****************************************************************************** * * * 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). * * * * To view a specific course or instructor, plese use the FIND feature on * * your web browser. * * * ****************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 495 001L1 EXPERIMENTAL METHODS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chappell, Joseph ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 50.0 Junior 2 16.7 C 1 10.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 6 - 7 hours 4 33.3 8 or more hours 3 25.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 33.3 25.0 25.0 16.7 2.3 1.14 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 36.4 18.2 27.3 18.2 2.3 1.19 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 58.3 25.0 16.7 0.0 1.6 0.79 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 8.3 8.3 75.0 8.3 2.8 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 11. Was available for consultation 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 9.1 9.1 54.5 27.3 3.0 0.89 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 2.8 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 25.0 33.3 33.3 8.3 2.3 0.97 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 16.7 41.7 16.7 25.0 2.5 1.09 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67. % % 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 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 33. Amount of work appropriate 12 33.3 58.3 0.0 8.3 1.8 0.83 34. Instructor explained expectations 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 35. Instructor helped with my problems 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 14 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 85.7 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 360 001L1 GENETICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Pfeiffer, Todd W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 6.3 A 2 12.5 Sophomore 5 31.3 B 7 43.8 Junior 5 31.3 C 5 31.3 Senior 4 25.0 D 1 6.3 Graduate 1 6.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 6.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 12.5 Required by my major 12 75.0 3 hours 11 68.8 Other (e.g. elective) 4 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 12.5 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 5.0 20.0 45.0 30.0 3.0 0.86 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 5.0 45.0 50.0 3.5 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 10.0 55.0 35.0 3.3 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 45.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 3.4 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 15.0 50.0 35.0 3.2 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 6.3 0.0 81.3 12.5 3.0 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 5.0 65.0 30.0 3.3 0.55. % % 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 37. Question 37 20 25.0 30.0 40.0 5.0 0.0 2.3 0.91 38. Question 38 20 20.0 35.0 25.0 20.0 0.0 2.5 1.05 39. Question 39 20 30.0 15.0 25.0 30.0 0.0 2.6 1.23 40. Question 40 20 30.0 40.0 20.0 5.0 5.0 2.2 1.09 41. Question 41 20 0.0 15.0 20.0 60.0 5.0 3.6 0.83 42. Question 42 19 5.3 10.5 21.1 57.9 5.3 3.5 0.96 43. Question 43 20 20.0 25.0 30.0 20.0 5.0 2.7 1.18 44. Question 44 19 89.5 5.3 0.0 5.3 0.0 1.2 0.71 45. Question 45 19 15.8 63.2 10.5 10.5 0.0 2.2 0.83 46. Question 46 19 15.8 15.8 26.3 42.1 0.0 2.9 1.13 47. Question 47 14 7.1 14.3 35.7 42.9 0.0 3.1 0.95 48. Question 48 18 5.6 22.2 38.9 27.8 5.6 3.1 1.00 49. Question 49 17 5.9 5.9 23.5 52.9 11.8 3.6 1.00 Number of forms preslugged = 28 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 71.4 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Biotechnology FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ABT 401 001L1 TECHNICAL WRITING AND PRESENTATIONS IN BIOTECH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schardl, Christopher L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 2 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 75.0 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 37.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 8 100.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 37.5 25.0 37.5 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 42.9 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . . % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 28. Guided student report preparation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 66.7 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 001L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dillon, Carl ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 52.2 Sophomore 1 4.2 B 11 47.8 Junior 9 37.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 58.3 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 13.0 Studies Program 1 4.3 2 hours 8 34.8 Required by my major 13 56.5 3 hours 12 52.2 Other (e.g. elective) 9 39.1 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 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 3.7 77.8 18.5 3.1 0.46 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 3.7 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 14.8 59.3 25.9 3.1 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 7.4 59.3 33.3 3.3 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 3.7 59.3 37.0 3.3 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 7.4 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 64.0 36.0 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 18.5 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 30.8 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 69.2 26.9 3.2 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 3.8 69.2 26.9 3.2 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 3.8 73.1 23.1 3.2 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 15.4 23.1 42.3 19.2 2.7 0.98 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 3.8 3.8 50.0 42.3 3.3 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 3.8 3.8 50.0 42.3 3.3 0.74. % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 28 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 96.4 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 302 002L1 AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dillon, Carl ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 25.0 Sophomore 2 12.5 B 10 62.5 Junior 4 25.0 C 2 12.5 Senior 10 62.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 12.5 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 11 68.8 3 hours 7 43.8 Other (e.g. elective) 4 25.0 4 - 5 hours 2 12.5 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 31.3 43.8 25.0 2.9 0.77 5. Grading was fair and consistent 16 6.3 6.3 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 16 6.3 12.5 56.3 25.0 3.0 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 17.6 58.8 23.5 3.1 0.66. % % 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 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 56.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 653 401L1 LOCAL ECON DEVELOP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Freshwater, David ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 70.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 90.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 9.1 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 3 27.3 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 8 72.7 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 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 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = AEC 300 001L1 TOPS AEC:ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND REGULATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gorton, William T. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 75.0 Sophomore 1 6.3 B 4 25.0 Junior 6 37.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 56.3 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 1 6.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 43.8 Required by my major 7 43.8 3 hours 7 43.8 Other (e.g. elective) 9 56.3 4 - 5 hours 1 6.3 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 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 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 13 7.7 7.7 53.8 30.8 3.1 0.86 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 11.8 17.6 70.6 3.6 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 11.8 76.5 11.8 3.0 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 11.8 41.2 47.1 3.4 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51. % % 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 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 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 = 20 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 85.0 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 303 001L1 MICROECONOMIC CONCEPTS IN AG ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hall, Harry H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 11.1 Sophomore 2 5.6 B 20 55.6 Junior 10 27.8 C 12 33.3 Senior 24 66.7 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 14 38.9 Studies Program 1 2.8 2 hours 15 41.7 Required by my major 34 94.4 3 hours 7 19.4 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.8 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 38 0.0 7.9 73.7 18.4 3.1 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 31.6 44.7 21.1 2.6 1.9 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 2.6 21.1 57.9 18.4 2.9 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 38 0.0 7.9 65.8 26.3 3.2 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 38 2.6 23.7 57.9 15.8 2.9 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 38 0.0 0.0 76.3 23.7 3.2 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 38 0.0 5.3 73.7 21.1 3.2 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 38 2.6 23.7 60.5 13.2 2.8 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 0.0 26.3 60.5 13.2 2.9 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 0.0 71.1 28.9 3.3 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 37 0.0 5.4 64.9 29.7 3.2 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 38 0.0 7.9 73.7 18.4 3.1 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 38 13.2 21.1 52.6 13.2 2.7 0.88 14. Encouraged class participation 38 0.0 15.8 65.8 18.4 3.0 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 0.0 21.2 60.6 18.2 3.0 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 38 0.0 15.8 63.2 21.1 3.1 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 38 0.0 15.8 63.2 21.1 3.1 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 38 0.0 10.5 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 38 13.2 23.7 52.6 10.5 2.6 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 37 2.7 27.0 62.2 8.1 2.8 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 37 5.4 18.9 59.5 16.2 2.9 0.75. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 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 = 49 Number of forms scanned = 38 Number of forms with at least one student response = 38 Percent completed = 77.6 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 661 001L1 PROGRAMMING MODELS AEC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hall, Harry H ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 44.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 8 or more hours 6 66.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 9 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 445G001L1 INTRO RESOURCE/ENVIR ECO INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Infanger, Craig L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 30.0 Junior 8 40.0 C 2 10.0 Senior 12 60.0 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 1 5.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 25.0 Required by my major 19 95.0 3 hours 7 35.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.0 4 - 5 hours 7 35.0 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 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 9.5 28.6 61.9 3.5 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 9.5 42.9 47.6 3.4 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 4.8 33.3 61.9 3.6 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 0.0 61.9 33.3 3.2 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48. % % 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 001L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 4.2 A 4 16.7 Sophomore 8 33.3 B 13 54.2 Junior 10 41.7 C 6 25.0 Senior 5 20.8 D 1 4.2 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 4.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 25.0 Required by my major 17 70.8 3 hours 14 58.3 Other (e.g. elective) 7 29.2 4 - 5 hours 3 12.5 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 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 3.6 28.6 67.9 3.6 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 3.6 50.0 46.4 3.4 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 3.6 7.1 39.3 50.0 3.4 0.78 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 14.8 40.7 44.4 3.3 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 17.9 82.1 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 39.3 60.7 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 0.0 0.0 32.1 67.9 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 0.0 3.6 35.7 60.7 3.6 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 46.4 53.6 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49. % % 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 = 34 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 82.4 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 305 002L1 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL MARKETING PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mather, Loys L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 14.3 Sophomore 8 57.1 B 8 57.1 Junior 2 14.3 C 4 28.6 Senior 4 28.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 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 21.4 Required by my major 13 92.9 3 hours 9 64.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 7.1 4 - 5 hours 2 14.3 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 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 28.6 35.7 35.7 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 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00. % % 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 71.4 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 321 001L1 AG FUTURES MARKETS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Maynard, Leigh J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 17.4 Sophomore 2 8.7 B 15 65.2 Junior 5 21.7 C 4 17.4 Senior 16 69.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 21.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 43.5 Required by my major 14 60.9 3 hours 8 34.8 Other (e.g. elective) 9 39.1 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 26 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 0.0 11.5 53.8 34.6 3.2 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 3.8 65.4 30.8 3.3 0.53 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 3.8 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50 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 3.8 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 34.6 65.4 3.7 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 15.4 50.0 34.6 3.2 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 7.7 65.4 26.9 3.2 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 9.5 76.2 14.3 3.0 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 4.0 68.0 28.0 3.2 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 16.0 68.0 16.0 3.0 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 0.0 3.8 50.0 46.2 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 0.0 0.0 42.3 57.7 3.6 0.50. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 26 Number of forms with at least one student response = 26 Percent completed = 78.8 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 410 001L1 INTERNATL TRADE & AG MKT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Reed, Michael R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 12.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 3 37.5 Senior 8 100.0 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 1 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 50.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 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 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 2.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 12.5 12.5 75.0 0.0 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 2.4 . . % % 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 = 13 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 69.2 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 532 001L1 AGRICULT & FOOD POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Skees, Jerry R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 55.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 30.0 Junior 2 9.5 C 2 10.0 Senior 17 81.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 9.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 5.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 23.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 33.3 Required by my major 6 28.6 3 hours 8 38.1 Other (e.g. elective) 15 71.4 4 - 5 hours 1 4.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 4.3 17.4 65.2 13.0 2.9 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 4.3 0.0 82.6 13.0 3.0 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 65.2 26.1 3.2 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 34.8 39.1 26.1 2.9 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 78.3 21.7 3.2 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 8.7 73.9 17.4 3.1 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 34.8 65.2 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 0.0 65.2 34.8 3.3 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 4.5 68.2 27.3 3.2 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 4.3 43.5 52.2 3.5 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51. % % 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 = 28 Number of forms scanned = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 82.1 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 640 001L1 ADV AGRICULTURAL POLICY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Skees, Jerry R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 22.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 66.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 11.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 5 55.6 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 4 44.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 44.4 44.4 11.1 2.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 2.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 37.5 25.0 37.5 3.0 . . % % 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 422 001L1 AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vickner, Steven S ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 20.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 18 52.9 Junior 1 2.9 C 9 26.5 Senior 34 97.1 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 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 31.4 Required by my major 29 82.9 3 hours 10 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 6 17.1 4 - 5 hours 5 14.3 6 - 7 hours 3 8.6 8 or more hours 1 2.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 33 6.1 9.1 57.6 27.3 3.1 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 35 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 0.0 5.7 51.4 42.9 3.4 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 54.3 45.7 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 2.9 8.8 50.0 38.2 3.2 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 2.9 57.1 40.0 3.4 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 0.0 54.3 45.7 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 0.0 5.7 57.1 37.1 3.3 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 2.9 54.3 42.9 3.4 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 34 0.0 2.9 73.5 23.5 3.2 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 0.0 37.1 62.9 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 0.0 48.6 51.4 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 0.0 8.6 54.3 37.1 3.3 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 0.0 31.4 68.6 3.7 0.47. % % 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 = 37 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 94.6 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 316 001L1 COOP MGMT & MARKETING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Williamson, Lionel ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 16.7 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 91.7 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 41.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 50.0 Required by my major 7 58.3 3 hours 1 8.3 Other (e.g. elective) 5 41.7 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 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 27.3 27.3 45.5 3.2 0.87 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39. % % 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Agriculture DEPARTMENT = Agricultural Economics FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = AEC 483 001L1 REGIONAL ECONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Zeuli, Kim ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 72.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 27.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 11 100.0 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 1 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my majo