 2.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 42.9 28.6 14.3 2.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 50.0 10.0 10.0 2.0 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 33.3 33.3 25.0 8.3 2.1 1.00 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 010L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward % % 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 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 7 0.0 42.9 28.6 28.6 2.9 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 57.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 011L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 14 100.0 A 3 21.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 78.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 9 64.3 Studies Program 10 71.4 2 hours 4 28.6 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 7.1 Other (e.g. elective) 4 28.6 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 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 0.78 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 33.3 16.7 50.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 35.7 42.9 21.4 2.9 0.77 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 66.7 20.0 3.1 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 38.5 30.8 30.8 2.9 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 6.7 26.7 40.0 26.7 2.9 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 20.0 26.7 53.3 3.3 0.82 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 011L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward % % 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 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 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 64.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 012L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 14 93.3 A 9 60.0 Sophomore 1 6.7 B 6 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 11 73.3 Studies Program 14 93.3 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 1 6.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 11.8 29.4 47.1 11.8 2.6 0.87 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 10.0 20.0 60.0 10.0 2.7 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 12.5 18.8 56.3 12.5 2.7 0.87 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.80 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 23.5 64.7 11.8 2.9 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 5.6 22.2 50.0 22.2 2.9 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 5.6 0.0 50.0 44.4 3.3 0.77 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 11.1 0.0 50.0 38.9 3.2 0.92 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 25.0 18.8 37.5 18.8 2.5 1.10 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 64.7 3.6 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 21.4 57.1 21.4 3.0 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 15.4 38.5 38.5 7.7 2.4 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 27.8 27.8 33.3 11.1 2.3 1.02 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 2.9 1.02 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 012L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CONNECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee, Edward % % 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 81.8 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 003L1 SPECIAL COURSE: CELL GENETICS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rawls, John M SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 10 100.0 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 3 30.0 Required by my major 6 60.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 40.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 2 20.0 8 or more hours 1 10.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 10.0 10.0 50.0 30.0 3.0 0.94 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 9.1 36.4 27.3 27.3 2.7 1.01 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 9.1 18.2 54.5 18.2 2.8 0.87 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 18.2 45.5 18.2 18.2 2.4 1.03 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 2.9 0.94 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 9.1 9.1 45.5 36.4 3.1 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 11 9.1 9.1 36.4 45.5 3.2 0.98 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 11.1 44.4 33.3 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 10.0 10.0 40.0 40.0 3.1 0.99 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 11.1 0.0 55.6 33.3 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 9.1 18.2 27.3 45.5 3.1 1.04 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 1.07 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 9.1 36.4 36.4 18.2 2.6 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 2.9 0.94 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 300 003L1 SPECIAL COURSE: CELL GENETICS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rawls, John M % % 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 9 11.1 44.4 33.3 11.1 2.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 9.1 27.3 36.4 27.3 2.8 0.98 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 9.1 45.5 36.4 9.1 2.5 0.82 35. Instructor helped with my problems 10 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 1.07 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 11 18.2 9.1 36.4 36.4 2.9 1.14 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 84.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available from VIEW on the IBM mainframe by typing "VIEW CAMPUS LCINFO". 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 302 002L1 MINI-COLLEGE IVB: DIRECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 35.3 Sophomore 16 94.1 B 9 52.9 Junior 1 5.9 C 2 11.8 Senior 0 0.0 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 3 17.6 Studies Program 16 100.0 2 hours 8 47.1 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 21.1 52.6 26.3 3.1 0.71 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 16.7 27.8 50.0 5.6 2.4 0.86 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 31.6 63.2 5.3 2.7 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 10.5 26.3 31.6 31.6 2.8 1.01 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 10.5 21.1 36.8 31.6 2.9 0.99 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 10.5 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 21.1 47.4 26.3 2.9 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 16.7 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.68 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 5.3 15.8 52.6 26.3 3.0 0.82 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 36.8 26.3 26.3 2.7 1.00 14. Encouraged class participation 19 10.5 15.8 57.9 15.8 2.8 0.85 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 5.9 29.4 52.9 11.8 2.7 0.77 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 5.6 38.9 27.8 27.8 2.8 0.94 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 5.9 47.1 41.2 5.9 2.5 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 21.1 57.9 21.1 3.0 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 44.4 16.7 16.7 22.2 2.2 1.25 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 5.6 55.6 16.7 22.2 2.6 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 29.4 41.2 23.5 2.8 0.88 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 302 002L1 MINI-COLLEGE IVB: DIRECTIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Roberts, Susan % % 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 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 11 0.0 27.3 72.7 0.0 2.7 0.47 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 7 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 65.5 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 007L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CHEMEXCEL WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph W SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 80.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 20.0 Junior 1 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 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 4 80.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 60.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 100.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 2 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = A&S 100 007L1 SP INTRO CRSE: CHEMEXCEL WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wilson, Joseph 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 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 40.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 = ZMisc. Arts and Sciences FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AAS 200 001L1 INTRO AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDIES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harris, J John SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 14 42.4 A 19 57.6 Sophomore 9 27.3 B 11 33.3 Junior 4 12.1 C 2 6.1 Senior 5 15.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 3.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 13 39.4 Studies Program 2 6.1 2 hours 7 21.2 Required by my major 2 6.1 3 hours 11 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 29 87.9 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 3.0 8 or more hours 1 3.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 35 0.0 11.4 45.7 42.9 3.3 0.68 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 3.3 53.3 43.3 3.4 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 5.9 50.0 44.1 3.4 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 14.3 45.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 2.9 17.6 50.0 29.4 3.1 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 3.0 18.2 45.5 33.3 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 0.0 8.6 40.0 51.4 3.4 0.65 10. Had good kn