****************************************************************************** * * * 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 401L1 TOPICS IN CE: GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 50.0 Junior 1 5.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 61.1 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 5.3 Studies Program 1 5.3 2 hours 5 26.3 Required by my major 4 21.1 3 hours 7 36.8 Other (e.g. elective) 14 73.7 4 - 5 hours 4 21.1 6 - 7 hours 1 5.3 8 or more hours 1 5.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 21.1 57.9 21.1 3.0 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 5.3 5.3 78.9 10.5 2.9 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 15.8 63.2 21.1 3.1 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 5.3 78.9 15.8 3.1 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 10.5 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 5.3 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 5.3 36.8 57.9 3.5 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 10.5 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 5.3 21.1 73.7 3.7 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61. % % 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 90.5 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 635 001L3 HIGHWAY SAFETY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 100.0 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 1 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 60.0 Required by my major 1 20.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 60.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G001A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 52.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 8.0 Senior 25 100.0 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 2 8.0 Required by my major 25 100.0 3 hours 5 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 12 48.0 6 - 7 hours 4 16.0 8 or more hours 2 8.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 4.0 8.0 68.0 20.0 3.0 0.68 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 16.0 76.0 8.0 2.9 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 8.0 76.0 16.0 3.1 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 28.0 28.0 32.0 12.0 2.3 1.02 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 4.0 84.0 12.0 3.1 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 4.3 17.4 73.9 4.3 2.8 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 4.0 52.0 44.0 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 44.0 56.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 0.0 64.0 36.0 3.4 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 48.0 32.0 20.0 2.7 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 17.4 56.5 26.1 3.1 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 12.5 58.3 29.2 3.2 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 4.2 66.7 16.7 12.5 2.4 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 8.0 16.0 64.0 12.0 2.8 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 12.0 52.0 36.0 3.2 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 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 33. Amount of work appropriate 17 17.6 29.4 47.1 5.9 2.4 0.87 34. Instructor explained expectations 17 5.9 5.9 70.6 17.6 3.0 0.71 35. Instructor helped with my problems 17 0.0 23.5 64.7 11.8 2.9 0.60 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 17 0.0 5.9 88.2 5.9 3.0 0.35 % 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 = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 38.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 52.4 Junior 2 9.5 C 1 4.8 Senior 18 85.7 D 1 4.8 Graduate 1 4.8 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 4.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 9.5 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 5 23.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.8 4 - 5 hours 8 38.1 6 - 7 hours 2 9.5 8 or more hours 3 14.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 10.0 85.0 5.0 3.0 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 5.3 15.8 78.9 0.0 2.7 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 5.0 15.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 5.3 21.1 73.7 0.0 2.7 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 15.0 40.0 40.0 5.0 2.4 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 5.0 90.0 5.0 3.0 0.32 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 95.0 5.0 3.1 0.22 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.41 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 9.5 81.0 9.5 3.0 0.45 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 4.8 81.0 14.3 3.1 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 5.0 50.0 40.0 5.0 2.5 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 9.5 85.7 4.8 3.0 0.38 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 17.6 76.5 5.9 2.9 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 10.0 85.0 5.0 3.0 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 15.0 75.0 10.0 3.0 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 15.0 75.0 10.0 3.0 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 15.0 25.0 55.0 5.0 2.5 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 28.6 61.9 9.5 2.8 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 23.8 57.1 19.0 3.0 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 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 33. Amount of work appropriate 12 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.89 34. Instructor explained expectations 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 35. Instructor helped with my problems 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 % 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 = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 699 002L1 TOPS CE: FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 28.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 42.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 8 or more hours 1 14.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . . % % 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 = 7 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 351 001L1 INTRO ENVIRONMENTAL EGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 26.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 42.1 Junior 11 57.9 C 6 31.6 Senior 8 42.1 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 31.6 Required by my major 17 89.5 3 hours 6 31.6 Other (e.g. elective) 2 10.5 4 - 5 hours 5 26.3 6 - 7 hours 2 10.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 10.5 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 10.5 15.8 52.6 21.1 2.8 0.90 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 5.3 0.0 63.2 31.6 3.2 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 10.5 52.6 36.8 3.3 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 15.8 31.6 36.8 15.8 2.5 0.96 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 5.3 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 26.3 73.7 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 19 10.5 0.0 57.9 31.6 3.1 0.88 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 21.1 57.9 15.8 2.8 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 5.6 11.1 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 10.5 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 5.3 15.8 63.2 15.8 2.9 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 10.5 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 36.8 47.4 10.5 2.6 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79. % % 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 79.2 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 351 002L1 INTRO ENVIRONMENTAL EGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 8.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 14 56.0 Junior 12 48.0 C 9 36.0 Senior 13 52.0 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 4.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 24.0 Required by my major 25 100.0 3 hours 9 36.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 20.0 6 - 7 hours 4 16.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 3.7 0.0 96.3 0.0 2.9 0.38 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 3.7 25.9 70.4 0.0 2.7 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 26 0.0 11.5 76.9 11.5 3.0 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 7.4 88.9 3.7 3.0 0.34 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 3.7 88.9 7.4 3.0 0.34 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 11.1 37.0 51.9 0.0 2.4 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 7.4 18.5 63.0 11.1 2.8 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 80.8 19.2 3.2 0.40 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 25.9 55.6 14.8 2.8 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 27 3.7 3.7 85.2 7.4 3.0 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.31 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 96.2 0.0 3.0 0.20 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 3.8 96.2 0.0 3.0 0.20 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 3.8 96.2 0.0 3.0 0.20 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 11.5 23.1 61.5 3.8 2.6 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 7.7 30.8 61.5 0.0 2.5 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.63. % % 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 401S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 56.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 39.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 4.3 Senior 23 100.0 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 17 73.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 21.7 Required by my major 23 100.0 3 hours 1 4.3 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 24 4.2 0.0 79.2 16.7 3.1 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 8.3 20.8 54.2 16.7 2.8 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 19.0 66.7 9.5 2.8 0.68 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 14.3 28.6 47.6 9.5 2.5 0.87 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 8.3 20.8 58.3 12.5 2.8 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 4.2 87.5 8.3 3.0 0.36 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 31.8 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 4.2 20.8 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 19 5.3 15.8 63.2 15.8 2.9 0.74 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 4.2 4.2 70.8 20.8 3.1 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 4.2 29.2 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 24 4.2 8.3 58.3 29.2 3.1 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 13.0 60.9 26.1 3.1 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 17.4 60.9 21.7 3.0 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 20.0 65.0 15.0 3.0 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 8.7 30.4 52.2 8.7 2.6 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 4.2 45.8 37.5 12.5 2.6 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 4.2 29.2 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.78. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 96.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 402S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 4.8 A 11 52.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 38.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 4.8 Senior 20 95.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 4.8 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 13 61.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 19.0 Required by my major 20 95.2 3 hours 1 4.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.8 4 - 5 hours 2 9.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 5.0 20.0 60.0 15.0 2.9 0.75 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 25.0 20.0 50.0 5.0 2.4 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 26.3 26.3 36.8 10.5 2.3 1.00 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 18.8 18.8 62.5 0.0 2.4 0.81 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 20.0 35.0 40.0 5.0 2.3 0.86 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 5.0 10.0 80.0 5.0 2.9 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 26.3 31.6 31.6 10.5 2.3 0.99 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 15.0 25.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 10.0 5.0 60.0 25.0 3.0 0.86 11. Was available for consultation 17 5.9 35.3 47.1 11.8 2.6 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 15.8 15.8 52.6 15.8 2.7 0.95 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 42.1 36.8 10.5 2.5 0.84 14. Encouraged class participation 19 15.8 10.5 52.6 21.1 2.8 0.98 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 17.6 11.8 58.8 11.8 2.6 0.93 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 18.8 12.5 50.0 18.8 2.7 1.01 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 17.6 11.8 58.8 11.8 2.6 0.93 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 15.8 10.5 63.2 10.5 2.7 0.89 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 15.8 26.3 47.4 10.5 2.5 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 19.0 33.3 42.9 4.8 2.3 0.86 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 23.8 23.8 42.9 9.5 2.4 0.97. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 27 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 77.8 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 651 001L1 FUND WATER QUAL CNTRL I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Deitsch, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 33.3 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 2 22.2 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 5 55.6 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 11.1 % % 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 44.4 44.4 0.0 11.1 1.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 44.4 33.3 22.2 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 12.5 37.5 37.5 12.5 2.5 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . . % % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 482 001L1 ELEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 5 41.7 Senior 11 91.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 8.3 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 6 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 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 12 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.39 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 2.2 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 41.7 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 81.8 18.2 0.0 2.2 0.40 14. Encouraged class participation 12 8.3 0.0 83.3 8.3 2.9 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.42 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 45.5 54.5 0.0 2.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 36.4 45.5 18.2 0.0 1.8 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 41.7 41.7 8.3 2.5 0.80. % % 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 = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 48.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 001L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 40.0 Junior 5 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 15 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 4 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 45.0 Required by my major 20 100.0 3 hours 6 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.0 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 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 9.5 71.4 19.0 3.1 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 9.5 76.2 14.3 3.0 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 9.5 81.0 9.5 3.0 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 14.3 61.9 23.8 3.1 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 76.2 9.5 3.0 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 88.2 11.8 3.1 0.33 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.31 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 5.0 85.0 10.0 3.1 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 85.0 15.0 3.2 0.37 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 2.9 0.45 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59. % % 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 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 381 002L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Goble, Christine ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 57.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 36.8 Junior 2 10.5 C 1 5.3 Senior 17 89.5 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 7 36.8 Studies Program 2 10.5 2 hours 5 26.3 Required by my major 17 89.5 3 hours 3 15.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 21.1 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 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 9.5 71.4 19.0 3.1 0.54 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 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 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 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 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59. % % 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 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 33. Amount of work appropriate 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 34. Instructor explained expectations 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 % 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 = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 84.0 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 699 001L1 TOPS CE: CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hancher, Donn E. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 88.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 11.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 88.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 11.1 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 3 33.3 Required by my major 2 22.2 3 hours 3 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 6 66.7 4 - 5 hours 3 33.3 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 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 382 001L1 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 54.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 35.5 Junior 8 26.7 C 2 6.5 Senior 22 73.3 D 1 3.2 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 10.0 Required by my major 30 100.0 3 hours 3 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 26.7 6 - 7 hours 5 16.7 8 or more hours 11 36.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 31 0.0 16.1 74.2 9.7 2.9 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 6.5 29.0 51.6 12.9 2.7 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 9.7 3.2 67.7 19.4 3.0 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 12.9 58.1 29.0 3.2 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 12.9 12.9 51.6 22.6 2.8 0.93 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 19.4 67.7 12.9 2.9 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 19.4 16.1 61.3 3.2 2.5 0.85 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 19.4 22.6 54.8 3.2 2.4 0.85 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 9.7 25.8 54.8 9.7 2.6 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 6.5 48.4 45.2 3.4 0.62 11. Was available for consultation 30 13.3 33.3 43.3 10.0 2.5 0.86 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 9.7 12.9 71.0 6.5 2.7 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 12.9 22.6 61.3 3.2 2.5 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 31 9.7 32.3 54.8 3.2 2.5 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 36.4 63.6 0.0 2.6 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 3.2 9.7 80.6 6.5 2.9 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 9.7 77.4 12.9 3.0 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 9.7 3.2 74.2 12.9 2.9 0.75 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 9.7 35.5 51.6 3.2 2.5 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 6.5 16.1 58.1 19.4 2.9 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 19.4 25.8 25.8 29.0 2.6 1.11. % % 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 = 32 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 96.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 382 002L1 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 50.0 Junior 8 66.7 C 1 8.3 Senior 4 33.3 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 2 16.7 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 6 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 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 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 0.98 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 16.7 25.0 58.3 0.0 2.4 0.79 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 12 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.94 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.42 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62. % % 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 = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 92.3 % 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 at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1999 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 579 001L1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 38.1 Junior 1 5.0 C 1 4.8 Senior 17 85.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 5.0 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 4 19.0 Required by my major 12 57.1 3 hours 8 38.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 42.9 4 - 5 hours 8 38.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.8 % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 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 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 9.5 33.3 57.1 3.5 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 9.5 33.3 57.1 3.5 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 14.3 33.3 52.4 3.4 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 19.0 33.3 47.6 3.3 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 15.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 4.8 0.0 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.74 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 9.5 38.1 47.6 3.3 0.85 % % % % 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 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 9.5 33.3 57.1 3.5 0.68. % % 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 = 26 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 80.8 % 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 779 001L1 ADV GEOTECHNICAL ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 100.0 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 2 33.3 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 66.7 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 16.7 8 or more hours 1 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . . % % 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 = 6 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 = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 586 001L1 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harik, Issam E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 27.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 9.1 Senior 5 41.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 58.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 4 33.3 3 hours 5 41.7 Other (e.g. elective) 7 58.3 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 2 16.7 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 50.0