****************************************************************************** * * * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 634 001L1 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Abu-Lebdeh, Ghassan ----------------------------------------------------- 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 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 44.4 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 3 33.3 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 22.2 11.1 44.4 22.2 2.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 33.3 44.4 11.1 11.1 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 33.3 33.3 11.1 22.2 2.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 40.0 0.0 40.0 20.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 44.4 22.2 11.1 22.2 2.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 33.3 22.2 22.2 22.2 2.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 33.3 33.3 22.2 11.1 2.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 33.3 22.2 33.3 11.1 2.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 33.3 11.1 22.2 33.3 2.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 22.2 22.2 22.2 33.3 2.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 22.2 33.3 11.1 33.3 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 22.2 33.3 33.3 11.1 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 22.2 11.1 55.6 11.1 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 22.2 11.1 44.4 22.2 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 22.2 22.2 22.2 33.3 2.7 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 2.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 62.5 0.0 37.5 0.0 1.8 . . % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 331 001L1 TRANSPORTATION ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Aultman-Hall, Lisa M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 47.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 18 45.0 Junior 28 70.0 C 3 7.5 Senior 12 30.0 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 7.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 14 35.0 Required by my major 41 100.0 3 hours 13 32.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 2.5 8 or more hours 1 2.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 41 0.0 0.0 78.0 22.0 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 13.0 17.4 34.8 34.8 2.9 1.04 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 40 0.0 2.5 80.0 17.5 3.2 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 41 0.0 7.3 70.7 22.0 3.1 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 41 0.0 7.3 78.0 14.6 3.1 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 41 0.0 2.4 75.6 22.0 3.2 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 41 0.0 4.9 70.7 24.4 3.2 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 41 0.0 36.6 51.2 12.2 2.8 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 41 2.4 31.7 39.0 26.8 2.9 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 41 0.0 12.2 63.4 24.4 3.1 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 41 0.0 0.0 75.6 24.4 3.2 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 41 0.0 14.6 68.3 17.1 3.0 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 41 2.4 22.0 61.0 14.6 2.9 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 40 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 37 0.0 13.5 73.0 13.5 3.0 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 40 0.0 7.5 75.0 17.5 3.1 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 0.0 2.4 73.2 24.4 3.2 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 40 0.0 2.5 82.5 15.0 3.1 0.40 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 41 2.4 24.4 61.0 12.2 2.8 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 40 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 3.1 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 40 2.5 27.5 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.76. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 47 Number of forms scanned = 44 Number of forms with at least one student response = 43 Percent completed = 91.5 % 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 - FALL 2000 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 5 41.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 58.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 12 100.0 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 2 16.7 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 6 50.0 Required by my major 11 91.7 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 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 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 58.3 33.3 0.0 2.3 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 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 11 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.40 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 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 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G003A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 36.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 63.6 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 4 36.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 36.4 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 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 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 27.3 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 54.5 45.5 0.0 2.5 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52. % % 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 679 001L1 GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bentler, David J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 37.5 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 12.5 62.5 12.5 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 12.5 62.5 25.0 0.0 2.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 75.0 12.5 12.5 2.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . % % % % 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 62.5 25.0 12.5 2.5 . . % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 582 001L1 ADV STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 23.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 70.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 5.9 Senior 14 77.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 5.6 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 5.6 Studies Program 1 5.6 2 hours 4 22.2 Required by my major 13 72.2 3 hours 3 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 22.2 4 - 5 hours 10 55.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 5.6 11.1 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 5.6 0.0 94.4 0.0 2.9 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 11.8 29.4 52.9 5.9 2.5 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 5.6 83.3 11.1 3.1 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 22.2 72.2 5.6 2.8 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 27.8 61.1 5.6 2.7 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 94.4 5.6 3.1 0.24 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 5.6 88.9 5.6 3.0 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 5.9 94.1 0.0 2.9 0.24 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53. % % 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 94.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 682 001L1 ADV STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Blandford, George E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 60.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 1 20.0 3 hours 1 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 80.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 40.0 8 or more hours 1 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 2.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 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 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 004L1 TOPICS CE:MICROBIOLOGY IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGR. INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brion, Gail ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 57.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 42.9 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 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 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 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . % % % % 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 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 001S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 78.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 21.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 19 100.0 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 16 84.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 15.8 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 0.0 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 5.6 83.3 11.1 3.1 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 0.0 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 5.6 0.0 83.3 11.1 3.0 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 29.4 64.7 5.9 2.8 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 5.6 5.6 61.1 27.8 3.1 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 11.1 61.1 22.2 3.0 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 5.6 72.2 22.2 3.2 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 23.5 64.7 11.8 2.9 0.60 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 15.8 47.4 36.8 3.2 0.71. % % 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 100.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 401 002S1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheeks, John ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 25 86.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 13.8 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 28 96.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.4 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 21 72.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 24.1 Required by my major 29 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 3.4 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 29 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 6.9 6.9 65.5 20.7 3.0 0.76 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 6.9 62.1 31.0 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 3.4 10.3 65.5 20.7 3.0 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 0.0 69.0 31.0 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 10.3 55.2 34.5 3.2 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 0.0 7.1 75.0 17.9 3.1 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 3.4 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 60.7 39.3 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 6.9 58.6 34.5 3.3 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 3.6 14.3 67.9 14.3 2.9 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 17.9 50.0 32.1 3.1 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 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 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 29 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 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 - FALL 2000 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 2 10.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 42.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 9 47.4 Senior 19 100.0 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 10.5 Required by my major 18 94.7 3 hours 7 36.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.3 4 - 5 hours 8 42.1 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 5.3 84.2 10.5 3.1 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 84.2 5.3 2.9 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 26.3 36.8 36.8 0.0 2.1 0.81 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 0.0 84.2 15.8 3.2 0.37 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 5.3 73.7 21.1 3.2 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 10.5 31.6 47.4 10.5 2.6 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 15.8 10.5 73.7 0.0 2.6 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 63.2 36.8 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 19 5.3 10.5 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 5.3 0.0 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 31.6 52.6 5.3 2.5 0.77 14. Encouraged class participation 19 5.3 15.8 63.2 15.8 2.9 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 0.89 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 3.0 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 5.3 10.5 68.4 15.8 2.9 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 5.3 5.3 84.2 5.3 2.9 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 10.5 42.1 47.4 0.0 2.4 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 5.3 47.4 47.4 0.0 2.4 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 10.5 21.1 57.9 10.5 2.7 0.82. % % 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 76.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 486G001L1 REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gesund, Hans ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 46.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 46.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 15 100.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 2 13.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.7 4 - 5 hours 7 46.7 6 - 7 hours 6 40.0 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 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 7.1 78.6 14.3 3.1 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 26.7 26.7 40.0 6.7 2.3 0.96 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 26.7 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 505 001L1 CONSTRUCT PROJ PLAN/MGMT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hancher, Donn E. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 40.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 16 59.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 23 85.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 14.8 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 5 18.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 12 44.4 Required by my major 14 51.9 3 hours 7 25.9 Other (e.g. elective) 13 48.1 4 - 5 hours 2 7.4 6 - 7 hours 1 3.7 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 27 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 7.4 63.0 29.6 3.2 0.58 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 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 7.4 66.7 25.9 3.2 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 25.9 63.0 11.1 2.9 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 19.2 57.7 23.1 3.0 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 37.0 59.3 3.6 0.58. % % 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G001L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 44.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 55.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 22.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 4 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 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 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G002L1 SOIL 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 0 0.0 C 1 8.3 Senior 12 100.0 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 4 33.3 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 1 8.3 % % 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 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 16.7 50.0 16.7 16.7 2.3 0.98 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 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 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 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 11 0.0 18.2 36.4 45.5 3.3 0.79 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 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 12 8.3 25.0 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.94 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 41.7 58.3 0.0 2.6 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 0.0 45.5 45.5 3.3 0.90. % % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G003L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 60.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 10.0 Senior 10 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 30.0 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 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 50.0 40.0 10.0 0.0 1.6 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 30.0 60.0 10.0 2.8 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 50.0 40.0 10.0 2.6 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82. % % 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 90.9 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 471G004L1 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 64.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 100.0 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 14.3 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 8 57.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 21.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 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 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 40.0 26.7 26.7 6.7 2.0 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 6.7 73.3 13.3 2.9 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 2.9 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 6.7 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 13.3 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 3.0 0.38 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 6.7 40.0 46.7 6.7 2.5 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 20.0 73.3 6.7 2.9 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 53.3 33.3 6.7 2.4 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 6.7 20.0 60.0 13.3 2.8 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 6.7 20.0 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.83. % % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 671 001L1 ADVANCED SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hardin, Bobby O ----------------------------------------------------- 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 10 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 10.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 20.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 70.0 4 - 5 hours 4 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 4 40.0 % % 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 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 10.0 0.0 70.0 20.0 3.0 0.82 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 3.1 0.88 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 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 60.0 20.0 3.0 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 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 784 001L1 SHELL STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Harik, Issam E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 60.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 60.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 40.0 4 - 5 hours 3 60.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 341 001L1 FLUID MECHANICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lingireddy, Srinivasa ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 45.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 17 40.5 Junior 25 56.8 C 5 11.9 Senior 19 43.2 D 1 2.4 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 2.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 13 30.2 Required by my major 44 100.0 3 hours 11 25.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 14 32.6 6 - 7 hours 4 9.3 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 45 0.0 0.0 75.6 24.4 3.2 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 45 24.4 31.1 35.6 8.9 2.3 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 45 0.0 4.4 68.9 26.7 3.2 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 45 0.0 2.2 40.0 57.8 3.6 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 45 0.0 2.2 51.1 46.7 3.4 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 45 0.0 0.0 57.8 42.2 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 45 2.2 2.2 55.6 40.0 3.3 0.64 8. Graded assignments included comments 45 8.9 35.6 42.2 13.3 2.6 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 45 2.2 26.7 55.6 15.6 2.8 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 45 0.0 4.4 64.4 31.1 3.3 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 43 7.0 7.0 60.5 25.6 3.0 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 45 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 43 4.7 37.2 51.2 7.0 2.6 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 44 6.8 11.4 77.3 4.5 2.8 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 36 11.1 19.4 63.9 5.6 2.6 0.76 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 45 0.0 2.2 82.2 15.6 3.1 0.40 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 45 0.0 6.7 75.6 17.8 3.1 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 43 11.6 53.5 32.6 2.3 2.3 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 45 2.2 24.4 55.6 17.8 2.9 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 45 6.7 15.6 60.0 17.8 2.9 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 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 64 Number of forms scanned = 45 Number of forms with at least one student response = 45 Percent completed = 70.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 549 001L1 ENGINEERING HYDRAULICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lingireddy, Srinivasa ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 16.7 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 50.0 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 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 16.7 Required by my major 2 33.3 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 66.7 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 16.7 0.0 83.3 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . . % % 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 = 9 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 534 001L1 PAVEMENT DESIGN, CON- STRUCTION & MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mahboub, Kamyar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 26.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 66.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 12 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 20.0 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 9 60.0 Required by my major 4 26.7 3 hours 2 13.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 73.3 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 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 15 0.0 0.0 93.3 6.7 3.1 0.26 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 20.0 73.3 6.7 2.9 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 86.7 13.3 3.1 0.35 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 % % % % 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 503 001L1 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Maloney, William F ----------------------------------------------------- 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 8 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 20.0 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 40.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 6 60.0 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 40.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 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 10 10.0 0.0 70.0 20.0 3.0 0.82 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 57.1 14.3 28.6 0.0 1.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 55.6 22.2 11.1 2.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 20.0 30.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 55.6 44.4 0.0 2.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 2.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 33.3 44.4 22.2 0.0 1.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.97 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 30.0 20.0 50.0 0.0 2.2 0.92. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 001L1 TOPICS IN CE: CE SYSTEMS DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Maloney, William F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 47.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 52.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 18 94.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.3 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 3 15.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 5.3 Required by my major 16 84.2 3 hours 4 21.1 Other (e.g. elective) 3 15.8 4 - 5 hours 8 42.1 6 - 7 hours 2 10.5 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 18 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 78.9 10.5 2.9 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 5.3 73.7 21.1 3.2 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 5.3 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 10.5 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 0.0 94.4 5.6 3.1 0.24 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 5.6 11.1 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 15.8 68.4 15.8 3.0 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 5.3 5.3 73.7 15.8 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 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 = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 95.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 461G001L1 HYDROLOGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ormsbee, Lindell E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 7.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 20 76.9 Junior 1 3.8 C 4 15.4 Senior 24 92.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.8 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 3 11.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 7.7 Required by my major 26 100.0 3 hours 7 26.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 10 38.5 6 - 7 hours 3 11.5 8 or more hours 1 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 3.7 7.4 77.8 11.1 3.0 0.59 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 7.4 29.6 63.0 0.0 2.6 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 3.7 22.2 66.7 7.4 2.8 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 11.1 14.8 63.0 11.1 2.7 0.81 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 7.4 18.5 66.7 7.4 2.7 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 11.1 18.5 63.0 7.4 2.7 0.78 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 7.4 22.2 63.0 7.4 2.7 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 29.6 59.3 7.4 2.7 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 11.1 25.9 48.1 14.8 2.7 0.88 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 3.7 3.7 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.71 11. Was available for consultation 26 15.4 19.2 42.3 23.1 2.7 1.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 7.4 7.4 63.0 22.2 3.0 0.78 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 14.8 29.6 44.4 11.1 2.5 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 27 3.7 3.7 81.5 11.1 3.0 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 10.0 10.0 75.0 5.0 2.8 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 3.8 15.4 65.4 15.4 2.9 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 3.7 7.4 74.1 14.8 3.0 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 7.4 7.4 74.1 11.1 2.9 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 15.4 34.6 46.2 3.8 2.4 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 25.9 55.6 14.8 2.8 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 11.1 29.6 44.4 14.8 2.6 0.88. % % 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 = 44 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 61.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 106 001L1 COMPUTER GRAPHICS/COMMUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perry, Kenneth ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 43.8 Sophomore 8 50.0 B 7 43.8 Junior 5 31.3 C 1 6.3 Senior 3 18.8 D 1 6.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 18.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 25.0 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 3 18.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 18.8 6 - 7 hours 1 6.3 8 or more hours 2 12.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 0.0 10.5 52.6 36.8 3.3 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 5.3 31.6 63.2 3.6 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 5.3 26.3 68.4 3.6 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 10.5 31.6 57.9 3.5 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 10.5 52.6 36.8 3.3 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 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 16 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 10.5 36.8 52.6 3.4 0.69 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 16 0.0 18.8 31.3 50.0 3.3 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 15.8 52.6 31.6 3.2 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 5.6 0.0 33.3 61.1 3.5 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 5.6 33.3 61.1 3.6 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 86.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 211 001L1 SURVEYING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Reynolds, David ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.6 A 5 31.3 Sophomore 11 61.1 B 8 50.0 Junior 6 33.3 C 2 12.5 Senior 0 0.0 D 1 6.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 17.6 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 5 29.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 29.4 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 8 or more hours 3 17.6 % % 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 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 5.3 36.8 21.1 36.8 2.9 0.99 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 5.3 26.3 68.4 3.6 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 5.3 0.0 5.3 89.5 3.8 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 31.6 36.8 31.6 3.0 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 0.0 5.3 47.4 47.4 3.4 0.61 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 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 21.1 36.8 42.1 3.2 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 15.8 36.8 47.4 3.3 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 14.3 35.7 50.0 3.4 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 0.0 26.3 36.8 36.8 3.1 0.81 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 86.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 211 002L1 SURVEYING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Reynolds, David ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 42.9 Sophomore 9 60.0 B 7 50.0 Junior 3 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 20.0 D 1 7.1 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 46.7 6 - 7 hours 2 13.3 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % 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 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 17.6 41.2 41.2 0.0 2.2 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 76.5 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 17.6 41.2 41.2 3.2 0.75 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 18.8 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 29.4 58.8 11.8 2.8 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 23.5 52.9 23.5 3.0 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 0.0 0.0 56.3 43.8 3.4 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 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 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 211 003L1 SURVEYING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Reynolds, David ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 30.4 Sophomore 12 52.2 B 11 47.8 Junior 7 30.4 C 4 17.4 Senior 4 17.4 D 1 4.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 8.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 4.3 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 10 43.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 4 - 5 hours 4 17.4 6 - 7 hours 5 21.7 8 or more hours 1 4.3 % % 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 75.0 20.8 3.1 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 20.8 29.2 45.8 4.2 2.3 0.87 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 4.0 68.0 28.0 3.2 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 4.0 4.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 4.0 12.0 64.0 20.0 3.0 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 4.0 0.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 4.0 8.0 64.0 24.0 3.1 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 4.0 28.0 56.0 12.0 2.8 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 4.0 4.0 72.0 20.0 3.1 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 4.0 36.0 60.0 3.6 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 12.0 72.0 16.0 3.0 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 68.0 28.0 3.2 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 20.0 56.0 20.0 2.9 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 25 4.0 16.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 8.7 69.6 17.4 3.0 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 4.0 76.0 20.0 3.2 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 4.0 72.0 24.0 3.2 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 4.0 4.0 68.0 24.0 3.1 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 8.3 8.3 75.0 8.3 2.8 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 4.0 4.0 60.0 32.0 3.2 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 4.0 0.0 60.0 36.0 3.3 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 381 001L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rose, Jerry G ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 47.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 52.9 Junior 1 5.9 C 0 0.0 Senior 16 94.1 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 4 23.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 47.1 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 11.8 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 17 0.0 0.0 82.4 17.6 3.2 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 17.6 76.5 5.9 2.9 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 0.0 82.4 17.6 3.2 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 17.6 70.6 11.8 2.9 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 0.0 94.1 5.9 3.1 0.24 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 82.4 17.6 3.2 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 5.9 11.8 76.5 5.9 2.8 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 23.5 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.66 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 16 6.3 0.0 81.3 12.5 3.0 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 82.4 17.6 3.2 0.39 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 17.6 70.6 5.9 2.8 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 11.8 82.4 5.9 2.9 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 88.2 5.9 3.0 0.35 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 17.6 76.5 5.9 2.9 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 88.2 11.8 3.1 0.33 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 11.8 17.6 64.7 5.9 2.6 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 0.0 17.6 70.6 11.8 2.9 0.56 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 17.6 52.9 29.4 3.1 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 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 35. Instructor helped with my problems 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 11 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 3.1 0.30 % 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 = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 81.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 381 002L1 CIVIL ENGR MATERIALS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rose, Jerry G ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 29.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 70.6 Junior 2 11.8 C 0 0.0 Senior 15 88.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 17.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 35.3 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 2 11.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 29.4 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 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 17.6 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 11.8 76.5 5.9 2.8 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 5.9 82.4 11.8 3.1 0.43 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 5.9 11.8 58.8 23.5 3.0 0.79 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 29.4 64.7 5.9 2.8 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 17.6 64.7 17.6 3.0 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 17.6 64.7 11.8 2.8 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 17 5.9 11.8 70.6 11.8 2.9 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.40 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 0.34 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 0.34 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 3.1 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 40.0 53.3 0.0 2.5 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 5.9 5.9 82.4 5.9 2.9 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 5.9 11.8 70.6 11.8 2.9 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 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 599 002L1 TOPICS IN CE: RAILWAY OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rose, Jerry G ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 91.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 8.3 Junior 1 8.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 8 66.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 25.0 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 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 41.7 Required by my major 4 33.3 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 8 66.7 4 - 5 hours 1 8.3 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 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 8.3 16.7 75.0 3.7 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 92.3 3.9 0.28 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 23.1 69.2 3.6 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 3.8 0.38. % % 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 76.5 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 539 001L1 TRANSPORTATN SYS DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stamatiadis, Nick ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 65.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 34.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 24 92.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 7.7 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 3.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 26.9 Required by my major 20 76.9 3 hours 6 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 6 23.1 4 - 5 hours 8 30.8 6 - 7 hours 2 7.7 8 or more hours 2 7.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 3.6 60.7 35.7 3.3 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 0.0 58.6 41.4 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 20.7 58.6 20.7 3.0 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 0.0 51.7 48.3 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 0.0 37.9 62.1 3.6 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 31.0 69.0 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 3.6 46.4 50.0 3.5 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 0.0 48.3 51.7 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 0.0 41.4 58.6 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 0.0 3.6 75.0 21.4 3.2 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 0.0 65.5 34.5 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 0.0 62.1 37.9 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 0.0 17.2 51.7 31.0 3.1 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 0.0 0.0 27.6 72.4 3.7 0.45. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 633 001L1 AIR TRANSPORT ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stamatiadis, Nick ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 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 7 100.0 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 3 42.9 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 28.6 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 25.0 12.5 62.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . % % % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % 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 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 120 001A1 INTRO TO CIVIL ENGINEER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stevens, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 21 52.5 A 40 100.0 Sophomore 8 20.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 5 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 15.0 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 37 92.5 Studies Program 2 5.0 2 hours 3 7.5 Required by my major 37 92.5 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.5 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 48 2.1 0.0 50.0 47.9 3.4 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 5.3 0.0 57.9 36.8 3.3 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 2.3 4.5 56.8 36.4 3.3 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 4.3 0.0 56.5 39.1 3.3 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 48 2.1 0.0 56.3 41.7 3.4 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 45 2.2 0.0 55.6 42.2 3.4 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 2.6 2.6 53.8 41.0 3.3 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 3.4 3.4 58.6 34.5 3.2 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 47 2.1 0.0 57.4 40.4 3.4 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 47 2.1 0.0 59.6 38.3 3.3 0.60 11. Was available for consultation 43 2.3 2.3 62.8 32.6 3.3 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 46 2.2 2.2 58.7 37.0 3.3 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 46 2.2 2.2 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 46 2.2 2.2 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 42 2.4 0.0 61.9 35.7 3.3 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 39 2.6 2.6 59.0 35.9 3.3 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 2.4 4.9 61.0 31.7 3.2 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 2.2 0.0 57.8 40.0 3.4 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 44 2.3 4.5 54.5 38.6 3.3 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 44 2.3 2.3 52.3 43.2 3.4 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 44 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 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 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 25.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 62 Number of forms scanned = 50 Number of forms with at least one student response = 48 Percent completed = 77.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 120 002A1 INTRO TO CIVIL ENGINEER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stevens, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 27.3 A 29 90.6 Sophomore 7 21.2 B 2 6.3 Junior 14 42.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 9.1 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 1 3.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 30 93.8 Studies Program 2 6.3 2 hours 2 6.3 Required by my major 30 93.8 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 37 0.0 0.0 27.0 73.0 3.7 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 33 0.0 3.0 54.5 42.4 3.4 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 5.0 0.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 0.76 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 0.0 0.0 29.7 70.3 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 37 0.0 0.0 35.1 64.9 3.6 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 32 0.0 0.0 46.9 53.1 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 26 3.8 3.8 38.5 53.8 3.4 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 37 0.0 0.0 45.9 54.1 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 0.0 48.5 51.5 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 0.0 0.0 45.9 54.1 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 5.6 41.7 52.8 3.5 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 0.0 3.0 45.5 51.5 3.5 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 0.0 35.3 64.7 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 32 0.0 0.0 46.9 53.1 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 2.9 35.3 61.8 3.6 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 2.9 2.9 40.0 54.3 3.5 0.70 % % % % 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 37.1 62.9 3.6 0.49 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 46 Number of forms scanned = 41 Number of forms with at least one student response = 37 Percent completed = 80.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 521 001L1 ENGINEERING ECONOMY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stevens, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 51.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 17 48.6 Junior 2 5.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 31 86.1 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 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 11 30.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 30.6 Required by my major 18 50.0 3 hours 8 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 18 50.0 4 - 5 hours 6 16.7 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 36 2.8 0.0 63.9 33.3 3.3 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 36 2.8 2.8 61.1 33.3 3.3 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 2.8 2.8 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 2.8 2.8 63.9 30.6 3.2 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 2.8 0.0 66.7 30.6 3.3 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 2.8 0.0 66.7 30.6 3.3 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 2.9 0.0 51.4 45.7 3.4 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 3.0 3.0 66.7 27.3 3.2 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 2.8 5.6 63.9 27.8 3.2 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 2.8 0.0 58.3 38.9 3.3 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 33 3.0 3.0 66.7 27.3 3.2 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 2.8 0.0 63.9 33.3 3.3 0.61 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 2.8 5.6 63.9 27.8 3.2 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 35 2.9 2.9 65.7 28.6 3.2 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 31 3.2 6.5 71.0 19.4 3.1 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 2.9 0.0 71.4 25.7 3.2 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 2.9 0.0 65.7 31.4 3.3 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 2.9 0.0 68.6 28.6 3.2 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 2.9 14.7 55.9 26.5 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 32 0.0 9.4 62.5 28.1 3.2 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 32 0.0 3.1 50.0 46.9 3.4 0.56. % % 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 = 48 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 601 401L1 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stevens, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 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 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 42.9 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 2 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . . % % 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 106 002L1 COMPUTER GRAPHICS/COMMUN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Walker, Robert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.9 A 10 58.8 Sophomore 5 29.4 B 6 35.3 Junior 8 47.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 17.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 1 5.9 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 17.6 Studies Program 1 6.3 2 hours 5 29.4 Required by my major 15 93.8 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 3 17.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 0.0 35.3 52.9 11.8 2.8 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 5.9 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 5.9 0.0 47.1 47.1 3.4 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 52.9 3.5 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 11.8 47.1 41.2 3.3 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 23.5 52.9 23.5 3.0 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 18.8 56.3 25.0 3.1 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 29.4 41.2 29.4 3.0 0.79 % % % % 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 29.4 29.4 41.2 3.1 0.86. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 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 = 26 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 65.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 382 001L1 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wang, Shien T ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 24.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 51.7 Junior 2 6.7 C 7 24.1 Senior 28 93.3 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 3.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 24.1 Required by my major 29 100.0 3 hours 6 20.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 24.1 6 - 7 hours 7 24.1 8 or more hours 1 3.4 % % 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 9.7 71.0 19.4 3.1 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 3.2 6.5 51.6 38.7 3.3 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 0.0 6.5 64.5 29.0 3.2 0.56 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 6.5 16.1 51.6 25.8 3.0 0.84 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 3.2 67.7 29.0 3.3 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 63.3 36.7 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 3.2 38.7 35.5 22.6 2.8 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 16.1 45.2 25.8 12.9 2.4 0.91 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 0.0 51.6 48.4 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 31 0.0 3.2 67.7 29.0 3.3 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 9.7 32.3 32.3 25.8 2.7 0.96 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 6.7 36.7 40.0 16.7 2.7 0.84 14. Encouraged class participation 30 3.3 33.3 50.0 13.3 2.7 0.74 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.78 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 0.0 6.5 64.5 29.0 3.2 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 3.2 64.5 32.3 3.3 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 19.4 54.8 25.8 3.1 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 13.3 36.7 36.7 13.3 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 29 0.0 13.8 65.5 20.7 3.1 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 13.8 27.6 44.8 13.8 2.6 0.91. % % 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 = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 83.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 487G001L1 STEEL STRUCTURES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wang, Shien T ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 30.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 69.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 13 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 12 92.3 3 hours 6 46.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 7.7 4 - 5 hours 4 30.8 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 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 30.8 61.5 0.0 2.5 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 92.9 7.1 3.1 0.27 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 0.36 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 0.0 92.9 0.0 2.9 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.39 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 7.1 42.9 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 7.1 28.6 64.3 0.0 2.6 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 0.36 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 7.1 21.4 71.4 0.0 2.6 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 14 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 7.1 42.9 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 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 = 15 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 93.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 351 001L1 INTRO ENVIRONMENTAL EGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wang, Yi Tin ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 23.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 17 65.4 Junior 15 55.6 C 3 11.5 Senior 11 40.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.7 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 3.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 25.9 Required by my major 27 100.0 3 hours 9 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 9 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 3.7 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 28 0.0 3.6 75.0 21.4 3.2 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 3.6 67.9 28.6 3.3 0.52 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 3.6 75.0 21.4 3.2 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 10.7 75.0 14.3 3.0 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 7.1 14.3 60.7 17.9 2.9 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 3.6 67.9 28.6 3.3 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 44.8 41.4 13.8 2.7 0.71 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 3.6 28.6 50.0 17.9 2.8 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 3.6 71.4 25.0 3.2 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 26 3.8 15.4 69.2 11.5 2.9 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 14.8 77.8 7.4 2.9 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 11.1 37.0 48.1 3.7 2.4 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 26 3.8 11.5 73.1 11.5 2.9 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 26.1 47.8 21.7 2.9 0.81 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 7.4 77.8 14.8 3.1 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 3.7 74.1 22.2 3.2 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 77.8 18.5 3.1 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 3.8 34.6 46.2 15.4 2.7 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 14.3 64.3 21.4 3.1 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 7.1 35.7 46.4 10.7 2.6 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 85.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 653 001L1 WATER QUAL-SURFACE WATER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wang, Yi Tin ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 12.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 87.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 87.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 12.5 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 1 12.5 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 87.5 4 - 5 hours 6 75.0 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 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 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 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 90.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 303 001L1 INTRO TO CONSTRUCT ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Werkmeister, Raymond ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 8.0 Sophomore 2 4.0 B 35 70.0 Junior 27 54.0 C 9 18.0 Senior 21 42.0 D 2 4.0 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 10.0 Studies Program 1 2.0 2 hours 13 26.0 Required by my major 49 98.0 3 hours 15 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 12 24.0 6 - 7 hours 3 6.0 8 or more hours 2 4.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 52 0.0 11.5 73.1 15.4 3.0 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 52 5.8 28.8 59.6 5.8 2.7 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 51 5.9 11.8 74.5 7.8 2.8 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 52 19.2 23.1 48.1 9.6 2.5 0.92 5. Grading was fair and consistent 51 25.5 39.2 31.4 3.9 2.1 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 52 3.8 7.7 78.8 9.6 2.9 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 51 9.8 13.7 68.6 7.8 2.7 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 50 20.0 38.0 40.0 2.0 2.2 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 52 15.4 48.1 28.8 7.7 2.3 0.82 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 52 1.9 9.6 50.0 38.5 3.3 0.71 11. Was available for consultation 50 0.0 4.0 66.0 30.0 3.3 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 51 5.9 23.5 58.8 11.8 2.8 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 50 18.0 32.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 50 2.0 12.0 76.0 10.0 2.9 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 40 5.0 27.5 60.0 7.5 2.7 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 50 6.0 18.0 70.0 6.0 2.8 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 50 6.0 28.0 56.0 10.0 2.7 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 52 3.8 11.5 73.1 11.5 2.9 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 50 10.0 40.0 46.0 4.0 2.4 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 52 7.7 46.2 36.5 9.6 2.5 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 52 23.1 34.6 32.7 9.6 2.3 0.94. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 57 Number of forms scanned = 57 Number of forms with at least one student response = 52 Percent completed = 91.2 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 471G001A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Woolery, Edward W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 57.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 100.0 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 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 57.1 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 2 28.6 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . . % % 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % 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 = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 88.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 471G004A2 SOIL MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Woolery, Edward W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 61.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 38.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 18 100.0 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 3 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 44.4 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 17 0.0 5.9 70.6 23.5 3.2 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 5.9 11.8 58.8 23.5 3.0 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 0.0 17.6 58.8 23.5 3.1 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 6.3 25.0 50.0 18.8 2.8 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 11.8 58.8 29.4 3.2 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 5.9 11.8 64.7 17.6 2.9 0.75 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 11.8 35.3 29.4 23.5 2.6 1.00 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 5.9 23.5 47.1 23.5 2.9 0.86 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 23.5 47.1 23.5 2.9 0.86 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 17.6 58.8 23.5 3.1 0.66 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 35.3 35.3 23.5 2.8 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 23.5 52.9 23.5 3.0 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 5.9 5.9 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 5.9 5.9 70.6 17.6 3.0 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 5.9 0.0 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.66 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 5.9 35.3 47.1 11.8 2.6 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 6.3 37.5 56.3 0.0 2.5 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.73. % % 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 14 7.1 42.9 42.9 7.1 2.5 0.76 33. Amount of work appropriate 15 33.3 40.0 20.0 6.7 2.0 0.93 34. Instructor explained expectations 15 6.7 20.0 53.3 20.0 2.9 0.83 35. Instructor helped with my problems 15 6.7 13.3 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.80 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 % 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 = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CE 679 001L2 GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Woolery, Edward W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 100.0 4 - 5 hours 3 37.5 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 12.5 62.5 12.5 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 12.5 62.5 25.0 0.0 2.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . % % % % 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 . . % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 421 001L1 CIV ENG SYSTEMS ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yost, Scott ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 7.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 46.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 6 46.2 Senior 13 100.0 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 7.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 7.7 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 1 7.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 9 69.2 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 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 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 30.8 61.5 7.7 2.8 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 23.1 23.1 38.5 15.4 2.5 1.05 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 7.7 46.2 46.2 0.0 2.4 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 41.7 41.7 16.7 0.0 1.8 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 38.5 53.8 7.7 2.7 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 15.4 53.8 23.1 7.7 2.2 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 7.7 15.4 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 15.4 76.9 0.0 7.7 2.0 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 15.4 46.2 38.5 0.0 2.2 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 38.5 53.8 7.7 2.7 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 37. Question 37 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 4.2 0.75 38. Question 38 11 27.3 9.1 45.5 9.1 9.1 2.6 1.29 39. Question 39 10 10.0 10.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 3.3 1.16 40. Question 40 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 3.8 0.60 41. Question 41 11 18.2 18.2 27.3 36.4 0.0 2.8 1.17 42. Question 42 11 9.1 18.2 36.4 27.3 9.1 3.1 1.14 43. Question 43 11 9.1 9.1 18.2 54.5 9.1 3.5 1.13 44. Question 44 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 3.4 0.84 45. Question 45 11 36.4 27.3 18.2 9.1 9.1 2.3 1.35 46. Question 46 11 18.2 54.5 27.3 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.70 47. Question 47 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 18.2 9.1 3.0 1.10 48. Question 48 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 45.5 9.1 3.5 0.82 Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 86.7 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 441 001L1 FLUID MECHANICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yost, Scott ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 18.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 81.8 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 45.5 6 - 7 hours 3 27.3 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % 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 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 44.4 22.2 33.3 0.0 1.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 8.3 8.3 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 8.3 8.3 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 66.7 25.0 0.0 2.2 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 8.3 58.3 25.0 3.0 0.85. % % 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 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.89 33. Amount of work appropriate 12 58.3 33.3 8.3 0.0 1.5 0.67 34. Instructor explained expectations 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 35. Instructor helped with my problems 12 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.39 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 12 8.3 50.0 41.7 0.0 2.3 0.65 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 441 002L1 FLUID MECHANICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yost, Scott ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 10.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 90.0 Junior 1 10.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 90.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 4 40.0 8 or more hours 3 30.0 % % 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 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 0.0 2.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 50.0 30.0 20.0 2.7 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 2.5 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 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 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 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 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 20.0 50.0 30.0 0.0 2.1 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 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 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 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 441 003L1 FLUID MECHANICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yost, Scott ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 60.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 13 86.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 13.3 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 4 26.7 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 4 26.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 13.3 8 or more hours 2 13.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 6.7 6.7 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 54.5 27.3 18.2 0.0 1.6 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 6.7 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 6.7 6.7 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 13.3 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 6.7 40.0 53.3 0.0 2.5 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.41 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 20.0 66.7 6.7 2.7 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 6.7 20.0 73.3 0.0 2.7 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 13.3 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 6.7 6.7 80.0 6.7 2.9 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 13.3 40.0 40.0 6.7 2.4 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 6.7 6.7 86.7 0.0 2.8 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 6.7 6.7 86.7 0.0 2.8 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 6.7 6.7 86.7 0.0 2.8 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 26.7 20.0 46.7 6.7 2.3 0.98 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 13.3 20.0 60.0 6.7 2.6 0.83. % % 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 13 7.7 0.0 84.6 7.7 2.9 0.64 33. Amount of work appropriate 13 23.1 46.2 30.8 0.0 2.1 0.76 34. Instructor explained expectations 13 0.0 15.4 84.6 0.0 2.8 0.38 35. Instructor helped with my problems 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 13 7.7 30.8 61.5 0.0 2.5 0.66 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Civil Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CE 441 004L1 FLUID MECHANICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yost, Scott ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 27.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 54.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 18.2 Senior 10 90.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 9.1 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 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 6 - 7 hours 1 9.1 8 or more hours 2 18.2 % % 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 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 44.4 33.3 22.2 0.0 1.8 . 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 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 33.3 58.3 0.0 2.5 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 33.3 58.3 0.0 2.5 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 33.3 58.3 8.3 2.8 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 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.97 33. Amount of work appropriate 10 40.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 2.1 1.10 34. Instructor explained expectations 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 35. Instructor helped with my problems 10 10.0 40.0 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.70 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 10 40.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 1.9 0.88 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 330 002L1 FLUID MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Kimberly ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 22.7 Junior 20 90.9 C 6 27.3 Senior 1 4.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.5 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 4.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 9.1 Required by my major 22 100.0 3 hours 7 31.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 10 45.5 6 - 7 hours 2 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 22 0.0 0.0 68.2 31.8 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 9.1 59.1 31.8 3.2 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 28.6 47.6 19.0 2.8 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 68.4 31.6 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 4.8 76.2 19.0 3.1 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 19.0 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 63.6 31.8 3.3 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 45.5 40.9 13.6 2.7 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 4.5 4.5 45.5 45.5 3.3 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 4.5 59.1 36.4 3.3 0.57. % % 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 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 22 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 4.7 0.46 38. Question 38 22 0.0 4.5 18.2 40.9 36.4 4.1 0.87 39. Question 39 22 0.0 0.0 4.5 59.1 36.4 4.3 0.57 40. Question 40 22 0.0 4.5 13.6 36.4 45.5 4.2 0.87 41. Question 41 22 0.0 4.5 9.1 59.1 27.3 4.1 0.75 42. Question 42 22 0.0 0.0 4.5 77.3 18.2 4.1 0.47 43. Question 43 19 0.0 10.5 42.1 36.8 10.5 3.5 0.84 44. Question 44 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . 45. Question 45 17 0.0 0.0 35.3 35.3 29.4 3.9 0.83 Number of forms preslugged = 27 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 81.5 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 599 002L1 TOPICS IN CHEMICAL ENGR: BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Anderson, Kimberly ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 28.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 57.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 14.3 Senior 11 78.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 21.4 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 4 28.6 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 6 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 14 100.0 4 - 5 hours 2 14.3 6 - 7 hours 1 7.1 8 or more hours 1 7.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 26.7 40.0 33.3 3.1 0.80 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 26.7 66.7 6.7 2.8 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 27.3 72.7 0.0 2.7 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 73.3 26.7 3.3 0.46 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 33.3 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.68 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 26.7 46.7 26.7 3.0 0.76. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 4.5 0.52 38. Question 38 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 4.5 0.64 39. Question 39 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 4.4 0.51 40. Question 40 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 4.3 0.62 41. Question 41 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 42.9 14.3 3.6 0.84 42. Question 42 15 0.0 20.0 20.0 53.3 6.7 3.5 0.92 Number of forms preslugged = 16 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 93.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 550 001L1 CHEMICAL REACTOR DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Bhattacharyya, Dibakar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 18.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 11 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 6 27.3 Senior 21 95.5 D 1 4.5 Graduate 1 4.5 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 9.1 Required by my major 21 95.5 3 hours 4 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.5 4 - 5 hours 9 40.9 6 - 7 hours 4 18.2 8 or more hours 3 13.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 23 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 8.7 47.8 43.5 3.3 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 8.7 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 17.4 56.5 26.1 3.1 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 4.3 82.6 13.0 3.1 0.42 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 4.3 8.7 60.9 26.1 3.1 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 39.1 60.9 3.6 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 22 4.5 18.2 63.6 13.6 2.9 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 18.8 75.0 6.3 2.9 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 87.0 13.0 3.1 0.34 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 36.8 52.6 5.3 2.6 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 8.7 56.5 34.8 3.3 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 13.0 47.8 39.1 3.3 0.69. % % 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 = 23 Number of forms with at least one student response = 23 Percent completed = 71.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 471 201L1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dunbar, Paul ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 2 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 16.7 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 66.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 33.3 50.0 16.7 0.0 1.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 14.3 0.0 71.4 14.3 2.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 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 7 0.0 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . 28. Guided student report preparation 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 29. Students free to express opinions 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 433 002L1 CHEM ENGINEERING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = GRULKE, ERIC ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 100.0 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 28.6 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 2.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 50.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 1.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . . % % 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 80.0 20.0 0.0 2.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 7 42.9 57.1 0.0 0.0 1.6 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 7 57.1 42.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 7 42.9 42.9 14.3 0.0 1.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 3.8 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 3.6 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 4.6 . 40. Question 40 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 4.4 . 41. Question 41 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 3.8 . Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 433 001A2 CHEM ENGINEERING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = HAMRIN JR, CHARLES ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 31.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 62.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.3 Senior 16 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 6.3 Required by my major 16 100.0 3 hours 5 31.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 12.5 6 - 7 hours 3 18.8 8 or more hours 5 31.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 0.0 35.7 50.0 14.3 2.8 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 7.1 0.0 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.73 4. Exams reflected what was taught 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 21.4 42.9 21.4 14.3 2.3 0.99 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 7.1 0.0 85.7 7.1 2.9 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 42.9 35.7 14.3 7.1 1.9 0.95 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 53.8 30.8 15.4 2.6 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 14 7.1 7.1 71.4 14.3 2.9 0.73 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 7.7 61.5 23.1 7.7 2.3 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 33.3 58.3 8.3 2.8 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 7.1 7.1 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 7.1 71.4 14.3 2.9 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 15.4 46.2 30.8 7.7 2.3 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 21.4 21.4 50.0 7.1 2.4 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 21.4 35.7 35.7 7.1 2.3 0.91. % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 37.5 25.0 37.5 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 11 18.2 18.2 54.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 34. Instructor explained expectations 11 18.2 63.6 18.2 0.0 2.0 0.63 35. Instructor helped with my problems 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.97 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 11 36.4 36.4 27.3 0.0 1.9 0.83 % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 17 5.9 0.0 47.1 41.2 5.9 3.4 0.87 38. Question 38 17 0.0 5.9 41.2 41.2 11.8 3.6 0.80 39. Question 39 17 0.0 11.8 11.8 52.9 23.5 3.9 0.93 40. Question 40 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 52.9 11.8 3.7 0.77 41. Question 41 16 6.3 12.5 18.8 50.0 12.5 3.5 1.10 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 89.5 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 101 001L1 INTRO TO CHEMICAL ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hamrin Jr, Charles E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 20 58.8 A 29 85.3 Sophomore 6 17.6 B 3 8.8 Junior 4 11.8 C 1 2.9 Senior 3 8.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.9 Pass or Audit 1 2.9 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 29 85.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 11.8 Required by my major 29 85.3 3 hours 1 2.9 Other (e.g. elective) 5 14.7 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 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 5.7 17.1 60.0 17.1 2.9 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 5.7 11.4 48.6 34.3 3.1 0.83 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 54.3 45.7 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 0.0 5.7 60.0 34.3 3.3 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 11.4 34.3 45.7 8.6 2.5 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 2.9 20.0 51.4 25.7 3.0 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 2.9 51.4 45.7 3.4 0.56 11. Was available for consultation 29 3.4 6.9 58.6 31.0 3.2 0.71 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 2.9 11.4 60.0 25.7 3.1 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 5.7 34.3 42.9 17.1 2.7 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 17.1 48.6 34.3 3.2 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 8.8 64.7 26.5 3.2 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 15.2 57.6 27.3 3.1 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 2.9 14.3 57.1 25.7 3.1 0.73 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 6.5 38.7 41.9 12.9 2.6 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 2.9 35.3 44.1 17.6 2.8 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 5.9 26.5 35.3 32.4 2.9 0.92. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 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 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 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 35 2.9 0.0 2.9 11.4 82.9 4.7 0.79 38. Question 38 35 0.0 0.0 2.9 22.9 74.3 4.7 0.52 39. Question 39 34 2.9 2.9 11.8 44.1 38.2 4.1 0.95 40. Question 40 35 2.9 17.1 14.3 28.6 37.1 3.8 1.21 41. Question 41 35 0.0 2.9 17.1 28.6 51.4 4.3 0.86 42. Question 42 35 2.9 2.9 17.1 31.4 45.7 4.1 1.00 43. Question 43 33 9.1 3.0 24.2 21.2 42.4 3.8 1.28 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 49 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 470 001L1 PROFESSIONALISM, ETHICS AND SAFETY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hamrin Jr, Charles E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 24 100.0 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 23 95.8 Studies Program 2 8.3 2 hours 1 4.2 Required by my major 22 91.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 33.3 33.3 25.0 8.3 2.1 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 29.2 62.5 8.3 2.8 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 16.7 62.5 20.8 3.0 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 4.2 66.7 29.2 3.3 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 13.0 30.4 43.5 13.0 2.6 0.90 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.87 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 4.2 12.5 54.2 29.2 3.1 0.78 11. Was available for consultation 19 5.3 5.3 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.71 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 8.3 20.8 54.2 16.7 2.8 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 17.4 47.8 26.1 8.7 2.3 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 24 4.2 8.3 70.8 16.7 3.0 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 5.3 31.6 52.6 10.5 2.7 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 4.2 33.3 50.0 12.5 2.7 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 8.3 37.5 45.8 8.3 2.5 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 4.2 25.0 62.5 8.3 2.8 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 17.4 52.2 21.7 8.7 2.2 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 25.0 33.3 33.3 8.3 2.3 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 8.3 45.8 33.3 12.5 2.5 0.83. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 37. Question 37 22 13.6 13.6 36.4 18.2 18.2 3.1 1.28 38. Question 38 23 0.0 26.1 26.1 21.7 26.1 3.5 1.16 39. Question 39 24 8.3 16.7 25.0 29.2 20.8 3.4 1.24 40. Question 40 16 25.0 25.0 31.3 6.3 12.5 2.6 1.31 41. Question 41 21 9.5 23.8 33.3 14.3 19.0 3.1 1.26 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 29 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 82.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 630 001L1 TRANSPORT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ho, W.S. Winston ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 80.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 3 60.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 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 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 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 5 20.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 433 002A2 CHEM ENGINEERING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = KNUTSON, BARBARA ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 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 3 37.5 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 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 2.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . . % % 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 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 50.0 33.3 16.7 0.0 1.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 66.7 33.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 50.0 16.7 33.3 0.0 1.8 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 4.2 . 38. Question 38 6 0.0 16.7 0.0 66.7 16.7 3.8 . 39. Question 39 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 4.7 . 40. Question 40 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 4.7 . 41. Question 41 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 16.7 50.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 8 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 433 001A3 CHEM ENGINEERING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kermode, Richard I ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 30.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 61.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 7.7 Senior 13 100.0 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 7.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 13 100.0 3 hours 4 30.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 2 15.4 8 or more hours 4 30.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 8.3 41.7 33.3 16.7 2.6 0.90 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 46.2 38.5 15.4 2.7 0.75 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 7.7 7.7 76.9 7.7 2.8 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 23.1 30.8 30.8 15.4 2.4 1.04 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 15.4 46.2 23.1 15.4 2.4 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 13 7.7 23.1 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 15.4 38.5 30.8 15.4 2.5 0.97 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 7.7 23.1 61.5 7.7 2.7 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 15.4 84.6 0.0 2.8 0.38. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 25.0 12.5 50.0 12.5 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 2.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 11.1 11.1 55.6 22.2 2.9 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 2.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = at least 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 455 001L1 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROCESS DESIGN I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kermode, Richard I ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 37.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 24.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 11 37.9 Senior 30 100.0 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 1 3.3 2 hours 8 27.6 Required by my major 29 96.7 3 hours 12 41.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 20.7 6 - 7 hours 1 3.4 8 or more hours 2 6.9 % % 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 6.5 71.0 22.6 3.2 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 6.5 9.7 71.0 12.9 2.9 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 0.0 6.5 74.2 19.4 3.1 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 22.6 58.1 19.4 3.0 0.66 5. Grading was fair and consistent 31 0.0 6.5 80.6 12.9 3.1 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 6.5 61.3 32.3 3.3 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 3.2 77.4 19.4 3.2 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 26.7 66.7 6.7 2.8 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 0.0 35.5 51.6 12.9 2.8 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 3.2 45.2 51.6 3.5 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 30 0.0 3.3 66.7 30.0 3.3 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 0.0 9.7 71.0 19.4 3.1 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 20.0 23.3 43.3 13.3 2.5 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 31 3.2 12.9 71.0 12.9 2.9 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 8.7 13.0 73.9 4.3 2.7 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 0.0 12.9 74.2 12.9 3.0 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 9.7 80.6 9.7 3.0 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 3.2 77.4 19.4 3.2 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 33.3 20.0 40.0 6.7 2.2 1.00 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 31 9.7 29.0 48.4 12.9 2.6 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 3.2 22.6 45.2 29.0 3.0 0.82. % % 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 599 001L1 TOPICS IN CHEMICAL ENGR: COLLOIDS AND INTERFACES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Knutson, Barbara ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 18.2 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 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 8 72.7 4 - 5 hours 6 54.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % 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 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 18.2 81.8 3.8 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 0.39 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.29 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 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 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 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 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 % % % % 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 4.9 . 38. Question 38 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 4.9 . 39. Question 39 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 4.9 . 40. Question 40 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 4.7 . 41. Question 41 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 4.7 . 42. Question 42 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 43. Question 43 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 4.7 . 44. Question 44 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 4.7 . 45. Question 45 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 330 201L1 FLUID MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lee-Desautels, Rhonda ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 22.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 44.4 Junior 7 77.8 C 2 22.2 Senior 1 11.1 D 1 11.1 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 11.1 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 77.8 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 2 22.2 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 4 44.4 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 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 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 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 % % % % 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 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 433 001L1 CHEM ENGINEERING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = RANKIN, STEPHEN ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 28.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 64.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 7.1 Senior 14 100.0 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 7.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 8 or more hours 5 35.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 7.7 23.1 69.2 0.0 2.6 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 7.1 21.4 71.4 0.0 2.6 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 7.1 42.9 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 7.1 0.0 92.9 0.0 2.9 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 42.9 35.7 21.4 0.0 1.8 0.80 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 7.1 14.3 71.4 7.1 2.8 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 18.2 18.2 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.82 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 14.3 14.3 64.3 7.1 2.6 0.84 11. Was available for consultation 14 7.1 7.1 85.7 0.0 2.8 0.58 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 15.4 7.7 76.9 0.0 2.6 0.77 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 23.1 38.5 38.5 0.0 2.2 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 12 16.7 25.0 58.3 0.0 2.4 0.79 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 2.9 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 21.4 71.4 7.1 2.9 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 23.1 61.5 15.4 0.0 1.9 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 21.4 21.4 57.1 0.0 2.4 0.84 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 28.6 42.9 28.6 0.0 2.0 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 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 7 42.9 28.6 28.6 0.0 1.9 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 37.5 25.0 37.5 0.0 2.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 25.0 12.5 62.5 0.0 2.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 25.0 12.5 62.5 0.0 2.4 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 37.5 25.0 37.5 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 19 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 73.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 415 001L1 SEPARATION PROCESSES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rankin, Stephen ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 35.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 25.0 Junior 17 85.0 C 6 30.0 Senior 3 15.0 D 2 10.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 19 95.0 3 hours 2 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.0 4 - 5 hours 2 10.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 8 or more hours 15 75.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 5.0 0.0 80.0 15.0 3.1 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 35.0 35.0 25.0 5.0 2.0 0.92 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 10.0 20.0 50.0 20.0 2.8 0.89 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 5.0 10.0 60.0 25.0 3.1 0.76 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 10.0 5.0 55.0 30.0 3.1 0.89 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 10.0 10.0 65.0 15.0 2.9 0.81 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 5.0 0.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 11.1 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 15.0 30.0 45.0 10.0 2.5 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 5.0 5.0 65.0 25.0 3.1 0.72 11. Was available for consultation 20 5.0 0.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 10.0 15.0 55.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 30.0 30.0 35.0 5.0 2.2 0.93 14. Encouraged class participation 19 15.8 31.6 42.1 10.5 2.5 0.90 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 18.2 0.0 72.7 9.1 2.7 0.90 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 5.0 15.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.83 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 5.0 15.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.83 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 15.0 10.0 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.99 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 35.0 15.0 45.0 5.0 2.2 1.01 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 15.0 20.0 50.0 15.0 2.7 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 15.0 45.0 30.0 10.0 2.4 0.88. % % 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 19 5.3 10.5 63.2 21.1 0.0 3.0 0.75 38. Question 38 19 10.5 21.1 52.6 15.8 0.0 2.7 0.87 39. Question 39 19 5.3 42.1 36.8 15.8 0.0 2.6 0.83 40. Question 40 19 10.5 15.8 42.1 31.6 0.0 2.9 0.97 41. Question 41 19 10.5 26.3 42.1 21.1 0.0 2.7 0.93 42. Question 42 19 10.5 31.6 42.1 15.8 0.0 2.6 0.90 43. Question 43 19 5.3 10.5 68.4 15.8 0.0 2.9 0.71 44. Question 44 19 15.8 26.3 42.1 15.8 0.0 2.6 0.96 45. Question 45 19 5.3 0.0 63.2 31.6 0.0 3.2 0.71 46. Question 46 19 5.3 5.3 68.4 21.1 0.0 3.1 0.71 Number of forms preslugged = 24 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 505 001L1 ANALYSIS OF CME PROBS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Ray, Asit K ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 57.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 85.7 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 7 100.0 3 hours 2 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 2 28.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 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 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 200 002L1 PROCESS PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schrodt, J Thomas ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 33.3 B 1 33.3 Junior 1 33.3 C 2 66.7 Senior 1 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 66.7 8 or more hours 1 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 60.0 0.0 40.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . . % % 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 = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 55.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 320 001L1 ENGR THERMODYNAMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schrodt, J Thomas ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 14.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 42.9 Junior 5 71.4 C 2 28.6 Senior 1 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 14.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 14.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 71.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 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 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 471 001L1 SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Schrodt, J Thomas ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 77.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 22.2 Junior 16 84.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 15.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 94.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 5.6 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 19 0.0 5.3 63.2 31.6 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 31.6 57.9 10.5 2.8 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 0.0 78.9 21.1 3.2 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 5.3 10.5 73.7 10.5 2.9 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 36.8 52.6 5.3 2.6 0.69 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 5.3 31.6 52.6 10.5 2.7 0.75 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 18.8 75.0 6.3 2.9 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 0.0 6.3 87.5 6.3 3.0 0.37 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 14.3 35.7 42.9 7.1 2.4 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 7.1 64.3 28.6 3.2 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 10.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 2.8 1.03 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 6.3 25.0 43.8 25.0 2.9 0.89 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 14.3 35.7 28.6 21.4 2.6 1.02 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 10.5 42.1 47.4 0.0 2.4 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 10.5 42.1 42.1 5.3 2.4 0.77. % % 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 13 0.0 38.5 46.2 15.4 2.8 0.73 28. Guided student report preparation 13 30.8 46.2 23.1 0.0 1.9 0.76 29. Students free to express opinions 13 0.0 30.8 61.5 7.7 2.8 0.60 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 9 0.0 55.6 33.3 11.1 2.6 . 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 = 24 Number of forms scanned = 20 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 470 201L1 PROFESSIONALISM, ETHICS AND SAFETY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Silverstein, David L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 25.0 Junior 2 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 100.0 Required by my major 3 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 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 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . . % % 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 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 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 101 201L1 INTRO TO CHEMICAL ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Smart, Jim L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 75.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 2 25.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 12.5 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 87.5 3 hours 5 62.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 12.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 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 9 0.0 44.4 33.3 22.2 2.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 22.2 22.2 55.6 0.0 2.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 12.5 50.0 37.5 0.0 2.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 2.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 22.2 11.1 66.7 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 2.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 12.5 0.0 87.5 0.0 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 0.0 2.2 . 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 33.3 55.6 11.1 0.0 1.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 25.0 62.5 12.5 0.0 1.9 . . % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 2.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CME 515 001L1 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tsang, Tate T ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 33.3 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 50.0 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 1 16.7 3 hours 4 66.7 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 2 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 212 001L1 ELECT PROPS OF MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Chen, Zhi ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 36.4 Junior 1 9.1 C 2 18.2 Senior 10 90.9 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 major 7 63.6 3 hours 6 54.5 Other (e.g. elective) 4 36.4 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 7.7 0.0 84.6 7.7 2.9 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 7.7 84.6 7.7 3.0 0.41 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 15.4 7.7 61.5 15.4 2.8 0.93 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 30.8 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.69 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 23.1 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 15.4 61.5 15.4 2.8 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 7.7 7.7 69.2 15.4 2.9 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 7.7 15.4 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.73. % % 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 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 = 22 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 59.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 585 001L1 MATERIALS CHARACTER TECHNIQUES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dickey, Elizabeth C. ----------------------------------------------------- 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 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 5 55.6 6 - 7 hours 3 33.3 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 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 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 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 0.0 41.7 50.0 3.3 0.89 % % % % 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 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 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 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 12 0.0 8.3 0.0 33.3 58.3 4.4 0.90 38. Question 38 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 4.5 0.67 39. Question 39 12 0.0 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 4.3 0.65 Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 635 001L1 ADV MECHAN METALLURGY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gillis, Peter P ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 42.9 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 14.3 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 3 42.9 Required by my major 3 42.9 3 hours 2 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 3 42.9 4 - 5 hours 1 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 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 27.3 54.5 18.2 2.9 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 9.1 0.0 45.5 45.5 3.3 0.90 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 11 9.1 27.3 54.5 9.1 2.6 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 9.1 0.0 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.87 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 2.9 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 27.3 36.4 36.4 3.1 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 9.1 9.1 45.5 36.4 3.1 0.94 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 10.0 20.0 40.0 30.0 2.9 0.99 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 10.0 10.0 50.0 30.0 3.0 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 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 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 33.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 2.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 33.3 0.0 0.0 66.7 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 8 12.5 0.0 25.0 62.5 3.4 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 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 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 404G001L1 POLYMERIC MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Grulke, Eric ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 42.9 Junior 2 12.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 9 56.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 31.3 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 1 6.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 20.0 Required by my major 8 53.3 3 hours 7 46.7 Other (e.g. elective) 7 46.7 4 - 5 hours 3 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 6.7 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 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 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 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 0.0 11.8 41.2 47.1 3.4 0.70 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 17 11.8 29.4 41.2 17.6 2.6 0.93 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 17.6 52.9 29.4 3.1 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 23.5 70.6 3.6 0.61 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 11.8 23.5 64.7 3.5 0.72 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 3.8 0.39 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 17.6 76.5 3.7 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 88.2 3.9 0.33 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 0.0 0.0 29.4 70.6 3.7 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 0.0 17.6 29.4 52.9 3.4 0.79 % % % % 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 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 82.4 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 = 19 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 89.5 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = MSE 581 401L1 QUALITY CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lifland, Mitch ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 71.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 28.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 6 85.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 42.9 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 28.6 0.0 14.3 57.1 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 28.6 0.0 28.6 42.9 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 42.9 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 28.6 0.0 42.9 28.6 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 28.6 0.0 14.3 57.1 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 3.1 . . % % 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 2 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 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 201 001L1 MATERIALS SCIENCE INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Okazaki, Kenji ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 14 70.0 Sophomore 2 10.0 B 5 25.0 Junior 8 40.0 C 1 5.0 Senior 10 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 11 55.0 Studies Program 1 5.0 2 hours 3 15.0 Required by my major 17 85.0 3 hours 6 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 10.0 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 22 0.0 4.5 45.5 50.0 3.5 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 0.0 33.3 61.9 3.5 0.75 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 23.1 76.9 3.8 0.44 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 4.5 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 13.6 31.8 54.5 3.4 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 4.5 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 9.1 36.4 54.5 3.5 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 45.5 50.0 3.5 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 4.5 40.9 54.5 3.5 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 13.6 36.4 50.0 3.4 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 9.1 9.1 27.3 54.5 3.3 0.98 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 4.5 4.5 27.3 63.6 3.5 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Chemical & Materials Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MSE 450 001L1 TRANSPORT PHENOMENA FOR MATERIALS ENGINEERS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Sekulic, Dusan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 58.3 Junior 5 41.7 C 2 16.7 Senior 7 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 1 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 4 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 6 - 7 hours 4 36.4 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 8.3 8.3 75.0 8.3 2.8 0.72 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 41.7 50.0 8.3 2.7 0.65 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 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 33.3 58.3 8.3 2.8 0.62 % % % % 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 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 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 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 405G001L1 INTRO TO DATABASE SYS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baxter, Anthony Q ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 20 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 16 44.4 Junior 4 11.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 21 58.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 25.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 2.8 I 0 0.0 Other 1 2.8 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 10.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 13.5 Required by my major 24 64.9 3 hours 11 29.7 Other (e.g. elective) 13 35.1 4 - 5 hours 11 29.7 6 - 7 hours 6 16.2 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 38 0.0 2.6 50.0 47.4 3.4 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 38 0.0 10.5 60.5 28.9 3.2 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 38 0.0 5.3 65.8 28.9 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 37 0.0 10.8 62.2 27.0 3.2 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 37 0.0 10.8 51.4 37.8 3.3 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 38 2.6 13.2 57.9 26.3 3.1 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 38 5.3 10.5 55.3 28.9 3.1 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 38 2.6 23.7 63.2 10.5 2.8 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 38 5.3 21.1 47.4 26.3 2.9 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 0.0 7.9 47.4 44.7 3.4 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 6.1 54.5 39.4 3.3 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 37 0.0 10.8 56.8 32.4 3.2 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 37 2.7 21.6 51.4 24.3 3.0 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 37 2.7 16.2 56.8 24.3 3.0 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 7.1 10.7 60.7 21.4 3.0 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 3.0 3.0 60.6 33.3 3.2 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 5.7 0.0 65.7 28.6 3.2 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 37 5.4 2.7 51.4 40.5 3.3 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 8.8 17.6 38.2 35.3 3.0 0.95 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 37 2.7 13.5 51.4 32.4 3.1 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 8.3 22.2 36.1 33.3 2.9 0.95. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 = 63 Number of forms scanned = 38 Number of forms with at least one student response = 38 Percent completed = 60.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 470G001L1 INTRO TO OPERATING SYS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baxter, Anthony Q ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 32.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 48.0 Junior 3 12.5 C 4 16.0 Senior 18 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 8.3 Pass or Audit 1 4.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.2 Studies Program 1 4.2 2 hours 5 20.8 Required by my major 19 79.2 3 hours 11 45.8 Other (e.g. elective) 4 16.7 4 - 5 hours 5 20.8 6 - 7 hours 2 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 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 8.0 12.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.81 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 8.0 68.0 24.0 3.2 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 0.0 24.0 56.0 20.0 3.0 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 4.0 8.0 68.0 20.0 3.0 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 4.0 52.0 44.0 3.4 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 12.0 56.0 28.0 3.1 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 20.8 66.7 12.5 2.9 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 5.0 5.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 8.0 64.0 28.0 3.2 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 76.0 24.0 3.2 0.44 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 8.3 16.7 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 12.0 60.0 28.0 3.2 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 4.0 12.0 44.0 40.0 3.2 0.82. % % 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 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 = 49 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 51.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 471G001L1 NETWORKING AND DISTRIB OPERATING SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Calvert, Kenneth ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 33.3 Junior 1 4.2 C 4 16.7 Senior 14 58.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 33.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 4.2 Pass or Audit 3 12.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 25.0 Required by my major 10 41.7 3 hours 8 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 14 58.3 4 - 5 hours 5 20.8 6 - 7 hours 1 4.2 8 or more hours 2 8.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 8.3 8.3 62.5 20.8 3.0 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.59 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 12.5 12.5 54.2 20.8 2.8 0.92 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 4.3 30.4 47.8 17.4 2.8 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 16.7 37.5 45.8 3.3 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 8.3 91.7 3.9 0.28 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 6.3 81.3 12.5 3.1 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 4.5 77.3 18.2 3.1 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 8.3 54.2 37.5 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 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 8.3 29.2 62.5 3.5 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 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 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 = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 72.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 535 001L1 INTERMED COMP GRAPHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Cheng, Fuhua ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 14.3 Senior 3 42.9 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 57.1 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 3 50.0 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 50.0 4 - 5 hours 3 42.9 6 - 7 hours 3 42.9 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 63.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 685 004L1 SP TOPS IN CS:ADVANCED DATABASE TOPICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dekhtyar, Alexander ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 9 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 4 44.4 3 hours 4 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 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 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 % % % % 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 0.0 30.0 70.0 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 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 685 003L1 SP TOPS IN CS:NETWORKED APPLICATIONS & SERVICES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Fei, Zongming ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 12 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 1 9.1 Required by my major 4 33.3 3 hours 5 45.5 Other (e.g. elective) 7 58.3 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 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 15.4 38.5 46.2 3.3 0.75 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 15.4 30.8 53.8 3.4 0.77 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 7.1 7.1 42.9 42.9 3.2 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 14.3 21.4 64.3 3.5 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 14 7.1 21.4 35.7 35.7 3.0 0.96 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 7.1 35.7 57.1 3.5 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 7.1 42.9 50.0 3.4 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 7.1 7.1 50.0 35.7 3.1 0.86. % % 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 = 28 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 585 002L1 INTERM TOPS CS: INTERMEDIATE NETWORKING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Griffioen, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 22 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 5.0 2 hours 2 9.1 Required by my major 16 80.0 3 hours 3 13.6 Other (e.g. elective) 3 15.0 4 - 5 hours 8 36.4 6 - 7 hours 6 27.3 8 or more hours 3 13.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 0.0 4.2 33.3 62.5 3.6 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 25.0 45.8 25.0 4.2 2.1 0.83 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 17.4 52.2 30.4 3.1 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 24 4.2 8.3 25.0 62.5 3.5 0.83 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 14. Encouraged class participation 24 0.0 4.2 16.7 79.2 3.8 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 19 0.0 0.0 31.6 68.4 3.7 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 3.7 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.46 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 21.7 78.3 3.8 0.42 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 0.0 22.7 77.3 3.8 0.43. % % 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 = 27 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 88.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 441G001L1 COMPILERS FOR ALGOR LANG INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jaromczyk, Jerzy W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 55.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 27.8 Junior 2 11.8 C 3 16.7 Senior 14 82.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.9 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 5.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 5.6 Required by my major 13 72.2 3 hours 9 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 27.8 4 - 5 hours 5 27.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % 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 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 14.3 33.3 38.1 14.3 2.5 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 9.5 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 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 4.8 9.5 52.4 33.3 3.1 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 14.3 14.3 42.9 28.6 2.9 1.01 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 5.0 5.0 55.0 35.0 3.2 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 3.2 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 11.8 47.1 41.2 3.3 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 23.8 57.1 19.0 3.0 0.67 % % % % 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 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 10.0 25.0 60.0 3.4 0.88. % % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 499 001L1 SENIOR DESIGN PROJECT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jaromczyk, Jerzy W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 17 81.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 19.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 21 100.0 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 2 9.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 14.3 Required by my major 21 100.0 3 hours 8 38.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 4.8 6 - 7 hours 3 14.3 8 or more hours 4 19.0 % % 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 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 4.3 8.7 65.2 21.7 3.0 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 8.7 78.3 13.0 3.0 0.47 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 5.6 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 0.0 60.9 39.1 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 0.0 68.2 31.8 3.3 0.48 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 4.3 0.0 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 4.3 0.0 56.5 39.1 3.3 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 0.0 56.5 43.5 3.4 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 0.0 31.8 68.2 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 635 001L1 IMAGE PROCESSING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jaynes, Christopher ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 14.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 21 100.0 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 4.8 Studies Program 3 14.3 2 hours 2 9.5 Required by my major 9 42.9 3 hours 8 38.1 Other (e.g. elective) 9 42.9 4 - 5 hours 6 28.6 6 - 7 hours 2 9.5 8 or more hours 2 9.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 16.7 38.9 44.4 3.3 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 4.5 50.0 45.5 3.4 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 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 22 0.0 18.2 31.8 50.0 3.3 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 9.1 40.9 50.0 3.4 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 4.8 42.9 52.4 3.5 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 31.8 59.1 3.5 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 13.6 36.4 50.0 3.4 0.73 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 4.5 31.8 63.6 3.6 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 22 0.0 18.2 27.3 54.5 3.4 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 5.0 40.0 55.0 3.5 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 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 22 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 002L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 50.0 A 4 50.0 Sophomore 2 25.0 B 2 25.0 Junior 2 25.0 C 2 25.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 25.0 Studies Program 3 37.5 2 hours 2 25.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 1 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 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 28.6 42.9 28.6 0.0 2.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 25.0 50.0 12.5 12.5 2.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 25.0 12.5 62.5 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 25.0 37.5 25.0 12.5 2.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 25.0 25.0 37.5 12.5 2.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 50.0 37.5 12.5 0.0 1.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . . % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 003L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 33.3 Sophomore 2 22.2 B 5 55.6 Junior 4 44.4 C 1 11.1 Senior 3 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 3 33.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 44.4 Required by my major 4 44.4 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 5 55.6 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 1.07 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 2.0 0.94 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 27.3 9.1 45.5 18.2 2.5 1.13 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 33.3 16.7 50.0 0.0 2.2 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 10 10.0 20.0 70.0 0.0 2.6 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 0.0 2.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 22.2 22.2 55.6 0.0 2.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 11.1 77.8 0.0 2.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 25.0 33.3 33.3 8.3 2.3 0.97 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 16.7 25.0 50.0 8.3 2.5 0.90. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 005L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 22.2 A 6 66.7 Sophomore 2 22.2 B 3 33.3 Junior 4 44.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 11.1 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 55.6 Studies Program 3 33.3 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 55.6 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 36.4 36.4 27.3 2.9 0.83 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 2.6 0.97 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 2.9 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 27.3 36.4 36.4 3.1 0.83 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 20.0 10.0 40.0 30.0 2.8 1.14 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 27.3 36.4 27.3 9.1 2.2 0.98 14. Encouraged class participation 10 30.0 20.0 40.0 10.0 2.3 1.06 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 30.0 60.0 10.0 2.8 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 27.3 36.4 36.4 0.0 2.1 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 54.5 27.3 18.2 2.6 0.81 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 18.2 27.3 27.3 27.3 2.6 1.12. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 73.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 006L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- 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 6 66.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 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 4 44.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 22.2 Required by my major 5 55.6 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 44.4 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 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 55.6 33.3 11.1 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 12.5 12.5 50.0 25.0 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 11.1 0.0 44.4 44.4 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 11.1 55.6 22.2 2.9 . % % % % 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 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . . % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 007L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 20.0 A 4 40.0 Sophomore 3 30.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 4 40.0 C 4 40.0 Senior 1 10.0 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 2 20.0 Studies Program 3 33.3 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 6 66.7 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 20.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 9.1 0.0 72.7 18.2 3.0 0.77 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 18.2 18.2 27.3 36.4 2.8 1.17 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 18.2 18.2 45.5 18.2 2.6 1.03 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 30.0 30.0 40.0 0.0 2.1 0.88 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 20.0 10.0 60.0 10.0 2.6 0.97 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 20.0 10.0 70.0 0.0 2.5 0.85 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 60.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 27.3 18.2 54.5 0.0 2.3 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 7 14.3 0.0 85.7 0.0 2.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 10.0 20.0 70.0 0.0 2.6 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 27.3 36.4 36.4 0.0 2.1 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 11 45.5 27.3 27.3 0.0 1.8 0.87 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 28.6 14.3 42.9 14.3 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.84 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 30.0 30.0 40.0 0.0 2.1 0.88 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 27.3 9.1 63.6 0.0 2.4 0.92 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 27.3 45.5 27.3 0.0 2.0 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 27.3 27.3 36.4 9.1 2.3 1.01 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 27.3 45.5 27.3 0.0 2.0 0.77. % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 16 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 68.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 008L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 12.5 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 3 37.5 B 4 50.0 Junior 3 37.5 C 1 12.5 Senior 1 12.5 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 25.0 Studies Program 1 12.5 2 hours 3 37.5 Required by my major 6 75.0 3 hours 1 12.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 44.4 11.1 44.4 0.0 2.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 44.4 11.1 44.4 0.0 2.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 44.4 11.1 33.3 11.1 2.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 33.3 22.2 33.3 11.1 2.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . . % % 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 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 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 56.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 009L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 10.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 7 70.0 B 3 30.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 1 10.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 40.0 Required by my major 9 90.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 30.8 69.2 0.0 2.7 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 92.3 0.0 2.9 0.28 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 15.4 46.2 30.8 7.7 2.3 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 50.0 41.7 8.3 2.6 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 23.1 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.55 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 38.5 46.2 7.7 2.5 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 7.7 46.2 46.2 0.0 2.4 0.65. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 81.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 010L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 20.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 6 60.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 2 20.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 40.0 Studies Program 2 20.0 2 hours 2 20.0 Required by my major 7 70.0 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 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 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 63.6 27.3 9.1 2.5 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 16.7 16.7 50.0 16.7 2.7 0.98 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.79 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 12 25.0 33.3 41.7 0.0 2.2 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 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 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.42 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 27.3 9.1 63.6 0.0 2.4 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 33.3 50.0 8.3 2.6 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 16.7 33.3 41.7 8.3 2.4 0.90. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 011L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 10.0 A 8 80.0 Sophomore 6 60.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 10.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 50.0 Studies Program 3 30.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 6 60.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 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 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 18.2 27.3 36.4 18.2 2.5 1.04 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 1.00 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 16.7 33.3 41.7 8.3 2.4 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 36.4 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 60.0 30.0 10.0 2.5 0.71 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 16.7 50.0 25.0 8.3 2.3 0.87 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 16.7 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.90 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 25.0 16.7 41.7 16.7 2.5 1.09. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 012L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 18.2 A 5 50.0 Sophomore 1 9.1 B 5 50.0 Junior 7 63.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 9.1 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 1 10.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 40.0 Required by my major 10 90.9 3 hours 4 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 9.1 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 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 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 83.3 8.3 3.0 0.43 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.39 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 40.0 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 91.7 0.0 2.9 0.29 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 25.0 25.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 12 16.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 2.3 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 11 0.0 27.3 72.7 0.0 2.7 0.47 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 8.3 25.0 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.39 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 25.0 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 33.3 58.3 0.0 2.5 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 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 014L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 10.0 A 9 90.0 Sophomore 4 40.0 B 1 10.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 30.0 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 2 20.0 Studies Program 2 20.0 2 hours 7 70.0 Required by my major 7 70.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 23.1 46.2 30.8 3.1 0.76 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 36.4 45.5 18.2 2.8 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 23.1 15.4 46.2 15.4 2.5 1.05 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 8.3 0.0 75.0 16.7 3.0 0.74 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 15.4 30.8 38.5 15.4 2.5 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 13 15.4 30.8 46.2 7.7 2.5 0.88 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 9.1 63.6 18.2 2.9 0.83 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 7.7 23.1 46.2 23.1 2.8 0.90 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 23.1 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.71 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 16.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 2.3 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 7.7 30.8 38.5 23.1 2.8 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 15.4 23.1 46.2 15.4 2.6 0.96. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 81.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 015L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 87.5 Sophomore 5 62.5 B 1 12.5 Junior 2 25.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 12.5 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 4 50.0 Studies Program 1 12.5 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 3 37.5 4 - 5 hours 1 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 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 25.0 62.5 12.5 0.0 1.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 10.0 30.0 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 2.5 0.97 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 40.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 2.1 1.10 14. Encouraged class participation 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 10.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 2.8 1.03 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 62.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 016L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 8.3 A 6 50.0 Sophomore 6 50.0 B 6 50.0 Junior 5 41.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 25.0 Studies Program 1 8.3 2 hours 4 33.3 Required by my major 10 83.3 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 8.3 4 - 5 hours 1 8.3 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 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 14.3 50.0 35.7 3.2 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 15.4 7.7 69.2 7.7 2.7 0.85 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 7.7 46.2 46.2 0.0 2.4 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 0.91 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 28.6 28.6 35.7 7.1 2.2 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 14 21.4 42.9 28.6 7.1 2.2 0.89 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 54.5 36.4 9.1 2.5 0.69 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 50.0 35.7 14.3 2.6 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 46.2 46.2 7.7 2.6 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 7.1 21.4 57.1 14.3 2.8 0.80 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 42.9 28.6 21.4 7.1 1.9 1.00 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 21.4 42.9 21.4 14.3 2.3 0.99 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 21.4 50.0 14.3 14.3 2.2 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 16 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 017L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 10.0 A 7 70.0 Sophomore 6 60.0 B 3 30.0 Junior 3 30.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 40.0 Studies Program 4 40.0 2 hours 2 20.0 Required by my major 4 40.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 1 10.0 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 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 10.0 0.0 60.0 30.0 3.1 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 12.5 50.0 37.5 0.0 2.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 10 20.0 30.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.82 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 30.0 40.0 0.0 2.1 0.88 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 0.53 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 30.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 2.2 1.03. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 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 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 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 62.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 018L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 70.0 Sophomore 9 100.0 B 3 30.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 10.0 Required by my major 8 80.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 3 30.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 8.3 8.3 66.7 16.7 2.9 0.79 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 8.3 8.3 75.0 8.3 2.8 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 30.8 46.2 23.1 2.9 0.76 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 15.4 53.8 23.1 7.7 2.2 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 46.2 38.5 7.7 7.7 1.8 0.93 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 12 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.89 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 33.3 16.7 41.7 8.3 2.3 1.06 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 66.7 25.0 0.0 8.3 1.5 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 12 58.3 25.0 8.3 8.3 1.7 0.98 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 16.7 50.0 16.7 16.7 2.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 44.4 44.4 11.1 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 12.5 50.0 25.0 12.5 2.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 45.5 45.5 0.0 9.1 1.7 0.90 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 16.7 25.0 41.7 16.7 2.6 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 33.3 50.0 8.3 8.3 1.9 0.90. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 81.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 019L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 77.8 Sophomore 7 77.8 B 2 22.2 Junior 2 22.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 44.4 Studies Program 3 33.3 2 hours 3 33.3 Required by my major 6 66.7 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 9.1 54.5 27.3 3.0 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 27.3 63.6 9.1 2.8 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 2.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 36.4 54.5 9.1 2.7 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 27.3 18.2 45.5 9.1 2.4 1.03 14. Encouraged class participation 10 20.0 30.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.82 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 0.52 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. 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 10.0 30.0 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.71 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 45.5 45.5 9.1 2.6 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 9.1 45.5 45.5 0.0 2.4 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 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 68.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 021L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 8 100.0 B 3 37.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 3 37.5 2 hours 5 62.5 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 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 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.42 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 0.48 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . . % % 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 62.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 022L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 14.3 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 5 71.4 B 2 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 14.3 Senior 1 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 28.6 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 3 42.9 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 1 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 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 33.3 44.4 11.1 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 12.5 12.5 75.0 0.0 2.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 22.2 33.3 44.4 0.0 2.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 37.5 62.5 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 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . . % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 56.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 023L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 12.5 A 6 75.0 Sophomore 1 12.5 B 2 25.0 Junior 5 62.5 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 12.5 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 4 50.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 37.5 Required by my major 8 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 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 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 10.0 10.0 40.0 40.0 3.1 0.99 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 10.0 0.0 50.0 40.0 3.2 0.92 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 10.0 0.0 60.0 30.0 3.1 0.88 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 10.0 10.0 50.0 30.0 3.0 0.94 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.84 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 10.0 10.0 60.0 20.0 2.9 0.88 11. Was available for consultation 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.84 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 40.0 0.0 50.0 10.0 2.3 1.16 14. Encouraged class participation 10 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 1.07 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 2.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 10.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 2.7 0.95 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 2.0 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 10.0 40.0 40.0 10.0 2.5 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 1.07. % % 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 2.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 15 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 101 024L1 INTRO TO COMPUTING I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 28.6 A 6 85.7 Sophomore 2 28.6 B 1 14.3 Junior 2 28.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 14.3 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 28.6 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 3 42.9 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 22.2 33.3 44.4 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 2.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 56.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 115 004L1 INTRO TO COMP PROGRMMING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 11 73.3 A 7 46.7 Sophomore 1 6.7 B 7 46.7 Junior 2 13.3 C 1 6.7 Senior 1 6.7 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 1 6.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 13.3 Required by my major 15 100.0 3 hours 6 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 33.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 33.3 46.7 20.0 2.9 0.74 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 53.3 33.3 13.3 0.0 1.6 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 14.3 64.3 14.3 7.1 2.1 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 60.0 33.3 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 26.7 40.0 33.3 3.1 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 15 6.7 33.3 46.7 13.3 2.7 0.82 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 38.5 53.8 7.7 2.7 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 40.0 53.3 6.7 2.7 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 21.4 50.0 28.6 3.1 0.73 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 45.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 115 005L1 INTRO TO COMP PROGRMMING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 4 50.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 2 25.0 B 1 12.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 2 25.0 D 1 12.5 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 37.5 Required by my major 7 87.5 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 12.5 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 12.5 % % 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 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 36.4 27.3 36.4 3.0 0.89 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 9.1 18.2 36.4 36.4 3.0 1.00 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.90 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 25.0 41.7 33.3 3.1 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 33.3 16.7 50.0 3.2 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 25.0 25.0 41.7 3.0 1.04. % % 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 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 0.0 25.0 37.5 37.5 3.1 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 12 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 37.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 115 006L1 INTRO TO COMP PROGRMMING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 70.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 1 10.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 2 20.0 C 2 20.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 40.0 6 - 7 hours 2 20.0 8 or more hours 2 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.84 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.84 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 33.3 11.1 55.6 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 40.0 10.0 50.0 3.1 0.99 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 0.84 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 20.0 10.0 70.0 3.5 0.85 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 40.0 10.0 50.0 3.1 0.99 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 33.3 22.2 33.3 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 70.0 3.6 0.70 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 10.0 10.0 20.0 60.0 3.3 1.06 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 10.0 10.0 20.0 60.0 3.3 1.06. % % 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 = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 31.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 215 001L1 INTRO TO PROGRAM DESIGN, ABSTRACTION/PROB SOLV INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 8.3 A 4 33.3 Sophomore 3 25.0 B 6 50.0 Junior 4 33.3 C 1 8.3 Senior 3 25.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 8.3 Pass or Audit 1 8.3 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 1 8.3 Required by my major 9 75.0 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 25.0 4 - 5 hours 5 41.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 4 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 26.7 66.7 6.7 2.8 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 28.6 21.4 28.6 21.4 2.4 1.16 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 14 7.1 21.4 57.1 14.3 2.8 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 20.0 26.7 40.0 13.3 2.5 0.99 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 9.1 18.2 63.6 9.1 2.7 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 6.7 33.3 40.0 20.0 2.7 0.88 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 6.7 13.3 46.7 33.3 3.1 0.88 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 33.3 46.7 13.3 2.7 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 14 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 14.3 42.9 35.7 7.1 2.4 0.84. % % 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 215 002L1 INTRO TO PROGRAM DESIGN, ABSTRACTION/PROB SOLV INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 2 18.2 A 7 63.6 Sophomore 3 27.3 B 3 27.3 Junior 4 36.4 C 1 9.1 Senior 2 18.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 10 90.9 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 9.1 4 - 5 hours 3 27.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 3 27.3 % % 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 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 8.3 25.0 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.78 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 2.9 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 36.4 63.6 0.0 2.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 18.2 45.5 36.4 0.0 2.2 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 16.7 75.0 0.0 2.7 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 14. Encouraged class participation 10 10.0 30.0 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 54.5 18.2 2.9 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 16.7 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.83 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 18.2 27.3 27.3 27.3 2.6 1.12. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 33 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 12 Percent completed = 36.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 215 003L1 INTRO TO PROGRAM DESIGN, ABSTRACTION/PROB SOLV INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Keen, Debbie ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 42.9 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 2 28.6 B 3 42.9 Junior 2 28.6 C 1 14.3 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 28.6 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 28.6 4 - 5 hours 3 42.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 57.1 28.6 14.3 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 16.7 0.0 83.3 0.0 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 25.0 25.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 41.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 685 002L1 SP TOPS IN CS: CRYPTOGRAPHY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Klapper, Andrew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 16.7 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 57.1 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 42.9 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 3 42.9 % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 14.3 0.0 85.7 3.7 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 216 003L1 INTRO TO SOFTWARE ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Levy, Amy ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 51.7 Sophomore 10 34.5 B 13 44.8 Junior 11 37.9 C 1 3.4 Senior 5 17.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 6.9 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.4 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 10.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 24.1 Required by my major 23 82.1 3 hours 7 24.1 Other (e.g. elective) 5 17.9 4 - 5 hours 6 20.7 6 - 7 hours 4 13.8 8 or more hours 2 6.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 21.1 10.5 52.6 15.8 2.6 1.01 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 10.7 10.7 39.3 39.3 3.1 0.98 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 0.0 6.9 44.8 48.3 3.4 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 0.0 3.4 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.55 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 6.9 27.6 44.8 20.7 2.8 0.86 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 27.6 27.6 41.4 3.4 2.2 0.90 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 10.7 21.4 42.9 25.0 2.8 0.94 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 6.9 13.8 31.0 48.3 3.2 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 3.4 41.4 55.2 3.5 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 24 25.0 4.2 33.3 37.5 2.8 1.20 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 6.9 44.8 48.3 3.4 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 10.3 13.8 31.0 44.8 3.1 1.01 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 13.8 37.9 48.3 3.3 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 8.0 12.0 64.0 16.0 2.9 0.78 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 10.3 3.4 41.4 44.8 3.2 0.94 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 6.9 3.4 55.2 34.5 3.2 0.80 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 6.9 3.4 41.4 48.3 3.3 0.85 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 10.7 10.7 42.9 35.7 3.0 0.96 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 10.3 13.8 34.5 41.4 3.1 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 17.2 13.8 24.1 44.8 3.0 1.15. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 = 39 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 74.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 275 001L1 DISCRETE MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lonc, Zbigniew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 4 40.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 30.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 10.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 20.0 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 30.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 30.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 3 30.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 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 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 30.0 20.0 40.0 2.9 1.10 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 3.0 1.05 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 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 20.0 30.0 20.0 30.0 2.6 1.17 14. Encouraged class participation 10 40.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 2.4 1.35 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 10.0 0.0 60.0 30.0 3.1 0.88 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 10.0 0.0 60.0 30.0 3.1 0.88 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 20.0 20.0 30.0 2.5 1.27 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 10.0 10.0 50.0 30.0 3.0 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 3.0 1.05. % % 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 35.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 275 002L1 DISCRETE MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lonc, Zbigniew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 3 50.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 3 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 66.7 6 - 7 hours 1 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 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 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 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 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 = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 Percent completed = 25.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 275 003L1 DISCRETE MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lonc, Zbigniew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 71.4 Sophomore 2 28.6 B 2 28.6 Junior 4 57.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 14.3 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 6 85.7 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 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 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 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 = 33 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 27.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 315 001L1 ALGORITHM DSGN/ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lonc, Zbigniew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 16 53.3 Sophomore 2 6.7 B 10 33.3 Junior 14 46.7 C 3 10.0 Senior 9 30.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 13.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 3.3 Pass or Audit 1 3.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 30.0 Required by my major 23 76.7 3 hours 7 23.3 Other (e.g. elective) 7 23.3 4 - 5 hours 6 20.0 6 - 7 hours 1 3.3 8 or more hours 1 3.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 34 0.0 2.9 52.9 44.1 3.4 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 2.9 2.9 55.9 38.2 3.3 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 0.0 55.9 44.1 3.4 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 8.8 47.1 44.1 3.4 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 0.0 55.9 44.1 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 33 0.0 21.2 48.5 30.3 3.1 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 0.0 26.5 50.0 23.5 3.0 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 5.9 20.6 41.2 32.4 3.0 0.89 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 52.9 47.1 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 3.1 18.8 46.9 31.3 3.1 0.80 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 34 11.8 23.5 41.2 23.5 2.8 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 34 11.8 32.4 32.4 23.5 2.7 0.98 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 7.1 7.1 53.6 32.1 3.1 0.83 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 2.9 11.8 44.1 41.2 3.2 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 2.9 8.8 50.0 38.2 3.2 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 2.9 8.8 47.1 41.2 3.3 0.75 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 5.9 29.4 26.5 38.2 3.0 0.97 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 5.9 20.6 44.1 29.4 3.0 0.87 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 11.8 17.6 32.4 38.2 3.0 1.03. % % 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 = 70 Number of forms scanned = 37 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 48.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 570 001L1 MODERN OPERATING SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Manivannan, D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 91.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 4.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 4.3 Senior 2 8.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 21 91.3 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 1 4.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 13.0 Required by my major 20 87.0 3 hours 4 17.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 13.0 4 - 5 hours 8 34.8 6 - 7 hours 4 17.4 8 or more hours 3 13.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 0.0 44.0 56.0 3.6 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 4.0 32.0 64.0 3.6 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 0.0 36.0 64.0 3.6 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 56.0 40.0 3.4 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 0.0 12.0 48.0 40.0 3.3 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 4.0 36.0 60.0 3.6 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 4.0 32.0 64.0 3.6 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 4.3 39.1 56.5 3.5 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 30.4 69.6 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 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 28. Guided student report preparation 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 29. Students free to express opinions 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . % 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 = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 375 001L1 LOGIC/THEORY OF COMPUT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marek, Wiktor ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 35.5 Sophomore 2 6.5 B 14 45.2 Junior 12 38.7 C 5 16.1 Senior 17 54.8 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 9 29.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 11 35.5 Required by my major 31 100.0 3 hours 7 22.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 12.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 31 0.0 3.2 80.6 16.1 3.1 0.43 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 31 6.5 16.1 67.7 9.7 2.8 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 31 0.0 6.5 67.7 25.8 3.2 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 31 0.0 12.9 71.0 16.1 3.0 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 3.3 13.3 63.3 20.0 3.0 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 31 0.0 0.0 71.0 29.0 3.3 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 31 0.0 9.7 61.3 29.0 3.2 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 31 3.2 48.4 41.9 6.5 2.5 0.68 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 31 0.0 9.7 64.5 25.8 3.2 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 31 0.0 0.0 45.2 54.8 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 28 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 31 3.2 3.2 77.4 16.1 3.1 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 31 3.2 29.0 48.4 19.4 2.8 0.78 14. Encouraged class participation 31 0.0 3.2 71.0 25.8 3.2 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 18.2 72.7 4.5 2.8 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 31 3.2 6.5 71.0 19.4 3.1 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 31 0.0 3.2 77.4 19.4 3.2 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 31 0.0 6.5 74.2 19.4 3.1 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 12.9 38.7 32.3 16.1 2.5 0.93 % % % % 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 61.3 16.1 2.9 0.76 21. Overall quality of teaching 31 0.0 9.7 61.3 29.0 3.2 0.60. % % 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 = 64 Number of forms scanned = 32 Number of forms with at least one student response = 31 Percent completed = 48.4 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 505 001L1 ADV CONCEPTS IN DATABASE SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Marek, Wiktor ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 20.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 80.0 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 9 90.0 3 hours 5 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 4 40.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 10.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 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 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 0.85 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 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 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 0.39 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 2.8 0.58 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 0.0 41.7 50.0 8.3 2.7 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 41.7 41.7 16.7 2.8 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 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 335 001L1 GRAPHICS AND MULTIMEDIA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Seales, Brent ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 54.2 Junior 5 20.8 C 2 8.3 Senior 19 79.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 4.2 Required by my major 15 62.5 3 hours 6 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 9 37.5 4 - 5 hours 9 37.5 6 - 7 hours 3 12.5 8 or more hours 5 20.8 % % 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 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 3.8 11.5 65.4 19.2 3.0 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 3.7 44.4 51.9 3.5 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 11.5 50.0 38.5 3.3 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 18.5 33.3 44.4 3.7 2.3 0.83 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 18.5 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 3.7 7.4 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 29.6 70.4 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 20.0 44.0 36.0 3.2 0.75 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 14.8 59.3 25.9 3.1 0.64 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 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 55.6 40.7 3.4 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 11.1 51.9 37.0 3.3 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 3.7 7.4 25.9 63.0 3.5 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 11.1 40.7 48.1 3.4 0.69. % % 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 87.1 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 685 001L1 SP TOPS IN CS: EXPLORING VIRTUAL WORLDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Seales, Brent ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 7 100.0 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 8 or more hours 3 42.9 % % 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 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 42.9 28.6 28.6 2.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 0.0 85.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . . % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 9 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 100 001A1 COMP SCIENCE PROFESSION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Truszczynski, Miroslaw ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 30 54.5 A 33 63.5 Sophomore 11 20.0 B 13 25.0 Junior 9 16.4 C 3 5.8 Senior 3 5.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 3.6 Pass or Audit 3 5.8 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 47 87.0 Studies Program 1 1.9 2 hours 5 9.3 Required by my major 48 92.3 3 hours 2 3.7 Other (e.g. elective) 3 5.8 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 60 1.7 5.0 55.0 38.3 3.3 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 40 37.5 15.0 25.0 22.5 2.3 1.21 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 59 15.3 18.6 45.8 20.3 2.7 0.97 4. Exams reflected what was taught 57 5.3 12.3 59.6 22.8 3.0 0.76 5. Grading was fair and consistent 60 1.7 6.7 56.7 35.0 3.3 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 60 1.7 3.3 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 60 5.0 3.3 60.0 31.7 3.2 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 57 10.5 43.9 29.8 15.8 2.5 0.89 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 60 11.7 21.7 41.7 25.0 2.8 0.95 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 60 1.7 0.0 55.0 43.3 3.4 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 50 2.0 14.0 60.0 24.0 3.1 0.68 12. Satisfact answered class questions 58 3.4 6.9 65.5 24.1 3.1 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 59 16.9 27.1 37.3 18.6 2.6 0.99 14. Encouraged class participation 57 15.8 42.1 28.1 14.0 2.4 0.92 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 49 14.3 22.4 51.0 12.2 2.6 0.89 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 57 14.0 26.3 45.6 14.0 2.6 0.90 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 56 12.5 26.8 46.4 14.3 2.6 0.89 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 59 8.5 13.6 61.0 16.9 2.9 0.80 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 58 15.5 32.8 39.7 12.1 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 58 20.7 34.5 32.8 12.1 2.4 0.95 21. Overall quality of teaching 57 8.8 22.8 45.6 22.8 2.8 0.89. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 258 Number of forms scanned = 60 Number of forms with at least one student response = 60 Percent completed = 23.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 537 002L1 NUMERICAL ANALYSIS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wasilkowski, Grzegorz W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 81.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 22 100.0 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 4.5 Required by my major 15 68.2 3 hours 8 36.4 Other (e.g. elective) 7 31.8 4 - 5 hours 7 31.8 6 - 7 hours 1 4.5 8 or more hours 5 22.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 4.5 22.7 68.2 4.5 2.7 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 0.0 40.9 59.1 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 4.5 72.7 22.7 3.2 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 61.9 38.1 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 4.8 0.0 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 0.0 23.8 61.9 14.3 2.9 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 0.0 4.5 54.5 40.9 3.4 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 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 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 88.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = CS 115 401L1 INTRO TO COMP PROGRMMING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Whitaker, Jason ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 11 45.8 A 19 76.0 Sophomore 2 8.3 B 3 12.0 Junior 3 12.5 C 3 12.0 Senior 7 29.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 4.2 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 24.0 Required by my major 16 66.7 3 hours 12 48.0 Other (e.g. elective) 8 33.3 4 - 5 hours 4 16.0 6 - 7 hours 1 4.0 8 or more hours 1 4.0 % % 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 39.3 60.7 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 0.0 3.6 32.1 64.3 3.6 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 3.6 25.0 71.4 3.7 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 0.0 3.6 57.1 39.3 3.4 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.42 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.42 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 28.0 72.0 3.7 0.46 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.42 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.42 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 3.6 32.1 64.3 3.6 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 4.0 40.0 56.0 3.5 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 3.6 35.7 60.7 3.6 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 7.1 28.6 64.3 3.6 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 3.6 25.0 71.4 3.7 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 0.0 10.7 32.1 57.1 3.5 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 0.0 10.7 14.3 75.0 3.6 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 0.0 10.7 89.3 3.9 0.31. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 51 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 54.9 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 321 002L1 INTRO NUMERICAL METHODS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Zhang, Jun ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 56.3 Junior 5 31.3 C 2 12.5 Senior 10 62.5 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 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 6.3 2 hours 5 31.3 Required by my major 14 87.5 3 hours 8 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 6.3 4 - 5 hours 3 18.8 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 17 5.9 5.9 70.6 17.6 3.0 0.71 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 5.6 16.7 44.4 33.3 3.1 0.87 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 16.7 55.6 22.2 2.9 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 11.1 61.1 27.8 3.2 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 5.6 33.3 38.9 22.2 2.8 0.88 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 0.0 72.2 22.2 3.1 0.68 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 0.43 8. Graded assignments included comments 17 0.0 41.2 47.1 11.8 2.7 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 66.7 16.7 16.7 2.5 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 6.3 12.5 50.0 31.3 3.1 0.85 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 33.3 33.3 22.2 11.1 2.1 1.02 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 44.4 38.9 16.7 2.7 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.87 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 5.9 17.6 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 5.9 17.6 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 5.9 17.6 58.8 17.6 2.9 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 31.3 31.3 25.0 12.5 2.2 1.05 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 23.5 35.3 17.6 23.5 2.4 1.12 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 29.4 29.4 23.5 17.6 2.3 1.10. % % 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 58.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Computer Science FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = CS 689 002L1 SP TOPS NUM COMP: PARALLEL & DISTRIB COMP INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Zhang, Jun ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 14.3 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 28.6 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 5 71.4 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 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 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . . % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 16 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 43.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EE 582 001L2 HARDWARE DESCR LANGUAGES AND PROGRAM LOGIC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = CRUTCHFIELD, DA ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 7 87.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 12.5 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 25.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 12.5 % % 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 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 33.3 33.3 22.2 11.1 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 2.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 33.3 44.4 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 0.0 88.9 11.1 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . . % % 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 380 001L1 MICROCOMPUTER ORGANIZATN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dietz, Henry ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 33.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 48.1 Junior 14 51.9 C 5 18.5 Senior 13 48.1 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 11 40.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 29.6 Required by my major 26 96.3 3 hours 5 18.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.7 4 - 5 hours 3 11.1 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 11.1 81.5 7.4 3.0 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 18.5 70.4 11.1 2.9 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 11.1 14.8 74.1 0.0 2.6 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 7.4 11.1 74.1 7.4 2.8 0.68 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 7.4 11.1 74.1 7.4 2.8 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 22.2 3.7 59.3 14.8 2.7 1.00 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 29.6 40.7 29.6 0.0 2.0 0.78 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 22.2 59.3 18.5 0.0 2.0 0.65 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 14.8 14.8 51.9 18.5 2.7 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 22 0.0 9.1 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 7.4 11.1 63.0 18.5 2.9 0.78 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 15.4 23.1 42.3 19.2 2.7 0.98 14. Encouraged class participation 27 7.4 25.9 55.6 11.1 2.7 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 12.5 31.3 50.0 6.3 2.5 0.82 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 25 8.0 8.0 72.0 12.0 2.9 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 8.0 16.0 60.0 16.0 2.8 0.80 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 7.7 11.5 65.4 15.4 2.9 0.77 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 12.0 28.0 44.0 16.0 2.6 0.91 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 7.4 11.1 66.7 14.8 2.9 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 18.5 18.5 37.0 25.9 2.7 1.07. % % 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 26 7.7 11.5 34.6 34.6 11.5 3.3 1.09 38. Question 38 26 11.5 3.8 23.1 57.7 3.8 3.4 1.06 39. Question 39 26 11.5 7.7 11.5 61.5 7.7 3.5 1.14 40. Question 40 26 3.8 19.2 23.1 50.0 3.8 3.3 0.97 41. Question 41 24 16.7 16.7 16.7 37.5 12.5 3.1 1.33 42. Question 42 26 19.2 11.5 23.1 38.5 7.7 3.0 1.28 43. Question 43 24 8.3 12.5 12.5 50.0 16.7 3.5 1.18 Number of forms preslugged = 50 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 54.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 380 002L1 MICROCOMPUTER ORGANIZATN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Dietz, Henry ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 2.9 A 12 35.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 38.2 Junior 20 57.1 C 7 20.6 Senior 10 28.6 D 2 5.9 Graduate 2 5.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 5.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 8 22.9 Studies Program 1 2.9 2 hours 6 17.1 Required by my major 34 97.1 3 hours 12 34.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 22.9 6 - 7 hours 1 2.9 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 36 0.0 5.6 69.4 25.0 3.2 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 0.0 11.4 60.0 28.6 3.2 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 2.8 19.4 61.1 16.7 2.9 0.69 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 8.3 13.9 55.6 22.2 2.9 0.84 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 8.3 8.3 61.1 22.2 3.0 0.81 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 8.3 33.3 36.1 22.2 2.7 0.91 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 11.4 31.4 48.6 8.6 2.5 0.82 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 12.1 54.5 24.2 9.1 2.3 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 5.6 5.6 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 2.8 19.4 77.8 3.8 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 32 6.3 6.3 50.0 37.5 3.2 0.82 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 36 5.6 8.3 50.0 36.1 3.2 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 36 0.0 13.9 61.1 25.0 3.1 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 13.0 60.9 21.7 3.0 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 2.9 8.6 57.1 31.4 3.2 0.71 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 36 2.8 5.6 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 36 2.8 0.0 69.4 27.8 3.2 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 5.7 25.7 45.7 22.9 2.9 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 36 5.6 13.9 55.6 25.0 3.0 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 5.6 5.6 47.2 41.7 3.3 0.81. % % 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 36 2.8 0.0 22.2 58.3 16.7 3.9 0.80 38. Question 38 36 2.8 2.8 13.9 61.1 19.4 3.9 0.84 39. Question 39 36 5.6 11.1 16.7 44.4 22.2 3.7 1.12 40. Question 40 36 0.0 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 3.8 0.84 41. Question 41 32 3.1 21.9 18.8 50.0 6.3 3.3 1.00 42. Question 42 36 8.3 2.8 38.9 41.7 8.3 3.4 0.99 43. Question 43 35 0.0 11.4 25.7 42.9 20.0 3.7 0.93 Number of forms preslugged = 56 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 64.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 499 002L1 EE DESIGN: BIT-SLICE COMPUTER DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Distler, Raymond J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 100.0 D 1 25.0 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 25.0 Required by my major 4 100.0 3 hours 2 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 20.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 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 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 80.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 20.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 2.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 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 37. Question 37 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 4.4 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0 4.2 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0 4.2 . 40. Question 40 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0 4.2 . Number of forms preslugged = 9 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 55.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 583 001L1 MICROPROCESSORS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Distler, Raymond J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 62.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 62.5 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 3 37.5 4 - 5 hours 4 50.0 6 - 7 hours 1 12.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 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 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 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 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . % % % % 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 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 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 37. Question 37 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 4.4 . 38. Question 38 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 4.4 . 39. Question 39 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 4.4 . 40. Question 40 7 14.3 0.0 0.0 28.6 57.1 4.1 . Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 72.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 101 001S1 EE PROFESSIONS SEMINAR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Donohue, Kevin ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 37 54.4 A 3 4.5 Sophomore 16 23.5 B 3 4.5 Junior 10 14.7 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 7.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 61 91.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 53 77.9 Studies Program 3 4.4 2 hours 7 10.3 Required by my major 62 91.2 3 hours 5 7.4 Other (e.g. elective) 3 4.4 4 - 5 hours 1 1.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 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 76 0.0 1.3 46.1 52.6 3.5 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 76 0.0 10.5 56.6 32.9 3.2 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 74 0.0 1.4 51.4 47.3 3.5 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 77 0.0 2.6 45.5 51.9 3.5 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 74 0.0 1.4 48.6 50.0 3.5 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 75 1.3 1.3 62.7 34.7 3.3 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 77 0.0 3.9 50.6 45.5 3.4 0.57 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 77 0.0 0.0 33.8 66.2 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 70 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 76 0.0 0.0 46.1 53.9 3.5 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 76 2.6 7.9 47.4 42.1 3.3 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 73 2.7 13.7 50.7 32.9 3.1 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 67 0.0 13.4 53.7 32.8 3.2 0.66 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 70 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 65 1.5 13.8 56.9 27.7 3.1 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 77 0.0 3.9 53.2 42.9 3.4 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 74 2.7 14.9 48.6 33.8 3.1 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 77 2.6 14.3 42.9 40.3 3.2 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 77 0.0 3.9 37.7 58.4 3.5 0.57. % % 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 12 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 0.72 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 9 0.0 22.2 33.3 44.4 3.2 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 9 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 3.1 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 9 0.0 11.1 22.2 66.7 3.6 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 24 0.0 4.2 58.3 37.5 3.3 0.56 28. Guided student report preparation 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 29. Students free to express opinions 32 3.1 3.1 53.1 40.6 3.3 0.69 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 32 3.1 0.0 50.0 46.9 3.4 0.67 31. Developed abil to conduct research 27 3.7 7.4 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.74 SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 52 1.9 0.0 7.7 26.9 63.5 4.5 0.80 38. Question 38 52 0.0 1.9 9.6 32.7 55.8 4.4 0.75 39. Question 39 52 0.0 0.0 5.8 32.7 61.5 4.6 0.61 40. Question 40 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 4.8 . 41. Question 41 5 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 4.4 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 92 Number of forms scanned = 78 Number of forms with at least one student response = 77 Percent completed = 83.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 211 001L1 CIRCUITS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Donohue, Kevin ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 21 84.0 Sophomore 14 56.0 B 4 16.0 Junior 7 28.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 16.0 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 4 16.0 Required by my major 23 92.0 3 hours 5 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 8.0 4 - 5 hours 11 44.0 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 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 0.0 40.7 59.3 3.6 0.50 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 14.8 63.0 22.2 3.1 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 0.0 40.7 59.3 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 18.5 81.5 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 11.5 38.5 50.0 3.4 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 7.7 46.2 46.2 3.4 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 12.0 52.0 36.0 3.2 0.66 % % % % 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 38.5 57.7 3.5 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 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 23 0.0 0.0 4.3 47.8 47.8 4.4 0.59 38. Question 38 23 0.0 4.3 17.4 56.5 21.7 4.0 0.77 39. Question 39 23 0.0 4.3 4.3 39.1 52.2 4.4 0.78 40. Question 40 23 0.0 8.7 17.4 56.5 17.4 3.8 0.83 41. Question 41 23 0.0 4.3 8.7 34.8 52.2 4.3 0.83 Number of forms preslugged = 45 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 523 001L1 MICROWAVE CIRCUIT DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gedney, Stephen ----------------------------------------------------- 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 4 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 20.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 80.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 20.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 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 37. Question 37 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 4.8 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 4.4 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 4.6 . 40. Question 40 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 4.2 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 43. Question 43 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 280 001L1 DESIGN OF LOGIC CIRCUITS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Heath, James R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 17.9 Sophomore 6 22.2 B 7 25.0 Junior 12 44.4 C 10 35.7 Senior 7 25.9 D 6 21.4 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 7.4 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 10.7 Required by my major 27 96.4 3 hours 6 21.4 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.6 4 - 5 hours 9 32.1 6 - 7 hours 7 25.0 8 or more hours 3 10.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 11.1 11.1 48.1 29.6 3.0 0.94 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 14.3 7.1 64.3 14.3 2.8 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 10.7 17.9 50.0 21.4 2.8 0.90 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 21.4 35.7 28.6 14.3 2.4 0.99 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 21.4 28.6 39.3 10.7 2.4 0.96 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 25.0 35.7 32.1 7.1 2.2 0.92 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 28 14.3 14.3 46.4 25.0 2.8 0.98 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 32.1 46.4 14.3 7.1 2.0 0.88 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 18.5 33.3 25.9 22.2 2.5 1.05 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 3.6 3.6 39.3 53.6 3.4 0.74 11. Was available for consultation 26 3.8 7.7 57.7 30.8 3.2 0.73 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 3.6 25.0 50.0 21.4 2.9 0.79 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 22.2 37.0 22.2 18.5 2.4 1.04 14. Encouraged class participation 28 28.6 35.7 25.0 10.7 2.2 0.98 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 23.5 17.6 41.2 17.6 2.5 1.07 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 7.4 7.4 66.7 18.5 3.0 0.76 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 11.1 11.1 59.3 18.5 2.9 0.86 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 7.7 65.4 26.9 3.2 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 25.9 51.9 11.1 11.1 2.1 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 17.9 35.7 28.6 17.9 2.5 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 32.1 39.3 3.6 25.0 2.2 1.17. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 37. Question 37 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 37.5 33.3 4.0 0.81 38. Question 38 24 4.2 8.3 37.5 25.0 25.0 3.6 1.10 39. Question 39 24 8.3 16.7 29.2 33.3 12.5 3.3 1.15 40. Question 40 22 13.6 13.6 31.8 27.3 13.6 3.1 1.25 Number of forms preslugged = 58 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 48.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 280 002L1 DESIGN OF LOGIC CIRCUITS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Heath, James R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 2.7 A 4 11.1 Sophomore 15 40.5 B 9 25.0 Junior 15 40.5 C 10 27.8 Senior 6 16.2 D 10 27.8 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 3 8.3 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 5.4 Studies Program 1 2.7 2 hours 3 8.1 Required by my major 36 97.3 3 hours 12 32.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 11 29.7 6 - 7 hours 6 16.2 8 or more hours 3 8.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 42 0.0 14.3 61.9 23.8 3.1 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 42 16.7 31.0 42.9 9.5 2.5 0.89 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 42 7.1 23.8 61.9 7.1 2.7 0.72 4. Exams reflected what was taught 42 26.2 35.7 33.3 4.8 2.2 0.88 5. Grading was fair and consistent 42 26.2 40.5 28.6 4.8 2.1 0.86 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 42 19.0 38.1 35.7 7.1 2.3 0.87 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 41 2.4 9.8 75.6 12.2 3.0 0.57 8. Graded assignments included comments 42 21.4 50.0 23.8 4.8 2.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 42 19.0 21.4 31.0 28.6 2.7 1.09 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 42 0.0 2.4 45.2 52.4 3.5 0.55 11. Was available for consultation 39 0.0 17.9 46.2 35.9 3.2 0.72 12. Satisfact answered class questions 42 9.5 14.3 64.3 11.9 2.8 0.78 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 23.8 19.0 42.9 14.3 2.5 1.02 14. Encouraged class participation 41 24.4 46.3 19.5 9.8 2.1 0.91 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 33 3.0 42.4 42.4 12.1 2.6 0.74 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 42 4.8 23.8 57.1 14.3 2.8 0.74 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 42 4.8 23.8 52.4 19.0 2.9 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 42 14.3 21.4 40.5 23.8 2.7 0.99 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 42 21.4 35.7 23.8 19.0 2.4 1.04 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 41 22.0 26.8 39.0 12.2 2.4 0.97 21. Overall quality of teaching 41 31.7 19.5 36.6 12.2 2.3 1.05. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 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 35 5.7 8.6 17.1 45.7 22.9 3.7 1.10 38. Question 38 34 5.9 8.8 17.6 41.2 26.5 3.7 1.14 39. Question 39 33 9.1 18.2 21.2 30.3 21.2 3.4 1.27 40. Question 40 33 12.1 21.2 18.2 33.3 15.2 3.2 1.29 Number of forms preslugged = 64 Number of forms scanned = 42 Number of forms with at least one student response = 42 Percent completed = 65.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 685 001L1 DIGITAL COMPUTER STRUCT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Heath, James R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 42.9 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 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 14.3 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 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 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 14.3 14.3 28.6 42.9 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 42.9 14.3 42.9 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 57.1 14.3 28.6 2.7 . . % % 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 = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 421G001L1 SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holloway, Lawrence ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 28.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 14 56.0 Junior 11 42.3 C 4 16.0 Senior 15 57.7 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 3 11.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 7.7 Required by my major 26 100.0 3 hours 11 42.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 26.9 6 - 7 hours 3 11.5 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 27 0.0 3.7 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.54 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 7.4 25.9 44.4 22.2 2.8 0.88 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 11.1 7.4 55.6 25.9 3.0 0.90 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 3.7 3.7 70.4 22.2 3.1 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 63.0 37.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 74.1 25.9 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 44.4 40.7 14.8 2.7 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 25.9 48.1 25.9 3.0 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 11. Was available for consultation 26 0.0 0.0 57.7 42.3 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 3.8 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 3.7 29.6 44.4 22.2 2.9 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 26 3.8 19.2 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.71 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 12.5 68.8 18.8 3.1 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 0.0 7.4 59.3 33.3 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 7.4 66.7 25.9 3.2 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 3.7 66.7 29.6 3.3 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 3.7 25.9 51.9 18.5 2.9 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 22.2 51.9 25.9 3.0 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 3.7 18.5 40.7 37.0 3.1 0.85. % % 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 23 0.0 4.3 21.7 43.5 30.4 4.0 0.85 38. Question 38 23 0.0 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 4.1 0.60 39. Question 39 22 0.0 4.5 18.2 54.5 22.7 4.0 0.79 40. Question 40 23 0.0 8.7 21.7 47.8 21.7 3.8 0.89 41. Question 41 23 0.0 8.7 4.3 43.5 43.5 4.2 0.90 42. Question 42 23 0.0 8.7 21.7 39.1 30.4 3.9 0.95 43. Question 43 22 0.0 9.1 18.2 45.5 27.3 3.9 0.92 44. Question 44 18 11.1 11.1 11.1 50.0 16.7 3.5 1.25 45. Question 45 3 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 33.3 3.0 . 46. Question 46 3 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 33.3 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 36 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 605 001L1 SYSTEMS FOR FACTORY INFORMATION AND CONTROL INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Holloway, Lawrence ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 78.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 21.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 15 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 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 6.7 2 hours 1 6.7 Required by my major 12 80.0 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 13.3 4 - 5 hours 5 33.3 6 - 7 hours 3 20.0 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % 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 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 16 0.0 6.3 50.0 43.8 3.4 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 0.36 4. Exams reflected what was taught 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 81.3 3.8 0.40 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 6.3 25.0 68.8 3.6 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 0.0 0.0 43.8 56.3 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 0.0 6.3 37.5 56.3 3.5 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 13.3 86.7 3.9 0.35 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 3.9 0.26 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 14. Encouraged class participation 14 0.0 0.0 21.4 78.6 3.8 0.43 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 14 0.0 0.0 35.7 64.3 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 % % % % 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 14 0.0 0.0 7.1 92.9 3.9 0.27. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 18 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 16 Percent completed = 88.9 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 462G002A1 ELECTRONIC CIRCUITS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kumar, R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 44.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 55.6 Junior 1 11.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 8 88.9 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 4 44.4 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 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 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 2.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 2.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 2.8 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 11.1 55.6 22.2 11.1 2.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 2.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 2.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 28.6 14.3 57.1 0.0 2.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 12.5 50.0 37.5 0.0 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 2.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 0.0 44.4 55.6 0.0 2.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 9 0.0 44.4 55.6 0.0 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 22.2 44.4 22.2 11.1 2.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 33.3 33.3 22.2 11.1 2.1 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 22.2 66.7 11.1 0.0 1.9 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 462G003A1 ELECTRONIC CIRCUITS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kumar, R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 28.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 71.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 100.0 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 14.3 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 3 42.9 Required by my major 6 85.7 3 hours 3 42.9 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 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 0.0 85.7 0.0 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 14.3 0.0 85.7 0.0 2.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . . % % 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 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 611 001L1 DETERMINISTIC SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Kumar, R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 85.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 14.3 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 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 14.3 Studies Program 3 42.9 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 3 42.9 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 28.6 28.6 28.6 2.7 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 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 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 33.3 0.0 66.7 3.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 41.2 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 621 001L1 ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lu, Caicheng ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 9 90.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 10.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 10 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 4 40.0 2 hours 1 11.1 Required by my major 4 40.0 3 hours 1 11.1 Other (e.g. elective) 2 20.0 4 - 5 hours 5 55.6 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 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 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 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 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 481 002A1 LOGICAL DESIGN LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lumpp, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 62.5 Junior 6 75.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 25.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 8 100.0 3 hours 2 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 37.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 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 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 28.6 28.6 42.9 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 12.5 50.0 25.0 12.5 2.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 11. Was available for consultation 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 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 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 2.6 . . % % 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 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 72.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 481 003A1 LOGICAL DESIGN LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lumpp, James ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 50.0 Junior 1 25.0 C 1 25.0 Senior 3 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 25.0 Required by my major 3 75.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 25.0 4 - 5 hours 1 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 25.0 8 or more hours 1 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . . % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 307 001L1 CIRCUIT ANALY W/ APPLS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lumpp, Janet ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 35.0 Sophomore 1 4.8 B 10 50.0 Junior 9 42.9 C 3 15.0 Senior 11 52.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 4.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 14.3 Required by my major 21 100.0 3 hours 9 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 28.6 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 9.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 0.0 90.5 9.5 3.1 0.30 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 4.8 14.3 61.9 19.0 3.0 0.74 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 4.8 9.5 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 4.8 9.5 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.77 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 5.3 26.3 57.9 10.5 2.7 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 9.5 19.0 57.1 14.3 2.8 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 4.8 14.3 61.9 19.0 3.0 0.74 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 3.2 0.70 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 23.8 47.6 23.8 2.9 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 19.0 14.3 61.9 4.8 2.5 0.87 14. Encouraged class participation 21 14.3 23.8 57.1 4.8 2.5 0.81 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 33.3 61.1 5.6 2.7 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 4.8 14.3 66.7 14.3 2.9 0.70 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 4.8 14.3 61.9 19.0 3.0 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 14.3 66.7 19.0 3.0 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 19.0 28.6 47.6 4.8 2.4 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 38.1 47.6 14.3 2.8 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 19.0 28.6 33.3 19.0 2.5 1.03. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 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 37. Question 37 20 0.0 0.0 55.0 40.0 5.0 3.5 0.61 38. Question 38 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 0.0 3.2 0.62 39. Question 39 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 0.0 3.2 0.62 40. Question 40 20 5.0 25.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 2.9 0.81 41. Question 41 20 5.0 5.0 65.0 25.0 0.0 3.1 0.72 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 21 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 562 001L1 ANALOG ELECTRON CIRCUITS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mason, Andrew ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 12 42.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 14 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 7.1 Senior 20 71.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 28.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 3.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 7.1 Required by my major 18 64.3 3 hours 6 21.4 Other (e.g. elective) 10 35.7 4 - 5 hours 11 39.3 6 - 7 hours 6 21.4 8 or more hours 2 7.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 3.4 0.0 58.6 37.9 3.3 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 29 6.9 13.8 41.4 37.9 3.1 0.90 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 10.3 55.2 34.5 3.2 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 0.0 6.9 65.5 27.6 3.2 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 6.9 13.8 48.3 31.0 3.0 0.87 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 17.2 51.7 31.0 3.1 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 6.9 34.5 44.8 13.8 2.7 0.81 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 20.7 41.4 37.9 3.2 0.76 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 10.3 17.2 44.8 27.6 2.9 0.94 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 6.9 3.4 44.8 44.8 3.3 0.84 11. Was available for consultation 29 0.0 6.9 37.9 55.2 3.5 0.63 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 27.6 41.4 31.0 3.0 0.78 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 28 7.1 28.6 21.4 42.9 3.0 1.02 14. Encouraged class participation 29 3.4 3.4 48.3 44.8 3.3 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 4.5 4.5 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 17.2 44.8 37.9 3.2 0.73 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 6.9 51.7 41.4 3.3 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 6.9 44.8 48.3 3.4 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 29 10.3 24.1 41.4 24.1 2.8 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 3.4 24.1 34.5 37.9 3.1 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 6.9 24.1 31.0 37.9 3.0 0.96. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 37. Question 37 28 3.6 14.3 28.6 28.6 25.0 3.6 1.14 38. Question 38 28 0.0 7.1 32.1 39.3 21.4 3.8 0.89 39. Question 39 28 3.6 17.9 21.4 28.6 28.6 3.6 1.20 40. Question 40 28 0.0 7.1 17.9 28.6 46.4 4.1 0.97 41. Question 41 28 0.0 7.1 21.4 28.6 42.9 4.1 0.98 42. Question 42 28 0.0 10.7 28.6 42.9 17.9 3.7 0.90 43. Question 43 28 0.0 21.4 25.0 32.1 21.4 3.5 1.07 Number of forms preslugged = 39 Number of forms scanned = 30 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 74.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 584 001L1 INTRODUCTION OF VLSI DESIGN AND TESTING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mir, Nader F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 20 76.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 19.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 3.8 Senior 12 46.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 14 53.8 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 2 7.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 11.5 Required by my major 13 50.0 3 hours 6 23.1 Other (e.g. elective) 13 50.0 4 - 5 hours 8 30.8 6 - 7 hours 5 19.2 8 or more hours 2 7.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 3.7 3.7 48.1 44.4 3.3 0.73 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 7.4 14.8 44.4 33.3 3.0 0.90 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 3.7 7.4 48.1 40.7 3.3 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 7.4 51.9 40.7 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 3.7 3.7 48.1 44.4 3.3 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 3.7 0.0 63.0 33.3 3.3 0.66 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 3.7 0.0 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 3.7 22.2 44.4 29.6 3.0 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 3.7 14.8 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 7.4 14.8 40.7 37.0 3.1 0.92 11. Was available for consultation 24 4.2 8.3 54.2 33.3 3.2 0.76 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 3.7 14.8 44.4 37.0 3.1 0.82 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 7.4 14.8 44.4 33.3 3.0 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 27 3.7 7.4 51.9 37.0 3.2 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 4.2 41.7 54.2 3.5 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 8.3 45.8 45.8 3.4 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 26 3.8 0.0 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 26 7.7 11.5 46.2 34.6 3.1 0.89. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 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 = 29 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 93.1 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 586 001L1 COMMUNICATION AND SWITCHING NETWORKS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Mir, Nader F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 44.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 48.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 8.0 Senior 17 70.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 7 29.2 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 24.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 16.0 Required by my major 11 44.0 3 hours 5 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 14 56.0 4 - 5 hours 6 24.0 6 - 7 hours 2 8.0 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 26 0.0 15.4 53.8 30.8 3.2 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 26 30.8 15.4 46.2 7.7 2.3 1.01 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 18.5 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.70 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 7.4 25.9 40.7 25.9 2.9 0.91 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 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 0.0 51.9 48.1 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 37.0 37.0 25.9 2.9 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 18.5 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 7.4 44.4 48.1 3.4 0.64 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 12.5 58.3 29.2 3.2 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 18.5 48.1 33.3 3.1 0.72 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 14.8 55.6 29.6 3.1 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.68 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 19.2 53.8 26.9 3.1 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 27 0.0 18.5 51.9 29.6 3.1 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 27 0.0 7.4 59.3 33.3 3.3 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 3.7 18.5 51.9 25.9 3.0 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 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 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 = 39 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 415G001L1 ELECTROMECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Nasar, Syed A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 8 33.3 Junior 13 54.2 C 1 4.2 Senior 11 45.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 16.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 37.5 Required by my major 24 100.0 3 hours 6 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 16.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 16.0 4.0 52.0 28.0 2.9 1.00 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 25 4.0 0.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.71 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 0.0 4.0 52.0 44.0 3.4 0.58 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 8.3 8.3 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.94 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 3.7 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 22.7 50.0 22.7 2.9 0.81 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 4.0 16.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.85 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 25 0.0 0.0 32.0 68.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 58.8 41.2 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 0.0 56.0 44.0 3.4 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 25 4.0 28.0 48.0 20.0 2.8 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 24 4.2 25.0 45.8 25.0 2.9 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 4.2 62.5 33.3 3.3 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 8.3 12.5 58.3 20.8 2.9 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 0.0 8.0 68.0 24.0 3.2 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 0.0 20.0 48.0 32.0 3.1 0.73. % % 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 = 36 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 69.4 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EE 582 001L3 HARDWARE DESCR LANGUAGES AND PROGRAM LOGIC INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = RADEMACHER, TIM ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 37.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 7 87.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 12.5 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 25.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 12.5 % % 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 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 44.4 33.3 11.1 11.1 1.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 2.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 22.2 33.3 44.4 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 2.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 2.8 . . % % 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 = 12 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 461G001L1 INTRO TO ELECTRONICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Radun, Arthur ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 13 40.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 14 43.8 Junior 19 57.6 C 5 15.6 Senior 14 42.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 21.2 Required by my major 33 100.0 3 hours 6 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 13 39.4 6 - 7 hours 4 12.1 8 or more hours 3 9.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 34 0.0 8.8 55.9 35.3 3.3 0.62 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 2.9 5.9 67.6 23.5 3.1 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 8.8 61.8 29.4 3.2 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 2.9 5.9 55.9 35.3 3.2 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 2.9 67.6 29.4 3.3 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 2.9 58.8 38.2 3.4 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 0.0 33.3 57.6 9.1 2.8 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 2.9 11.8 67.6 17.6 3.0 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 32 0.0 0.0 68.8 31.3 3.3 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 34 0.0 17.6 55.9 26.5 3.1 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 32 0.0 28.1 65.6 6.3 2.8 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 8.3 79.2 12.5 3.0 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 0.0 3.0 72.7 24.2 3.2 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 3.0 0.0 69.7 27.3 3.2 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 0.0 6.1 63.6 30.3 3.2 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 33 3.0 18.2 51.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 0.0 11.8 61.8 26.5 3.1 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 0.0 17.6 55.9 26.5 3.1 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 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 33 0.0 0.0 3.0 51.5 45.5 4.4 0.56 38. Question 38 33 0.0 0.0 6.1 60.6 33.3 4.3 0.57 39. Question 39 33 0.0 0.0 12.1 54.5 33.3 4.2 0.65 40. Question 40 32 0.0 6.3 21.9 46.9 25.0 3.9 0.86 41. Question 41 31 3.2 22.6 25.8 35.5 12.9 3.3 1.08 42. Question 42 32 3.1 6.3 28.1 43.8 18.8 3.7 0.97 43. Question 43 31 3.2 6.5 19.4 54.8 16.1 3.7 0.93 44. Question 44 33 3.0 3.0 6.1 48.5 39.4 4.2 0.92 45. Question 45 33 3.0 6.1 6.1 42.4 42.4 4.2 1.00 46. Question 46 26 23.1 23.1 11.5 34.6 7.7 2.8 1.36 Number of forms preslugged = 41 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 82.9 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 517 001L1 ADV ELECTROMECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Radun, Arthur ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 62.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 25.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 12.5 Senior 5 62.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 37.5 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 4 50.0 3 hours 3 37.5 Other (e.g. elective) 4 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 3 37.5 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 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 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . % % % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 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 = 13 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 61.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 581 001L1 ADVANCED LOGICAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shahidain, Rony ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 38.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 46.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 15.4 Senior 12 92.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 7.7 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 15.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 23.1 Required by my major 6 50.0 3 hours 5 38.5 Other (e.g. elective) 6 50.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 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 17 11.8 29.4 52.9 5.9 2.5 0.80 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 23.5 35.3 41.2 0.0 2.2 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 17 11.8 41.2 41.2 5.9 2.4 0.80 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 5.9 11.8 82.4 0.0 2.8 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 5.9 0.0 88.2 5.9 2.9 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 17 5.9 11.8 82.4 0.0 2.8 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 16 25.0 37.5 37.5 0.0 2.1 0.81 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 25.0 31.3 37.5 6.3 2.3 0.93 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 17.6 29.4 52.9 0.0 2.4 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 17.6 76.5 5.9 2.9 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 17 17.6 11.8 70.6 0.0 2.5 0.80 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 29.4 70.6 0.0 2.7 0.47 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 17.6 23.5 58.8 0.0 2.4 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 29.4 70.6 0.0 2.7 0.47 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 0.0 31.3 68.8 0.0 2.7 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 6.3 25.0 68.8 0.0 2.6 0.62 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 13.3 40.0 46.7 0.0 2.3 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 17 23.5 41.2 35.3 0.0 2.1 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 31.3 43.8 25.0 0.0 1.9 0.77. % % 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 94.4 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 221 001L1 CIRCUITS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Singh, Vijay ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 30.0 Sophomore 2 10.0 B 11 55.0 Junior 13 65.0 C 1 5.0 Senior 5 25.0 D 2 10.0 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 10.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 15.0 Required by my major 19 95.0 3 hours 8 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.0 4 - 5 hours 5 25.0 6 - 7 hours 2 10.0 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 22 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 22 9.1 22.7 45.5 22.7 2.8 0.91 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 13.6 45.5 40.9 3.3 0.70 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 0.0 4.5 77.3 18.2 3.1 0.47 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 38.1 42.9 14.3 2.7 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 9.1 27.3 54.5 9.1 2.6 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.66 11. Was available for consultation 21 4.8 9.5 52.4 33.3 3.1 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 4.5 13.6 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.72 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 9.5 9.5 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 22 9.1 4.5 68.2 18.2 3.0 0.79 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 5.9 17.6 64.7 11.8 2.8 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 4.5 13.6 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 4.5 13.6 50.0 31.8 3.1 0.81 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 4.5 13.6 45.5 36.4 3.1 0.83 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 9.5 14.3 52.4 23.8 2.9 0.89 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 9.5 9.5 42.9 38.1 3.1 0.94 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 9.5 14.3 47.6 28.6 3.0 0.92. % % 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 95.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 468G001L1 INTRO TO ENGINEERING ELECTROMAGNETICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Smith, William ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 21.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 18 54.5 Junior 3 9.1 C 8 24.2 Senior 30 90.9 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 3.0 Required by my major 33 100.0 3 hours 5 15.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 15 45.5 6 - 7 hours 8 24.2 8 or more hours 4 12.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 34 0.0 0.0 61.8 38.2 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 8.8 58.8 32.4 3.2 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 2.9 52.9 44.1 3.4 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.58 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 8.8 55.9 35.3 3.3 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 2.9 2.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.67 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 3.0 27.3 48.5 21.2 2.9 0.78 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 2.9 2.9 52.9 41.2 3.3 0.68 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 38.2 61.8 3.6 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 0.0 44.1 55.9 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 34 0.0 0.0 41.2 58.8 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 33 3.0 9.1 60.6 27.3 3.1 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 34 2.9 8.8 55.9 32.4 3.2 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 16.0 72.0 12.0 3.0 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 0.0 3.0 69.7 27.3 3.2 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 3.3 30.0 53.3 13.3 2.8 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 11.4 60.0 28.6 3.2 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 2.9 0.0 25.7 71.4 3.7 0.64. % % 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 33 3.0 3.0 15.2 51.5 27.3 4.0 0.92 38. Question 38 33 3.0 3.0 21.2 45.5 27.3 3.9 0.95 39. Question 39 33 3.0 0.0 21.2 51.5 24.2 3.9 0.86 40. Question 40 33 3.0 6.1 15.2 48.5 27.3 3.9 0.98 41. Question 41 33 3.0 3.0 21.2 45.5 27.3 3.9 0.95 42. Question 42 29 10.3 24.1 34.5 17.2 13.8 3.0 1.20 Number of forms preslugged = 46 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 76.1 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 511 001L1 INTRODUCTION TO COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Smith, William ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 54.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 5 20.8 Senior 23 95.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.2 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 8.3 Required by my major 13 54.2 3 hours 5 20.8 Other (e.g. elective) 11 45.8 4 - 5 hours 13 54.2 6 - 7 hours 3 12.5 8 or more hours 1 4.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 24 0.0 4.2 62.5 33.3 3.3 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 0.0 4.2 54.2 41.7 3.4 0.58 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 12.5 45.8 41.7 3.3 0.69 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 0.0 4.2 62.5 33.3 3.3 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.50 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 4.2 45.8 50.0 3.5 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 8.7 65.2 26.1 3.2 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 6.7 80.0 13.3 3.1 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.78 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 8.3 54.2 37.5 3.3 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 4.2 37.5 58.3 3.5 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 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 23 0.0 4.3 30.4 52.2 13.0 3.7 0.75 38. Question 38 23 4.3 8.7 39.1 30.4 17.4 3.5 1.04 39. Question 39 23 0.0 13.0 30.4 43.5 13.0 3.6 0.90 Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 306 001L1 ELECT CIRCUITS/MACHINERY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Sottile, Joseph ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 42.9 Sophomore 1 14.3 B 3 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 14.3 Senior 6 85.7 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 4 57.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 28.6 6 - 7 hours 1 14.3 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . % % % % 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 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . . % % 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 571 001L1 FEEDBACK CONTROL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Walcott, Bruce L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 46.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 46.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 9 60.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 40.0 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 6.7 Required by my major 8 53.3 3 hours 1 6.7 Other (e.g. elective) 7 46.7 4 - 5 hours 5 33.3 6 - 7 hours 4 26.7 8 or more hours 4 26.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 23.1 30.8 23.1 23.1 2.5 1.13 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 6.7 0.0 40.0 53.3 3.4 0.83 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.72 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 6.7 26.7 33.3 33.3 2.9 0.96 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 13.3 0.0 46.7 40.0 3.1 0.99 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 28.6 21.4 50.0 3.2 0.89 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 6.7 0.0 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.83 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 6.7 13.3 26.7 53.3 3.3 0.96 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 0.0 42.9 42.9 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 6.7 13.3 40.0 40.0 3.1 0.92 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 13.3 20.0 66.7 3.5 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 20.0 13.3 66.7 3.5 0.83. % % 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 = 18 Number of forms scanned = 16 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 222 001A1 ELECT ENGR LABORATORY I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Whites, Keith ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 75.0 Junior 7 58.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 41.7 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 2 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 5 41.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 16.7 0.0 41.7 41.7 3.1 1.08 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 3.1 0.29 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 41.7 33.3 16.7 8.3 1.9 1.00 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 9.1 63.6 27.3 0.0 2.2 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 8.3 25.0 25.0 41.7 3.0 1.04 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 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 0.85 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 16.7 33.3 25.0 25.0 2.6 1.08 14. Encouraged class participation 12 16.7 33.3 25.0 25.0 2.6 1.08 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 2.8 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 25.0 33.3 41.7 3.2 0.83 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 33.3 25.0 33.3 2.8 1.03 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 33.3 41.7 16.7 2.7 0.89 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 25.0 25.0 16.7 33.3 2.6 1.24. % % 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 10.0 0.0 70.0 20.0 3.0 0.82 33. Amount of work appropriate 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.97 34. Instructor explained expectations 10 10.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 2.7 0.95 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 2.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 10 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 2.5 0.97 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 222 002A1 ELECT ENGR LABORATORY I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Whites, Keith ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 14.3 Sophomore 2 28.6 B 4 57.1 Junior 5 71.4 C 1 14.3 Senior 0 0.0 D 1 14.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 57.1 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 12.5 25.0 12.5 50.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 42.9 28.6 28.6 0.0 1.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 28.6 28.6 42.9 0.0 2.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 12.5 25.0 37.5 25.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 12.5 62.5 12.5 12.5 2.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 25.0 25.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 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 8 12.5 62.5 12.5 12.5 2.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 2.0 . . % % 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 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 222 003A1 ELECT ENGR LABORATORY I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Whites, Keith ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 80.0 Junior 3 60.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 40.0 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 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 80.0 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 4 75.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 1.5 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 25.0 25.0 50.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 60.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 1.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 20.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 2.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 3 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 3 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 2.0 . . % % 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 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 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . % 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 = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 422G001L1 SIGNALS/SYSTEMS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Zhang, Yu-Ming ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 15 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 15.0 Junior 3 15.0 C 2 10.0 Senior 16 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 5.0 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 2 10.0 Required by my major 20 100.0 3 hours 3 15.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 8 or more hours 2 10.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 9.5 28.6 28.6 33.3 2.9 1.01 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 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 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 33.3 38.9 22.2 2.8 0.88 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 4.8 14.3 52.4 28.6 3.0 0.80 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 14.3 52.4 28.6 3.0 0.80 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 5.0 20.0 40.0 35.0 3.1 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 47.6 38.1 3.2 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 35.7 50.0 14.3 2.8 0.70 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 76.2 19.0 3.1 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 57.1 28.6 9.5 2.4 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 9.5 9.5 47.6 33.3 3.0 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 4.8 4.8 33.3 57.1 3.4 0.81. % % 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 = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 75.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Electrical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EE 699 002L1 TOPS IN ELEC ENGR: ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Zhang, Yu-Ming ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 75.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 12.5 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 1 12.5 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 6 66.7 3 hours 5 55.6 Other (e.g. elective) 3 33.3 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 2 22.2 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 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 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 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 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 11 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 9 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 001L3 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jacob, Jamey D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 92.9 A 5 35.7 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 8 57.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 7.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 21.4 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 14.3 Required by my major 9 64.3 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 5 35.7 4 - 5 hours 5 35.7 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 22 4.5 40.9 54.5 0.0 2.5 0.60 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 17 41.2 35.3 23.5 0.0 1.8 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 31.8 31.8 27.3 9.1 2.1 0.99 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 37.5 50.0 0.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.39 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 13.6 77.3 9.1 3.0 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 4.5 13.6 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 15.8 42.1 42.1 0.0 2.3 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 19.0 33.3 42.9 4.8 2.3 0.86 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 3.2 0.59 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 37.5 62.5 0.0 2.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 15.4 38.5 46.2 0.0 2.3 0.75 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 35.0 50.0 10.0 5.0 1.9 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 13 15.4 61.5 23.1 0.0 2.1 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 17.6 41.2 41.2 0.0 2.2 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 13.6 36.4 40.9 9.1 2.5 0.86 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 22.7 31.8 36.4 9.1 2.3 0.95 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 27.3 36.4 27.3 9.1 2.2 0.96 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 45.0 40.0 10.0 5.0 1.8 0.85 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 40.9 27.3 27.3 4.5 2.0 0.95 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 23.8 23.8 47.6 4.8 2.3 0.91. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 95.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 002L3 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jacob, Jamey D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 12 92.3 A 4 30.8 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 6 46.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 3 23.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 30.8 Studies Program 1 7.7 2 hours 4 30.8 Required by my major 8 61.5 3 hours 2 15.4 Other (e.g. elective) 4 30.8 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 1 7.7 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 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 16.7 11.1 44.4 27.8 2.8 1.04 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 11.1 5.6 55.6 27.8 3.0 0.91 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 13.3 0.0 53.3 33.3 3.1 0.96 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 11.1 0.0 50.0 38.9 3.2 0.92 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.46 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 11.1 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 5.9 0.0 52.9 41.2 3.3 0.77 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 17 5.9 5.9 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.81 12. Satisfact answered class questions 16 6.3 0.0 50.0 43.8 3.3 0.79 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 5.9 11.8 47.1 35.3 3.1 0.86 14. Encouraged class participation 16 6.3 6.3 50.0 37.5 3.2 0.83 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 7.7 0.0 53.8 38.5 3.2 0.83 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 16 6.3 6.3 56.3 31.3 3.1 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 3.3 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 17 5.9 5.9 58.8 29.4 3.1 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 17.6 11.8 41.2 29.4 2.8 1.07 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 16 12.5 18.8 37.5 31.3 2.9 1.02 21. Overall quality of teaching 16 6.3 18.8 43.8 31.3 3.0 0.89. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 Percent completed = 78.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 003L3 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jacob, Jamey D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 92.9 A 8 57.1 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 5 35.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 7.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 7.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 35.7 Required by my major 10 71.4 3 hours 5 35.7 Other (e.g. elective) 4 28.6 4 - 5 hours 1 7.1 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 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 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 14 0.0 21.4 57.1 21.4 3.0 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 7.1 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.53 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 9.1 54.5 36.4 3.3 0.65 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 12 8.3 0.0 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 27.3 45.5 27.3 3.0 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 11.8 41.2 47.1 3.4 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 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 21 Number of forms scanned = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EGR 199 001L1 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Taunya ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 17 94.4 A 6 33.3 Sophomore 1 5.6 B 10 55.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 11.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 27.8 Studies Program 1 5.6 2 hours 1 5.6 Required by my major 13 72.2 3 hours 7 38.9 Other (e.g. elective) 4 22.2 4 - 5 hours 3 16.7 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 22 0.0 4.5 72.7 22.7 3.2 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 9.5 23.8 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 22 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 2.8 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 22 0.0 9.1 77.3 13.6 3.0 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 22 0.0 9.1 81.8 9.1 3.0 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 22 0.0 4.5 90.9 4.5 3.0 0.31 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 22 4.5 4.5 86.4 4.5 2.9 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 38.1 57.1 4.8 2.7 0.58 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 22 0.0 4.5 81.8 13.6 3.1 0.43 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 22 0.0 0.0 77.3 22.7 3.2 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 22 0.0 0.0 86.4 13.6 3.1 0.35 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 9.1 90.9 0.0 2.9 0.29 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 22 0.0 9.1 86.4 4.5 3.0 0.38 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 22 0.0 13.6 68.2 18.2 3.0 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 13.6 72.7 13.6 3.0 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 28.6 61.9 4.8 2.7 0.66 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 22 9.1 22.7 59.1 9.1 2.7 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 22 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.46. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 22 Number of forms with at least one student response = 22 Percent completed = 95.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EGR 199 002L1 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Phillips, Taunya ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 16 94.1 A 6 35.3 Sophomore 1 5.9 B 8 47.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 3 17.6 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 35.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 23.5 Required by my major 11 64.7 3 hours 3 17.6 Other (e.g. elective) 6 35.3 4 - 5 hours 2 11.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.9 8 or more hours 1 5.9 % % 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 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 20.0 15.0 45.0 20.0 2.7 1.04 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 15.0 55.0 30.0 3.2 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 5.0 50.0 45.0 3.4 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 15.0 50.0 35.0 3.2 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 15.0 40.0 45.0 3.3 0.73 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 0.0 10.5 36.8 52.6 3.4 0.69 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 0.0 10.5 42.1 47.4 3.4 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 5.0 15.0 55.0 25.0 3.0 0.79 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 19 5.3 15.8 42.1 36.8 3.1 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 57.9 3.6 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 87.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 001L2 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shearer, Scott A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 85.7 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 1 14.3 B 3 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 3 42.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 5 71.4 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 2 28.6 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 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 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 9 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 34.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 002L2 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shearer, Scott A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 14 93.3 A 6 50.0 Sophomore 1 6.7 B 4 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 2 16.7 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 35.7 Studies Program 1 6.7 2 hours 5 35.7 Required by my major 9 60.0 3 hours 2 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 5 33.3 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 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 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 19 5.3 5.3 73.7 15.8 3.0 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 5.3 57.9 31.6 3.2 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 11.1 61.1 27.8 3.2 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 19 0.0 5.3 52.6 42.1 3.4 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 47.4 3.5 0.51 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 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 36.8 63.2 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 57.9 42.1 3.4 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 5.3 5.3 47.4 42.1 3.3 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 19 0.0 0.0 47.4 52.6 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.43 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 3.3 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 11.1 61.1 27.8 3.2 0.62 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 5.6 11.1 50.0 33.3 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 19 5.3 5.3 52.6 36.8 3.2 0.79 21. Overall quality of teaching 19 0.0 5.3 36.8 57.9 3.5 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 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 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 2.8 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 4 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 = 23 Number of forms scanned = 19 Number of forms with at least one student response = 19 Percent completed = 82.6 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 003L2 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Shearer, Scott A ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 92.9 A 7 50.0 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 6 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 7.1 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 4 28.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 21.4 Required by my major 9 69.2 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 4 30.8 4 - 5 hours 1 7.1 6 - 7 hours 2 14.3 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 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.64 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 6.7 73.3 20.0 3.1 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 16 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 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 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.45 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 17 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 16 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 12. Satisfact answered class questions 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 17 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.49 14. Encouraged class participation 17 0.0 0.0 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 17 0.0 11.8 52.9 35.3 3.2 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 16 0.0 6.3 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 16 0.0 12.5 56.3 31.3 3.2 0.66 % % % % 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 76.5 23.5 3.2 0.44 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 0.0 70.6 29.4 3.3 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 0.0 33.3 44.4 22.2 2.9 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 . % 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 = 17 Number of forms with at least one student response = 17 Percent completed = 81.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = ZMisc. - Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EGR 199 003L1 TOPICS IN ENGINEERING: INTRO TO THE ART OF ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Walcott, Bruce L ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 92.9 A 8 53.3 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 6 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 6.7 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 11 73.3 3 hours 5 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 4 26.7 4 - 5 hours 4 26.7 6 - 7 hours 2 13.3 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 18 0.0 11.1 38.9 50.0 3.4 0.70 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 11.1 5.6 55.6 27.8 3.0 0.91 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 5.6 0.0 61.1 33.3 3.2 0.73 4. Exams reflected what was taught 18 0.0 5.6 44.4 50.0 3.4 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 11.1 50.0 38.9 3.3 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 5.6 0.0 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.75 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 5.6 11.1 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.80 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 18 5.6 5.6 50.0 38.9 3.2 0.81 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 5.6 11.1 55.6 27.8 3.1 0.80 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 3.4 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 17 11.8 11.8 35.3 41.2 3.1 1.03 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 18 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 513 201L1 MECHANICAL VIBRATIONS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, John R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 20.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 2 40.0 C 2 40.0 Senior 3 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 2 40.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 3 60.0 4 - 5 hours 1 20.0 6 - 7 hours 2 40.0 8 or more hours 2 40.0 % % 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 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 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 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 33.3 33.3 33.3 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 33.3 16.7 16.7 33.3 2.5 . % % % % 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 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 313 002L1 DYNAMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Louis M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 8.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 24 66.7 Junior 14 38.9 C 8 22.2 Senior 22 61.1 D 1 2.8 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 13.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 10 27.8 Required by my major 35 97.2 3 hours 16 44.4 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.8 4 - 5 hours 5 13.9 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 39 2.6 0.0 79.5 17.9 3.1 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 39 15.4 30.8 48.7 5.1 2.4 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 39 5.1 15.4 69.2 10.3 2.8 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 39 2.6 0.0 64.1 33.3 3.3 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 39 2.6 2.6 64.1 30.8 3.2 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 39 2.6 7.7 53.8 35.9 3.2 0.71 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 39 2.6 0.0 25.6 71.8 3.7 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 39 5.1 20.5 59.0 15.4 2.8 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 39 10.3 35.9 43.6 10.3 2.5 0.82 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 38 2.6 10.5 44.7 42.1 3.3 0.76 11. Was available for consultation 34 8.8 26.5 52.9 11.8 2.7 0.81 12. Satisfact answered class questions 39 17.9 30.8 43.6 7.7 2.4 0.88 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 38 21.1 44.7 31.6 2.6 2.2 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 38 15.8 47.4 34.2 2.6 2.2 0.75 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 28 3.6 25.0 64.3 7.1 2.8 0.65 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 37 2.7 29.7 56.8 10.8 2.8 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 37 2.7 13.5 73.0 10.8 2.9 0.60 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 37 2.7 29.7 56.8 10.8 2.8 0.68 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 37 13.5 59.5 21.6 5.4 2.2 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 39 15.4 33.3 41.0 10.3 2.5 0.88 21. Overall quality of teaching 37 16.2 37.8 43.2 2.7 2.3 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 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 19 0.0 0.0 52.6 42.1 5.3 3.5 0.61 38. Question 38 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 47.4 5.3 3.5 0.70 39. Question 39 19 0.0 0.0 42.1 47.4 10.5 3.7 0.67 40. Question 40 19 0.0 10.5 36.8 42.1 10.5 3.5 0.84 41. Question 41 19 0.0 10.5 42.1 42.1 5.3 3.4 0.77 42. Question 42 17 0.0 5.9 29.4 58.8 5.9 3.6 0.70 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 48 Number of forms scanned = 39 Number of forms with at least one student response = 39 Percent completed = 81.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 531 001L1 ADV STRENGTH MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Brock, Louis M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 50.0 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 16.7 Required by my major 1 16.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 5 83.3 4 - 5 hours 4 66.7 6 - 7 hours 1 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 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 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 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 28.6 42.9 28.6 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 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 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 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 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 = 8 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 87.5 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 302 002L1 MECHAN OF DEFORM SOLIDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hanson, Mark T ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 17.9 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 32.1 Junior 17 60.7 C 14 50.0 Senior 10 35.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 3.6 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 3.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 26 96.3 3 hours 3 10.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 3.7 4 - 5 hours 17 60.7 6 - 7 hours 6 21.4 8 or more hours 1 3.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 29 0.0 0.0 75.9 24.1 3.2 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 10.7 53.6 35.7 3.3 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 0.0 65.5 34.5 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 29 0.0 13.8 65.5 20.7 3.1 0.59 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 3.4 13.8 72.4 10.3 2.9 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 10.3 69.0 20.7 3.1 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 0.0 48.3 51.7 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 28 3.6 28.6 57.1 10.7 2.8 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 29 0.0 10.3 62.1 27.6 3.2 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 29 0.0 0.0 62.1 37.9 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 24 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 6.9 58.6 34.5 3.3 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 3.4 27.6 51.7 17.2 2.8 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 28 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 30.0 55.0 15.0 2.9 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 29 0.0 3.4 69.0 27.6 3.2 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 0.0 72.4 27.6 3.3 0.45 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 7.1 42.9 35.7 14.3 2.6 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 29 0.0 13.8 51.7 34.5 3.2 0.68 21. Overall quality of teaching 29 0.0 24.1 51.7 24.1 3.0 0.71. % % 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 28 0.0 3.6 25.0 39.3 32.1 4.0 0.86 38. Question 38 28 3.6 10.7 14.3 42.9 28.6 3.8 1.09 39. Question 39 28 0.0 3.6 14.3 53.6 28.6 4.1 0.77 40. Question 40 27 0.0 3.7 18.5 48.1 29.6 4.0 0.81 41. Question 41 28 0.0 7.1 21.4 53.6 17.9 3.8 0.82 42. Question 42 28 0.0 3.6 25.0 57.1 14.3 3.8 0.72 43. Question 43 28 0.0 7.1 21.4 46.4 25.0 3.9 0.88 44. Question 44 28 0.0 7.1 25.0 53.6 14.3 3.8 0.80 45. Question 45 28 0.0 7.1 25.0 46.4 21.4 3.8 0.86 46. Question 46 22 0.0 4.5 22.7 45.5 27.3 4.0 0.84 Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 29 Number of forms with at least one student response = 29 Percent completed = 85.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = EM 221 001L1 STATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Herrin, David W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 36.4 Sophomore 2 18.2 B 4 36.4 Junior 5 45.5 C 2 18.2 Senior 3 27.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 9.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 9.1 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 18.2 Required by my major 10 90.9 3 hours 6 54.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 9.1 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 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 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 23.1 53.8 15.4 2.8 0.83 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 33.3 41.7 25.0 2.9 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 10 10.0 0.0 60.0 30.0 3.1 0.88 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 23.1 53.8 23.1 3.0 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 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 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 9.1 27.3 63.6 0.0 2.5 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 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 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 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 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 4.4 0.51 38. Question 38 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 4.4 0.51 39. Question 39 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 38.5 53.8 4.5 0.66 40. Question 40 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 4.5 0.52 41. Question 41 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 4.1 0.49 42. Question 42 13 0.0 7.7 7.7 61.5 23.1 4.0 0.82 43. Question 43 13 0.0 0.0 15.4 46.2 38.5 4.2 0.73 44. Question 44 13 0.0 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 4.2 0.60 45. Question 45 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 4.7 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 27 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 48.1 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 302 201L1 MECHAN OF DEFORM SOLIDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hickman, Scott R. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 16.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 66.7 Junior 5 83.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 16.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 1 16.7 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 16.7 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 2 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 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 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . % % % % 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 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . . % % 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 37. Question 37 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 38. Question 38 3 0.0 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 4.0 . 39. Question 39 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 40. Question 40 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 41. Question 41 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 42. Question 42 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 43. Question 43 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 44. Question 44 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 45. Question 45 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . 46. Question 46 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 33.3 3.7 . Number of forms preslugged = 10 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 313 201L1 DYNAMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Leifer, Jack ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 22.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 22.2 Junior 7 77.8 C 3 33.3 Senior 2 22.2 D 2 22.2 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 4 44.4 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 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.9 0.49 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 23.1 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.55 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 11. Was available for consultation 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 69.2 30.8 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 23.1 69.2 7.7 2.8 0.55 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 0.49 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 0.0 15.4 53.8 30.8 3.2 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 15.4 69.2 15.4 3.0 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 0.0 38.5 53.8 7.7 2.7 0.63 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 76.9 15.4 3.1 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 = 14 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 92.9 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 302 001L1 MECHAN OF DEFORM SOLIDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Main, John A. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 16.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 17 56.7 Junior 22 71.0 C 8 26.7 Senior 9 29.0 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 3.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 6.5 Required by my major 31 100.0 3 hours 6 19.4 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 9 29.0 6 - 7 hours 11 35.5 8 or more hours 2 6.5 % % 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 74.3 25.7 3.3 0.44 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 2.9 60.0 37.1 3.3 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 35 0.0 2.9 65.7 31.4 3.3 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 0.0 14.3 54.3 31.4 3.2 0.66 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 0.0 65.7 34.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 2.9 11.4 62.9 22.9 3.1 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 2.9 44.1 47.1 5.9 2.6 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 35 0.0 0.0 62.9 37.1 3.4 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 5.9 55.9 38.2 3.3 0.59 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 0.0 25.7 60.0 14.3 2.9 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 34 0.0 20.6 61.8 17.6 3.0 0.63 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 3.4 24.1 65.5 6.9 2.8 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 5.7 74.3 20.0 3.1 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 5.7 65.7 28.6 3.2 0.55 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 35 0.0 5.7 71.4 22.9 3.2 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 34 8.8 32.4 52.9 5.9 2.6 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 5.7 71.4 22.9 3.2 0.51 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 5.7 57.1 37.1 3.3 0.58. % % 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 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 29 0.0 0.0 17.2 65.5 17.2 4.0 0.60 38. Question 38 30 0.0 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 4.0 0.53 39. Question 39 30 0.0 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 3.9 0.55 40. Question 40 30 0.0 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 4.0 0.45 41. Question 41 30 3.3 0.0 10.0 73.3 13.3 3.9 0.74 42. Question 42 29 3.4 0.0 20.7 65.5 10.3 3.8 0.77 43. Question 43 19 5.3 0.0 10.5 68.4 15.8 3.9 0.88 44. Question 44 26 0.0 0.0 30.8 61.5 7.7 3.8 0.59 45. Question 45 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 3.9 0.64 46. Question 46 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 3.7 . 47. Question 47 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 48. Question 48 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 49. Question 49 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 39 Number of forms scanned = 35 Number of forms with at least one student response = 35 Percent completed = 89.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 313 003L1 DYNAMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Smith, Suzanne ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 23.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 35.3 Junior 8 44.4 C 6 35.3 Senior 10 55.6 D 1 5.9 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 16.7 Required by my major 16 94.1 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.9 4 - 5 hours 5 27.8 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 8 or more hours 4 22.2 % % 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 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 0.0 23.8 76.2 0.0 2.8 0.44 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 4.8 76.2 19.0 3.1 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 14.3 81.0 4.8 2.9 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 23.8 52.4 19.0 2.9 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 0.0 47.1 52.9 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 35.0 45.0 20.0 2.9 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 9.5 71.4 19.0 3.1 0.54 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 35.3 64.7 0.0 2.6 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 9.5 33.3 52.4 4.8 2.5 0.75 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 9.5 66.7 23.8 3.1 0.57 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 38.1 57.1 3.5 0.60. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 0.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 4.0 0.65 38. Question 38 20 0.0 0.0 25.0 45.0 30.0 4.1 0.76 39. Question 39 20 0.0 0.0 15.0 65.0 20.0 4.1 0.60 40. Question 40 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 65.0 15.0 4.0 0.60 41. Question 41 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 0.0 3.6 0.50 42. Question 42 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 22.2 11.1 3.4 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 645 001L1 ADVANCED DYNAMICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Smith, Suzanne ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 66.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 33.3 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 4 66.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 2 33.3 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 8 or more hours 1 16.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 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 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % % % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % 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 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 = 6 Number of forms with at least one student response = 6 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 221 003L1 STATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tauchert, Theodore R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 27.8 Sophomore 5 27.8 B 6 33.3 Junior 9 50.0 C 6 33.3 Senior 4 22.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 5.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 1 5.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 11.1 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 5 27.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 33.3 6 - 7 hours 3 16.7 8 or more hours 1 5.6 % % 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 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 4.8 9.5 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.77 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.44 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 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 4.8 4.8 61.9 28.6 3.1 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 9.5 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 23.8 47.6 28.6 3.0 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 14.3 81.0 4.8 2.9 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 25.0 68.8 6.3 2.8 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 75.0 20.0 3.2 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 27.8 72.2 0.0 2.7 0.46 % % % % 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 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 9.5 4.8 33.3 52.4 3.3 0.96. % % 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 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 0.0 0.0 15.0 45.0 40.0 4.3 0.72 38. Question 38 20 0.0 0.0 20.0 45.0 35.0 4.2 0.75 39. Question 39 20 0.0 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 4.3 0.57 40. Question 40 20 0.0 5.0 0.0 65.0 30.0 4.2 0.70 41. Question 41 20 0.0 0.0 10.0 65.0 25.0 4.2 0.59 42. Question 42 20 5.0 5.0 15.0 60.0 15.0 3.8 0.97 43. Question 43 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 . 44. Question 44 17 5.9 0.0 23.5 58.8 11.8 3.7 0.92 45. Question 45 5 20.0 0.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 3.2 . Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 70.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 302 003L1 MECHAN OF DEFORM SOLIDS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tauchert, Theodore R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 25.0 Sophomore 1 2.4 B 17 42.5 Junior 22 53.7 C 9 22.5 Senior 18 43.9 D 4 10.0 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 4.9 Required by my major 41 100.0 3 hours 8 19.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 20 48.8 6 - 7 hours 9 22.0 8 or more hours 2 4.9 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 45 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 45 0.0 6.7 75.6 17.8 3.1 0.49 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 0.0 2.3 45.5 52.3 3.5 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 45 4.4 13.3 48.9 33.3 3.1 0.80 5. Grading was fair and consistent 45 0.0 13.3 51.1 35.6 3.2 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 45 0.0 4.4 57.8 37.8 3.3 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 45 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 43 4.7 32.6 46.5 16.3 2.7 0.79 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 45 0.0 4.4 51.1 44.4 3.4 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 45 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 43 0.0 0.0 41.9 58.1 3.6 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 45 0.0 2.2 53.3 44.4 3.4 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 43 2.3 18.6 62.8 16.3 2.9 0.67 14. Encouraged class participation 42 0.0 11.9 73.8 14.3 3.0 0.52 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 30 3.3 3.3 80.0 13.3 3.0 0.56 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 44 0.0 0.0 61.4 38.6 3.4 0.49 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 45 0.0 0.0 62.2 37.8 3.4 0.49 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 45 0.0 2.2 71.1 26.7 3.2 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 43 4.7 20.9 60.5 14.0 2.8 0.72 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 45 0.0 20.0 51.1 28.9 3.1 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 45 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 0.69. % % 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 43 0.0 0.0 23.3 53.5 23.3 4.0 0.69 38. Question 38 43 0.0 0.0 16.3 58.1 25.6 4.1 0.65 39. Question 39 43 0.0 4.7 18.6 46.5 30.2 4.0 0.83 40. Question 40 43 0.0 0.0 25.6 46.5 27.9 4.0 0.74 41. Question 41 43 0.0 4.7 25.6 44.2 25.6 3.9 0.84 42. Question 42 43 0.0 4.7 25.6 51.2 18.6 3.8 0.78 43. Question 43 42 2.4 2.4 28.6 45.2 21.4 3.8 0.89 44. Question 44 43 0.0 7.0 34.9 37.2 20.9 3.7 0.88 45. Question 45 43 0.0 4.7 34.9 44.2 16.3 3.7 0.80 46. Question 46 8 0.0 12.5 12.5 62.5 12.5 3.8 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 50 Number of forms scanned = 45 Number of forms with at least one student response = 45 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 221 002L1 STATICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wu, T.W. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 11.5 Sophomore 3 11.5 B 14 53.8 Junior 17 65.4 C 8 30.8 Senior 5 19.2 D 1 3.8 Graduate 1 3.8 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 15.4 Required by my major 24 92.3 3 hours 11 42.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 7.7 4 - 5 hours 6 23.1 6 - 7 hours 4 15.4 8 or more hours 1 3.8 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 27 0.0 0.0 48.1 51.9 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 27 0.0 14.8 48.1 37.0 3.2 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 0.0 3.7 25.9 70.4 3.7 0.55 4. Exams reflected what was taught 27 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 27 0.0 11.1 37.0 51.9 3.4 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 27 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 27 0.0 0.0 37.0 63.0 3.6 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 3.7 22.2 74.1 3.7 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 27 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 4.3 26.1 69.6 3.7 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 27 0.0 3.7 48.1 48.1 3.4 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 27 0.0 14.8 55.6 29.6 3.1 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 34.6 61.5 3.6 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 3.8 26.9 69.2 3.7 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 0.0 3.8 30.8 65.4 3.6 0.57 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 0.0 24.0 48.0 28.0 3.0 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 3.7 40.7 55.6 3.5 0.58 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 3.7 18.5 77.8 3.7 0.53. % % 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 26 0.0 3.8 3.8 42.3 50.0 4.4 0.75 38. Question 38 26 0.0 3.8 0.0 42.3 53.8 4.5 0.71 39. Question 39 26 0.0 3.8 3.8 34.6 57.7 4.5 0.76 40. Question 40 26 0.0 3.8 7.7 26.9 61.5 4.5 0.81 41. Question 41 26 0.0 3.8 11.5 30.8 53.8 4.3 0.85 42. Question 42 26 0.0 7.7 11.5 34.6 46.2 4.2 0.94 43. Question 43 26 0.0 3.8 7.7 46.2 42.3 4.3 0.78 44. Question 44 25 0.0 4.0 16.0 44.0 36.0 4.1 0.83 45. Question 45 14 0.0 14.3 7.1 57.1 21.4 3.9 0.95 Number of forms preslugged = 38 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 Percent completed = 71.1 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = EM 313 001L1 DYNAMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Wu, T.W. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 9.1 B 9 81.8 Junior 3 27.3 C 2 18.2 Senior 7 63.6 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 2 18.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 27.3 6 - 7 hours 5 45.5 8 or more hours 1 9.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 0.0 27.3 72.7 0.0 2.7 0.47 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 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 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 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 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 30.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 27.3 63.6 3.5 0.69. % % 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 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 4.4 0.70 38. Question 38 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 4.2 0.63 39. Question 39 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 4.3 0.67 40. Question 40 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 4.4 0.70 41. Question 41 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 4.3 0.67 42. Question 42 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 4.3 . Number of forms preslugged = 17 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 64.7 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 440 201L1 DESIGN - CONTROL SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Baker, John R ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 16.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 83.3 Junior 3 50.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 8 or more hours 3 50.0 % % 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 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 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 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 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 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . % % % % 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % 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 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 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 4.7 . 39. Question 39 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 4.8 . 40. Question 40 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 41. Question 41 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 4.7 . 42. Question 42 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 4.8 . 43. Question 43 5 0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 4.2 . 44. Question 44 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 4.3 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 151 001L1 MANUFACTURING ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Benson, James M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 5.3 A 2 10.5 Sophomore 9 47.4 B 10 52.6 Junior 6 31.6 C 6 31.6 Senior 3 15.8 D 1 5.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 6 31.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 7 36.8 Required by my major 18 100.0 3 hours 4 21.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 5.3 6 - 7 hours 1 5.3 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 25 0.0 4.0 84.0 12.0 3.1 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 16.0 72.0 12.0 3.0 0.54 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 0.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 2.9 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 4.2 16.7 70.8 8.3 2.8 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 4.2 75.0 16.7 3.0 0.62 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 4.8 4.8 81.0 9.5 3.0 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 8. Graded assignments included comments 14 28.6 35.7 35.7 0.0 2.1 0.83 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 17.4 17.4 65.2 0.0 2.5 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 16 6.3 56.3 25.0 12.5 2.4 0.81 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 9.5 81.0 4.8 2.9 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 17.4 43.5 39.1 0.0 2.2 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 22 13.6 40.9 45.5 0.0 2.3 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 6.7 33.3 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 9.5 33.3 57.1 0.0 2.5 0.68 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 9.5 52.4 38.1 0.0 2.3 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 4.3 17.4 73.9 4.3 2.8 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 28.6 42.9 28.6 0.0 2.0 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 25 20.0 28.0 52.0 0.0 2.3 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 25 8.0 32.0 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.65. % % 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 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 2.3 . 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 2 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 37. Question 37 22 0.0 13.6 45.5 40.9 0.0 3.3 0.70 38. Question 38 22 4.5 9.1 59.1 27.3 0.0 3.1 0.75 39. Question 39 22 4.5 13.6 63.6 18.2 0.0 3.0 0.72 Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 151 201L1 MANUFACTURING ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Benson, James M ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 4 66.7 B 3 50.0 Junior 1 16.7 C 3 50.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 1 16.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 2 33.3 Required by my major 5 83.3 3 hours 1 16.7 Other (e.g. elective) 1 16.7 4 - 5 hours 1 16.7 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 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 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 9.1 72.7 9.1 2.8 0.75 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 11 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.54 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 10.0 70.0 20.0 3.1 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 54.5 45.5 0.0 2.5 0.52 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 0.53 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 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 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 10 0.0 10.0 20.0 60.0 10.0 3.7 0.82 38. Question 38 10 10.0 0.0 20.0 50.0 20.0 3.7 1.16 39. Question 39 10 0.0 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 3.5 0.97 Number of forms preslugged = 13 Number of forms scanned = 11 Number of forms with at least one student response = 11 Percent completed = 84.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 321 201L1 ENGR THERMODYNAMICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Capece, Vincent ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 25.0 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 5 41.7 Junior 10 76.9 C 3 25.0 Senior 2 15.4 D 1 8.3 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 12 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 16.7 6 - 7 hours 6 50.0 8 or more hours 4 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 13.3 33.3 53.3 3.4 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.41 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 6.7 46.7 46.7 3.4 0.63 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 13.3 40.0 46.7 3.3 0.72 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 21.4 50.0 28.6 3.1 0.73 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 0.0 0.0 53.3 46.7 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 3.1 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 0.0 6.7 33.3 60.0 3.5 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 6.7 20.0 73.3 3.7 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 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 17 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 88.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 325 201L1 ELEMENTS HEAT TRANSFER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Capece, Vincent ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 11.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 44.4 Junior 5 55.6 C 4 44.4 Senior 4 44.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 11.1 4 - 5 hours 1 11.1 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 8 or more hours 7 77.8 % % 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 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 0.0 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 33.3 66.7 3.7 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 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 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . . % % 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 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 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 4.4 . 38. Question 38 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 11.1 66.7 4.4 . 39. Question 39 9 0.0 11.1 0.0 33.3 55.6 4.3 . 40. Question 40 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 4.3 . 41. Question 41 9 11.1 0.0 0.0 33.3 55.6 4.2 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ME 599 002L1 TOPICS IN ME:INDUSTRIAL ERGONOMICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Edwards, Richard G ----------------------------------------------------- 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 5 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 40.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 10.0 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 20.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 60.0 Required by my major 4 40.0 3 hours 2 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 60.0 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 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 5. Grading was fair and consistent 9 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 3.6 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 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 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 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 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71. % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 28. Guided student report preparation 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 29. Students free to express opinions 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 321 001L1 ENGR THERMODYNAMICS II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gao, Dayong ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 25 65.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 34.2 Junior 16 42.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 22 57.9 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 7.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 9 23.7 Required by my major 37 100.0 3 hours 19 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 6 15.8 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 2.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 42 2.4 0.0 73.8 23.8 3.2 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 42 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 42 0.0 4.8 64.3 31.0 3.3 0.54 4. Exams reflected what was taught 42 0.0 4.8 59.5 35.7 3.3 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 42 0.0 4.8 71.4 23.8 3.2 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 42 0.0 0.0 76.2 23.8 3.2 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 42 9.5 33.3 40.5 16.7 2.6 0.88 8. Graded assignments included comments 42 2.4 31.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 41 2.4 12.2 68.3 17.1 3.0 0.63 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 41 0.0 0.0 68.3 31.7 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 38 0.0 5.3 76.3 18.4 3.1 0.47 12. Satisfact answered class questions 40 0.0 5.0 72.5 22.5 3.2 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 41 2.4 14.6 65.9 17.1 3.0 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 39 0.0 17.9 59.0 23.1 3.1 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 35 2.9 2.9 71.4 22.9 3.1 0.60 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 41 0.0 9.8 68.3 22.0 3.1 0.56 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 2.4 2.4 65.9 29.3 3.2 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 41 0.0 2.4 70.7 26.8 3.2 0.49 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 41 0.0 29.3 43.9 26.8 3.0 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 41 0.0 2.4 53.7 43.9 3.4 0.55 21. Overall quality of teaching 41 4.9 9.8 43.9 41.5 3.2 0.82. % % 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 37. Question 37 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 . 38. Question 38 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 . 39. Question 39 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 . 40. Question 40 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 . 41. Question 41 3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 . Number of forms preslugged = 53 Number of forms scanned = 43 Number of forms with at least one student response = 42 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 620 001L1 ADV ENGR THERMODYN I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Gao, Dayong ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 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 7 100.0 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 6 85.7 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 1 14.3 4 - 5 hours 5 71.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 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 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 12.5 12.5 0.0 75.0 3.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 8 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 12.5 25.0 62.5 3.5 . % % % % 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 8 0.0 0.0 12.5 87.5 3.9 . . % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 311 001A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hahn, Ottfried J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 60.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 40.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 5 100.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 1 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 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 2.7 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 16.7 33.3 50.0 0.0 2.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 60.0 40.0 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 37. Question 37 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 3.4 . 38. Question 38 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 3.4 . 39. Question 39 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 20.0 3.2 . 40. Question 40 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 3.6 . 41. Question 41 5 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 2.8 . 42. Question 42 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 3.8 . 43. Question 43 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 3.8 . 44. Question 44 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 3.4 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 311 002A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hahn, Ottfried J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 71.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 4 28.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 14 100.0 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 2 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 7.1 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 4 28.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 35.7 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 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 15 0.0 26.7 66.7 6.7 2.8 0.56 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 45.5 45.5 9.1 0.0 1.6 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 13.3 33.3 53.3 0.0 2.4 0.74 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 60.0 40.0 0.0 2.4 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 3.0 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 0.41 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 6.7 53.3 40.0 0.0 2.3 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 13.3 20.0 66.7 0.0 2.5 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 26.7 46.7 26.7 0.0 2.0 0.76 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 11. Was available for consultation 14 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 0.73 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 26.7 73.3 0.0 2.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 20.0 46.7 33.3 0.0 2.1 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 15 13.3 60.0 26.7 0.0 2.1 0.64 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 8.3 33.3 50.0 8.3 2.6 0.79 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 15 6.7 20.0 73.3 0.0 2.7 0.62 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 6.7 26.7 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.63 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 6.7 26.7 66.7 0.0 2.6 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 20.0 53.3 26.7 0.0 2.1 0.70 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 15 26.7 40.0 33.3 0.0 2.1 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 0.85. % % 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 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 8 12.5 25.0 50.0 12.5 0.0 2.6 . 38. Question 38 8 12.5 37.5 37.5 12.5 0.0 2.5 . 39. Question 39 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 0.0 2.9 . 40. Question 40 8 12.5 12.5 75.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 . 41. Question 41 8 25.0 25.0 37.5 12.5 0.0 2.4 . 42. Question 42 8 0.0 12.5 50.0 37.5 0.0 3.3 . 43. Question 43 8 12.5 25.0 37.5 25.0 0.0 2.8 . 44. Question 44 7 14.3 0.0 71.4 14.3 0.0 2.9 . Number of forms preslugged = 16 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 93.8 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 311 004A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION II INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hahn, Ottfried J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 100.0 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 1 14.3 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 85.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 6 85.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 71.4 0.0 28.6 0.0 1.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 28.6 14.3 57.1 0.0 2.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 14.3 57.1 28.6 0.0 2.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 2.6 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 14.3 0.0 85.7 0.0 2.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . . % % 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 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . 38. Question 38 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . 39. Question 39 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . 40. Question 40 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . 41. Question 41 7 0.0 42.9 14.3 42.9 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . 43. Question 43 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 3.6 . 44. Question 44 7 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 3.4 . Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 63.6 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 407 001L1 ENGINEERING ETHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Hahn, Ottfried J ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 29 70.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 12 29.3 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 42 100.0 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 34 81.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 6 14.3 Required by my major 42 100.0 3 hours 2 4.8 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 44 2.3 13.6 65.9 18.2 3.0 0.65 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 41 12.2 12.2 65.9 9.8 2.7 0.81 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 44 0.0 9.1 77.3 13.6 3.0 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 26 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.43 5. Grading was fair and consistent 44 0.0 4.5 81.8 13.6 3.1 0.42 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 44 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 43 4.7 32.6 53.5 9.3 2.7 0.71 8. Graded assignments included comments 44 4.5 27.3 56.8 11.4 2.8 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 44 4.5 29.5 54.5 11.4 2.7 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 44 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 11. Was available for consultation 41 2.4 17.1 68.3 12.2 2.9 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 43 0.0 4.7 86.0 9.3 3.0 0.38 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 42 9.5 23.8 59.5 7.1 2.6 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 43 0.0 37.2 55.8 7.0 2.7 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 39 2.6 5.1 74.4 17.9 3.1 0.58 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 41 2.4 7.3 78.0 12.2 3.0 0.55 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 41 2.4 12.2 75.6 9.8 2.9 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 43 0.0 4.7 88.4 7.0 3.0 0.34 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 43 9.3 32.6 53.5 4.7 2.5 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 44 11.4 20.5 61.4 6.8 2.6 0.78 21. Overall quality of teaching 44 9.1 27.3 45.5 18.2 2.7 0.87. % % 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 = 73 Number of forms scanned = 46 Number of forms with at least one student response = 44 Percent completed = 60.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ME 406 001L2 COMPUTER-AID GRAPH/DESGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Herrin, David W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 47.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 52.9 Junior 1 5.9 C 0 0.0 Senior 16 94.1 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 1 5.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 17.6 6 - 7 hours 6 35.3 8 or more hours 7 41.2 % % 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 5.0 90.0 5.0 3.0 0.32 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 10.0 25.0 65.0 0.0 2.6 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.31 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 5.0 20.0 75.0 0.0 2.7 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 0.0 5.0 95.0 0.0 3.0 0.22 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 15.0 25.0 60.0 0.0 2.5 0.76 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 10.0 25.0 65.0 0.0 2.6 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 5.0 10.0 85.0 0.0 2.8 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 5.0 20.0 65.0 10.0 2.8 0.70 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 10.5 68.4 21.1 3.1 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 10.5 5.3 73.7 10.5 2.8 0.76 14. Encouraged class participation 20 5.0 5.0 75.0 15.0 3.0 0.65 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 0.0 93.3 6.7 3.1 0.26 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 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.46 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.31 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 5.6 27.8 61.1 5.6 2.7 0.69 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 0.44 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 20.0 55.0 20.0 2.9 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 37. Question 37 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 66.7 6.7 3.8 0.56 38. Question 38 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 3.9 0.64 39. Question 39 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 3.9 0.64 40. Question 40 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 56.3 6.3 3.6 0.72 41. Question 41 16 0.0 0.0 12.5 81.3 6.3 3.9 0.44 42. Question 42 16 0.0 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 4.0 0.52 43. Question 43 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 68.8 6.3 3.8 0.54 44. Question 44 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 62.5 18.8 4.0 0.63 45. Question 45 16 0.0 0.0 18.8 75.0 6.3 3.9 0.50 46. Question 46 16 0.0 6.3 31.3 56.3 6.3 3.6 0.72 47. Question 47 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 3.9 0.64 Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 87.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ME 406 002L2 COMPUTER-AID GRAPH/DESGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Herrin, David W ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 12.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 87.5 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 12.5 Required by my major 8 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 25.0 6 - 7 hours 2 25.0 8 or more hours 3 37.5 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 0.0 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 50.0 37.5 12.5 2.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 12.5 25.0 62.5 0.0 2.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 37.5 50.0 12.5 2.8 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 62.5 37.5 0.0 2.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 62.5 37.5 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 42.9 42.9 14.3 2.7 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 12.5 87.5 0.0 2.9 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 57.1 42.9 0.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 8 0.0 37.5 37.5 25.0 2.9 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 8 12.5 62.5 12.5 12.5 2.3 . . % % 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 37. Question 37 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 38. Question 38 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 39. Question 39 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 40. Question 40 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 4.0 . 41. Question 41 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . 42. Question 42 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . 43. Question 43 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 44. Question 44 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 4.0 . 45. Question 45 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 4.5 . 46. Question 46 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . 47. Question 47 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 30.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 531 001L1 FLUID DYNAMICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jacob, Jamey D ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 70.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 10.0 Senior 2 20.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 80.0 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 9 90.0 3 hours 1 10.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 10.0 4 - 5 hours 6 60.0 6 - 7 hours 1 10.0 8 or more hours 2 20.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 18.2 9.1 63.6 9.1 2.6 0.92 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 11 0.0 18.2 54.5 27.3 3.1 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 27.3 72.7 3.7 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 3.8 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 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 11 0.0 9.1 45.5 45.5 3.4 0.67 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 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 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 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 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 41. Question 41 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 42. Question 42 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 43. Question 43 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 46. Question 46 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 47. Question 47 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 48. Question 48 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 49. Question 49 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 505 001L1 MODELING MANUFACTURING PROCESSES & MACHINES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Jawahir, I. S. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 45.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 5.0 Senior 16 76.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 5 23.8 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 6 28.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 14.3 Required by my major 10 47.6 3 hours 4 19.0 Other (e.g. elective) 11 52.4 4 - 5 hours 8 38.1 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 23 0.0 0.0 69.6 30.4 3.3 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 0.0 78.3 21.7 3.2 0.42 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 30.4 56.5 13.0 2.8 0.65 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 0.0 21.7 60.9 17.4 3.0 0.64 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 4.3 65.2 30.4 3.3 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 47.8 52.2 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 23 0.0 8.7 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 23 4.3 8.7 65.2 21.7 3.0 0.71 14. Encouraged class participation 22 0.0 4.5 68.2 27.3 3.2 0.53 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 18 0.0 11.1 72.2 16.7 3.1 0.54 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 23 0.0 0.0 73.9 26.1 3.3 0.45 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 23 0.0 4.3 69.6 26.1 3.2 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 0.0 21.7 60.9 17.4 3.0 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 23 0.0 0.0 78.3 21.7 3.2 0.42 21. Overall quality of teaching 23 0.0 0.0 52.2 47.8 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 38. Question 38 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 39. Question 39 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 40. Question 40 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 28 Number of forms scanned = 25 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ME 330 001L1 FLUID MECHANICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = LeBeau, Raymond ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 10 29.4 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 20 58.8 Junior 19 55.9 C 4 11.8 Senior 14 41.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 2.9 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 34 100.0 3 hours 7 20.6 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 13 38.2 6 - 7 hours 7 20.6 8 or more hours 7 20.6 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 36 0.0 2.8 77.8 19.4 3.2 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 36 41.7 33.3 19.4 5.6 1.9 0.92 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 2.8 5.6 69.4 22.2 3.1 0.62 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 2.8 0.0 75.0 22.2 3.2 0.56 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 8.3 5.6 77.8 8.3 2.9 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 2.8 16.7 72.2 8.3 2.9 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 2.9 20.0 68.6 8.6 2.8 0.62 8. Graded assignments included comments 35 5.7 45.7 42.9 5.7 2.5 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 5.6 13.9 61.1 19.4 2.9 0.75 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 63.9 36.1 3.4 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 32 0.0 0.0 46.9 53.1 3.5 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 8.6 71.4 20.0 3.1 0.53 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 8.6 22.9 45.7 22.9 2.8 0.89 14. Encouraged class participation 32 3.1 31.3 65.6 0.0 2.6 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 24.0 76.0 0.0 2.8 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 35 0.0 5.7 68.6 25.7 3.2 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 35 0.0 5.7 68.6 25.7 3.2 0.53 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 36 2.8 5.6 66.7 25.0 3.1 0.64 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 35 8.6 31.4 54.3 5.7 2.6 0.74 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 36 2.8 13.9 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 11.1 8.3 44.4 36.1 3.1 0.95. % % 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 34 0.0 8.8 29.4 55.9 5.9 3.6 0.74 38. Question 38 34 0.0 5.9 11.8 58.8 23.5 4.0 0.78 39. Question 39 34 0.0 8.8 17.6 67.6 5.9 3.7 0.72 40. Question 40 34 0.0 14.7 26.5 47.1 11.8 3.6 0.89 41. Question 41 34 0.0 14.7 23.5 41.2 20.6 3.7 0.98 Number of forms preslugged = 43 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 83.7 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 101 201L1 ORIENTA ME-FRESH/TRANSFR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Leifer, Jack ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 7 46.7 A 9 60.0 Sophomore 3 20.0 B 6 40.0 Junior 3 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 6.7 I 0 0.0 Other 1 6.7 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 5 33.3 Studies Program 1 6.7 2 hours 4 26.7 Required by my major 14 93.3 3 hours 3 20.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 13.3 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 1 6.7 % % 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 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.66 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 14.3 52.4 33.3 3.2 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 4.8 33.3 61.9 3.6 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 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 0.0 23.8 76.2 3.8 0.44 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 52.4 47.6 3.5 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 0.0 81.0 19.0 3.2 0.40 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 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 0.0 100.0 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS *** No Optional Questions were answered *** Number of forms preslugged = 25 Number of forms scanned = 21 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 407 201L1 ENGINEERING ETHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Leifer, Jack ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 33.3 Sophomore 1 16.7 B 3 50.0 Junior 2 33.3 C 1 16.7 Senior 2 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 1 16.7 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 6 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 33.3 6 - 7 hours 2 33.3 8 or more hours 2 33.3 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 71.4 14.3 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 2.7 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 14.3 85.7 0.0 2.9 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0 2.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 14.3 14.3 71.4 0.0 2.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 28.6 57.1 14.3 0.0 1.9 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 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 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 7 Number of forms with at least one student response = 7 Percent completed = 58.3 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 220 001L1 ENGR THERMODYNAMICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Menguc, M Pinar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 18.2 Sophomore 2 6.1 B 13 39.4 Junior 19 57.6 C 10 30.3 Senior 10 30.3 D 3 9.1 Graduate 2 6.1 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 3.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 30 90.9 3 hours 3 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 3 9.1 4 - 5 hours 7 21.2 6 - 7 hours 8 24.2 8 or more hours 15 45.5 % % 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 5.7 68.6 25.7 3.2 0.53 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 35 2.9 5.7 57.1 34.3 3.2 0.69 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 35 0.0 2.9 42.9 54.3 3.5 0.56 4. Exams reflected what was taught 35 2.9 0.0 57.1 40.0 3.3 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 35 2.9 5.7 57.1 34.3 3.2 0.69 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 35 0.0 5.7 54.3 40.0 3.3 0.59 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 35 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 34 5.9 20.6 64.7 8.8 2.8 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 0.0 5.6 58.3 36.1 3.3 0.58 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 36 0.0 0.0 27.8 72.2 3.7 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 35 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 36 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 35 0.0 17.1 65.7 17.1 3.0 0.59 14. Encouraged class participation 35 0.0 8.6 77.1 14.3 3.1 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 23 4.3 8.7 69.6 17.4 3.0 0.67 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 0.0 0.0 42.4 57.6 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 0.0 67.6 32.4 3.3 0.47 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 3.2 35.5 38.7 22.6 2.8 0.83 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 36 0.0 5.6 75.0 19.4 3.1 0.49 21. Overall quality of teaching 36 0.0 5.6 52.8 41.7 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 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 32 0.0 0.0 9.4 62.5 28.1 4.2 0.59 38. Question 38 31 0.0 0.0 12.9 67.7 19.4 4.1 0.57 39. Question 39 32 0.0 0.0 12.5 71.9 15.6 4.0 0.54 40. Question 40 31 0.0 0.0 16.1 67.7 16.1 4.0 0.58 41. Question 41 32 0.0 3.1 21.9 59.4 15.6 3.9 0.71 Number of forms preslugged = 51 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 Percent completed = 70.6 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 220 002L1 ENGR THERMODYNAMICS I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Menguc, M Pinar ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 1 9.1 B 7 63.6 Junior 10 90.9 C 4 36.4 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 4 36.4 8 or more hours 2 18.2 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 13 7.7 7.7 38.5 46.2 3.2 0.93 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 4. Exams reflected what was taught 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 7.7 53.8 30.8 7.7 2.4 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 7.7 23.1 46.2 23.1 2.8 0.90 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 38.5 61.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 16.7 58.3 25.0 3.1 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 7.7 53.8 38.5 3.3 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 7.7 30.8 46.2 15.4 2.7 0.85 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 9 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 7.7 0.0 38.5 53.8 3.4 0.87 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 13 7.7 7.7 15.4 69.2 3.5 0.97 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 7.7 7.7 38.5 46.2 3.2 0.93 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 8.3 41.7 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 13 7.7 23.1 38.5 30.8 2.9 0.95 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 7.7 23.1 15.4 53.8 3.2 1.07. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . SECTION G - GRADUATE SEMINARS ONLY 27. Feedback on oral presentations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 46.2 15.4 3.7 0.85 38. Question 38 13 0.0 7.7 15.4 46.2 30.8 4.0 0.91 39. Question 39 13 0.0 15.4 30.8 38.5 15.4 3.5 0.97 40. Question 40 13 0.0 15.4 38.5 30.8 15.4 3.5 0.97 41. Question 41 13 0.0 15.4 30.8 30.8 23.1 3.6 1.04 Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 13 Number of forms with at least one student response = 13 Percent completed = 56.5 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 440 001L1 DESIGN - CONTROL SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Parker, Johne M. ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 19 65.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 24.1 Junior 0 0.0 C 3 10.3 Senior 29 100.0 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 3.4 Studies Program 2 6.9 2 hours 3 10.3 Required by my major 27 93.1 3 hours 10 34.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 11 37.9 6 - 7 hours 4 13.8 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 0.46 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 29 0.0 0.0 55.2 44.8 3.4 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 29 0.0 0.0 51.7 48.3 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 29 0.0 13.8 55.2 31.0 3.2 0.66 8. Graded assignments included comments 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 0.0 36.7 63.3 3.6 0.49 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 3.8 0.43 11. Was available for consultation 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 29 0.0 6.9 51.7 41.4 3.3 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 29 0.0 0.0 44.8 55.2 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 10.0 55.0 35.0 3.3 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 28 0.0 0.0 53.6 46.4 3.5 0.51 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 27 0.0 18.5 48.1 33.3 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 30 0.0 0.0 43.3 56.7 3.6 0.50 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 3.8 0.43. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 37. Question 37 29 0.0 0.0 10.3 48.3 41.4 4.3 0.66 38. Question 38 29 0.0 0.0 10.3 51.7 37.9 4.3 0.65 39. Question 39 28 0.0 0.0 14.3 39.3 46.4 4.3 0.72 40. Question 40 28 0.0 0.0 10.7 39.3 50.0 4.4 0.69 41. Question 41 28 0.0 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 4.3 0.71 42. Question 42 28 0.0 0.0 17.9 39.3 42.9 4.3 0.75 43. Question 43 26 0.0 0.0 11.5 53.8 34.6 4.2 0.65 44. Question 44 28 0.0 10.7 21.4 39.3 28.6 3.9 0.97 Number of forms preslugged = 34 Number of forms scanned = 31 Number of forms with at least one student response = 30 Percent completed = 88.2 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 105 003L1 BASIC ENGR GRAPHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perry, Kenneth ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 47.4 A 15 78.9 Sophomore 2 10.5 B 4 21.1 Junior 6 31.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 10.5 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 12 63.2 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 15.8 Required by my major 18 94.7 3 hours 2 10.5 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.3 4 - 5 hours 1 5.3 6 - 7 hours 1 5.3 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 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 5.0 20.0 65.0 10.0 2.8 0.70 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 5.0 80.0 15.0 3.1 0.45 4. Exams reflected what was taught 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 5.0 0.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 0.0 65.0 35.0 3.4 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 2.7 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 10.0 0.0 65.0 25.0 3.1 0.83 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 17 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 3.1 0.60 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 5.0 5.0 55.0 35.0 3.2 0.77 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 5.0 0.0 65.0 30.0 3.2 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 16 0.0 6.3 62.5 31.3 3.3 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 16 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 0.34 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 5.0 15.0 75.0 5.0 2.8 0.62 % % % % 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 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 15.0 35.0 45.0 3.2 0.89. % % 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 = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 80.0 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 105 004L1 BASIC ENGR GRAPHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perry, Kenneth ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 6 42.9 A 3 21.4 Sophomore 1 7.1 B 11 78.6 Junior 4 28.6 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 14.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 7.1 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 7 53.8 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 7.7 Required by my major 14 100.0 3 hours 1 7.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 15.4 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 2 15.4 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 18 0.0 5.6 66.7 27.8 3.2 0.55 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 0.0 27.8 55.6 16.7 2.9 0.68 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 18 0.0 16.7 38.9 44.4 3.3 0.75 4. Exams reflected what was taught 17 0.0 5.9 52.9 41.2 3.4 0.61 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 5.6 16.7 44.4 33.3 3.1 0.87 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.65 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.69 8. Graded assignments included comments 18 0.0 22.2 55.6 22.2 3.0 0.69 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 18 0.0 22.2 50.0 27.8 3.1 0.73 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 18 0.0 0.0 38.9 61.1 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 15 0.0 6.7 66.7 26.7 3.2 0.56 12. Satisfact answered class questions 18 0.0 16.7 44.4 38.9 3.2 0.73 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 18 0.0 16.7 61.1 22.2 3.1 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 0.0 13.3 73.3 13.3 3.0 0.53 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 0.0 5.6 55.6 38.9 3.3 0.59 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 3.3 0.69 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 16.7 61.1 22.2 3.1 0.64 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 18 0.0 5.6 50.0 44.4 3.4 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 17 0.0 29.4 35.3 35.3 3.1 0.83. % % 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 = 18 Number of forms with at least one student response = 18 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 501 001L1 MECHANICAL DESIGN WITH FINITE ELEMENT METHODS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Rouch, Keith E ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 18 56.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 13 40.6 Junior 0 0.0 C 1 3.1 Senior 24 75.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 8 25.0 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 12.5 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 12.5 Required by my major 29 90.6 3 hours 15 46.9 Other (e.g. elective) 3 9.4 4 - 5 hours 6 18.8 6 - 7 hours 3 9.4 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 36 0.0 0.0 72.2 27.8 3.3 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 36 2.8 8.3 63.9 25.0 3.1 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 36 0.0 0.0 61.1 38.9 3.4 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 36 0.0 0.0 63.9 36.1 3.4 0.49 5. Grading was fair and consistent 36 0.0 0.0 69.4 30.6 3.3 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 36 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.48 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 36 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 36 0.0 38.9 50.0 11.1 2.7 0.66 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 36 2.8 16.7 75.0 5.6 2.8 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 35 0.0 0.0 51.4 48.6 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 6.1 60.6 33.3 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 35 0.0 2.9 65.7 31.4 3.3 0.52 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 34 2.9 26.5 58.8 11.8 2.8 0.69 14. Encouraged class participation 34 0.0 32.4 58.8 8.8 2.8 0.61 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 0.0 23.1 61.5 15.4 2.9 0.63 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 5.9 67.6 26.5 3.2 0.54 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 0.0 5.9 61.8 32.4 3.3 0.57 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 0.0 2.9 73.5 23.5 3.2 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 33 3.0 36.4 45.5 15.2 2.7 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 35 0.0 11.4 60.0 28.6 3.2 0.62 21. Overall quality of teaching 35 0.0 8.6 68.6 22.9 3.1 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 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 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 32 0.0 0.0 9.4 62.5 28.1 4.2 0.59 38. Question 38 32 0.0 0.0 9.4 59.4 31.3 4.2 0.61 39. Question 39 32 0.0 0.0 9.4 62.5 28.1 4.2 0.59 40. Question 40 32 0.0 0.0 6.3 75.0 18.8 4.1 0.49 Number of forms preslugged = 44 Number of forms scanned = 36 Number of forms with at least one student response = 36 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 101 001L1 ORIENTA ME-FRESH/TRANSFR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 12 63.2 A 18 94.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 7 36.8 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 5.3 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 19 100.0 Studies Program 1 5.3 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 17 89.5 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 5.3 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 21 0.0 9.5 76.2 14.3 3.0 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 27.3 27.3 45.5 0.0 2.2 0.87 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 9.5 42.9 47.6 0.0 2.4 0.67 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 2.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 18 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 0.0 15.0 85.0 0.0 2.9 0.37 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 28.6 47.6 19.0 4.8 2.0 0.84 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 26.3 52.6 15.8 5.3 2.0 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 4.8 28.6 61.9 4.8 2.7 0.66 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 10.0 10.0 75.0 5.0 2.8 0.72 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 4.8 4.8 81.0 9.5 3.0 0.59 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 14.3 23.8 47.6 14.3 2.6 0.92 14. Encouraged class participation 21 9.5 23.8 52.4 14.3 2.7 0.85 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 5.9 11.8 76.5 5.9 2.8 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 5.6 16.7 61.1 16.7 2.9 0.76 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 19 10.5 21.1 57.9 10.5 2.7 0.82 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 14.3 76.2 9.5 3.0 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 20 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 2.6 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 20.0 40.0 25.0 15.0 2.4 0.99 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 4.8 47.6 23.8 23.8 2.7 0.91. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 = 60 Number of forms scanned = 21 Number of forms with at least one student response = 21 Percent completed = 35.0 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 101 002L1 ORIENTA ME-FRESH/TRANSFR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 10 55.6 A 17 94.4 Sophomore 1 5.6 B 0 0.0 Junior 4 22.2 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 16.7 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 1 5.6 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 17 94.4 Studies Program 1 5.6 2 hours 1 5.6 Required by my major 17 94.4 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 20 0.0 5.0 70.0 25.0 3.2 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 19 5.3 21.1 57.9 15.8 2.8 0.76 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 18 5.6 0.0 77.8 16.7 3.1 0.64 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 20.0 26.7 40.0 13.3 2.5 0.99 8. Graded assignments included comments 16 12.5 37.5 37.5 12.5 2.5 0.89 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 19 5.3 5.3 73.7 15.8 3.0 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 19 0.0 5.3 68.4 26.3 3.2 0.54 11. Was available for consultation 18 0.0 11.1 77.8 11.1 3.0 0.49 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 0.0 15.0 60.0 25.0 3.1 0.64 14. Encouraged class participation 18 0.0 27.8 55.6 16.7 2.9 0.68 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 11.8 23.5 52.9 11.8 2.6 0.86 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 19 5.3 31.6 47.4 15.8 2.7 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 17 5.9 35.3 41.2 17.6 2.7 0.85 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 19 5.3 15.8 57.9 21.1 2.9 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 19 5.3 21.1 57.9 15.8 2.8 0.76 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 15.0 20.0 50.0 15.0 2.7 0.93 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 5.0 30.0 40.0 25.0 2.9 0.88. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 29. Students free to express opinions 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 2 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 101 003L1 ORIENTA ME-FRESH/TRANSFR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 12 52.2 A 17 81.0 Sophomore 4 17.4 B 1 4.8 Junior 4 17.4 C 1 4.8 Senior 2 8.7 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 4.3 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 2 9.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 22 95.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 4.3 Required by my major 22 95.7 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 1 4.3 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 29.6 55.6 14.8 2.9 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 18 22.2 27.8 44.4 5.6 2.3 0.91 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 27 14.8 25.9 51.9 7.4 2.5 0.85 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 8.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 2.7 0.78 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 0.0 26.1 52.2 21.7 3.0 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 28 7.1 28.6 50.0 14.3 2.7 0.81 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 29.2 29.2 33.3 8.3 2.2 0.98 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 36.4 22.7 36.4 4.5 2.1 0.97 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 14.3 21.4 50.0 14.3 2.6 0.91 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 3.6 78.6 17.9 3.1 0.45 11. Was available for consultation 20 5.0 0.0 75.0 20.0 3.1 0.64 12. Satisfact answered class questions 28 3.6 17.9 64.3 14.3 2.9 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 15.4 19.2 50.0 15.4 2.7 0.94 14. Encouraged class participation 28 14.3 17.9 53.6 14.3 2.7 0.90 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 26 15.4 11.5 57.7 15.4 2.7 0.92 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 27 22.2 7.4 51.9 18.5 2.7 1.04 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 19.2 11.5 53.8 15.4 2.7 0.98 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 26 19.2 7.7 57.7 15.4 2.7 0.97 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 25.0 10.7 46.4 17.9 2.6 1.07 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 29.6 29.6 29.6 11.1 2.2 1.01 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 18.5 22.2 40.7 18.5 2.6 1.01. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 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 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 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 = 31 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 90.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 310 002A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 83.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 16.7 Junior 2 33.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 6 100.0 3 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 50.0 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 6 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 66.7 3.5 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 2.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 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 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 83.3 3.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 4.2 . 38. Question 38 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 4.2 . 39. Question 39 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 4.0 . 40. Question 40 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 4.0 . 41. Question 41 6 0.0 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 3.8 . 42. Question 42 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 4.3 . 43. Question 43 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 4.2 . 44. Question 44 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 4.2 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 310 003A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- 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 1 20.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 80.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 3 60.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 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 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 6 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 2.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 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 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 6 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 6 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 6 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 2.5 . % % % % 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 16.7 66.7 16.7 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 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . % answering item N --------------------------------- Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) SECTION I - OPTIONAL ITEMS 37. Question 37 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 3.5 . 38. Question 38 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 33.3 16.7 3.5 . 39. Question 39 6 0.0 16.7 0.0 50.0 33.3 4.0 . 40. Question 40 6 0.0 16.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 4.2 . 41. Question 41 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 3.0 . 42. Question 42 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 3.7 . 43. Question 43 6 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . 44. Question 44 6 0.0 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 3.8 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 310 004A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- 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 9 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 9 100.0 3 hours 2 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 44.4 6 - 7 hours 3 33.3 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 10 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 2.4 1.07 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 3.3 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 0.79 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 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 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 10.0 40.0 50.0 3.4 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 3.0 0.82 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 3.1 0.74 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 30.0 50.0 20.0 2.9 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 30.0 20.0 50.0 3.2 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 3.3 0.82. % % 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 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 4 25.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 2.5 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 4 25.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 37. Question 37 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 4.0 0.82 38. Question 38 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 4.0 0.82 39. Question 39 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 50.0 30.0 4.1 0.74 40. Question 40 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 20.0 50.0 4.2 0.92 41. Question 41 9 0.0 0.0 55.6 22.2 22.2 3.7 . 42. Question 42 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 40.0 4.1 0.88 43. Question 43 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 30.0 50.0 4.3 0.82 44. Question 44 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 3.8 1.03 Number of forms preslugged = at least 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 563 001L1 BAS COMBUSTION PHENOMENA INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Saito, Kozo ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 58.3 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 41.7 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 6 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 6 50.0 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 8.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 8.3 Required by my major 5 41.7 3 hours 3 25.0 Other (e.g. elective) 7 58.3 4 - 5 hours 5 41.7 6 - 7 hours 1 8.3 8 or more hours 1 8.3 % % 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 16.7 25.0 58.3 3.4 0.79 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 12.5 25.0 0.0 62.5 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 8.3 58.3 33.3 3.3 0.62 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 3.3 0.75 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 8.3 25.0 25.0 41.7 3.0 1.04 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 3.6 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 8.3 41.7 50.0 3.4 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 12 0.0 16.7 33.3 50.0 3.3 0.78 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 12 0.0 33.3 16.7 50.0 3.2 0.94 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 12 8.3 16.7 33.3 41.7 3.1 1.00 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 0.0 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.87. % % 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 = at least 13 Number of forms scanned = 13 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 340 001L1 INTRO TO MECHANICAL SYST INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Seybert, Andrew F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 25.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 15 46.9 Junior 2 6.5 C 8 25.0 Senior 29 93.5 D 1 3.1 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 3.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 9.4 Required by my major 32 100.0 3 hours 15 46.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 8 25.0 6 - 7 hours 4 12.5 8 or more hours 1 3.1 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 34 0.0 5.9 73.5 20.6 3.1 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 34 0.0 5.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 34 0.0 2.9 64.7 32.4 3.3 0.52 4. Exams reflected what was taught 34 2.9 2.9 64.7 29.4 3.2 0.64 5. Grading was fair and consistent 34 0.0 8.8 70.6 20.6 3.1 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 34 0.0 2.9 67.6 29.4 3.3 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 34 0.0 0.0 64.7 35.3 3.4 0.49 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 3.0 21.2 69.7 6.1 2.8 0.60 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 34 8.8 20.6 58.8 11.8 2.7 0.79 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 34 0.0 0.0 55.9 44.1 3.4 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 34 0.0 8.8 55.9 35.3 3.3 0.62 12. Satisfact answered class questions 33 3.0 6.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 32 9.4 25.0 56.3 9.4 2.7 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 31 3.2 9.7 77.4 9.7 2.9 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 9.1 86.4 4.5 3.0 0.38 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 34 0.0 5.9 79.4 14.7 3.1 0.45 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 34 0.0 5.9 76.5 17.6 3.1 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 34 2.9 2.9 79.4 14.7 3.1 0.55 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 10.0 36.7 50.0 3.3 2.5 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 34 2.9 11.8 58.8 26.5 3.1 0.71 21. Overall quality of teaching 34 8.8 14.7 52.9 23.5 2.9 0.87. % % 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 31 0.0 3.2 16.1 54.8 25.8 4.0 0.75 38. Question 38 31 0.0 3.2 16.1 54.8 25.8 4.0 0.75 39. Question 39 31 3.2 9.7 19.4 51.6 16.1 3.7 0.98 40. Question 40 31 3.2 6.5 25.8 51.6 12.9 3.6 0.91 41. Question 41 31 3.2 12.9 19.4 41.9 22.6 3.7 1.08 42. Question 42 31 0.0 3.2 22.6 58.1 16.1 3.9 0.72 43. Question 43 31 6.5 3.2 48.4 35.5 6.5 3.3 0.91 44. Question 44 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . 45. Question 45 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 42 Number of forms scanned = 34 Number of forms with at least one student response = 34 Percent completed = 81.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 610 001L1 ENGINEERING ACOUSTICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Seybert, Andrew F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 72.7 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 18.2 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 11 100.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 1 9.1 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 1 9.1 Required by my major 9 81.8 3 hours 3 27.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 18.2 4 - 5 hours 4 36.4 6 - 7 hours 2 18.2 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 12 0.0 0.0 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 4. Exams reflected what was taught 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 5. Grading was fair and consistent 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 12 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 8.3 33.3 58.3 3.5 0.67 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 11. Was available for consultation 12 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 0.49 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 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 0.51 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.53 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 12 0.0 0.0 41.7 58.3 3.6 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 58.3 41.7 3.4 0.51 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 0.0 45.5 54.5 3.5 0.52. % % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 344 401L1 MECHANICAL DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Stephens, Lyndon S ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 6 13.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 28 60.9 Junior 5 10.6 C 10 21.7 Senior 41 87.2 D 2 4.3 Graduate 1 2.1 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 2.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 46 97.9 3 hours 7 14.9 Other (e.g. elective) 1 2.1 4 - 5 hours 14 29.8 6 - 7 hours 12 25.5 8 or more hours 13 27.7 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 49 0.0 2.0 73.5 24.5 3.2 0.47 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 49 2.0 6.1 73.5 18.4 3.1 0.57 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 49 0.0 2.0 69.4 28.6 3.3 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 49 0.0 4.1 61.2 34.7 3.3 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 49 0.0 4.1 65.3 30.6 3.3 0.53 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 49 4.1 12.2 59.2 24.5 3.0 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 49 0.0 8.2 67.3 24.5 3.2 0.55 8. Graded assignments included comments 49 2.0 24.5 57.1 16.3 2.9 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 49 2.0 6.1 61.2 30.6 3.2 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 49 0.0 2.0 30.6 67.3 3.7 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 48 4.2 4.2 70.8 20.8 3.1 0.65 12. Satisfact answered class questions 49 4.1 4.1 63.3 28.6 3.2 0.69 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 48 6.3 8.3 64.6 20.8 3.0 0.74 14. Encouraged class participation 49 4.1 10.2 69.4 16.3 3.0 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 37 2.7 10.8 78.4 8.1 2.9 0.55 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 48 2.1 0.0 64.6 33.3 3.3 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 48 2.1 4.2 56.3 37.5 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 48 2.1 0.0 68.8 29.2 3.3 0.56 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 46 4.3 21.7 58.7 15.2 2.8 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 49 2.0 4.1 55.1 38.8 3.3 0.65 21. Overall quality of teaching 49 4.1 6.1 49.0 40.8 3.3 0.76. % % 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 46 0.0 4.3 13.0 71.7 10.9 3.9 0.64 38. Question 38 46 0.0 4.3 19.6 50.0 26.1 4.0 0.80 39. Question 39 46 0.0 4.3 34.8 43.5 17.4 3.7 0.80 40. Question 40 46 0.0 2.2 19.6 58.7 19.6 4.0 0.70 41. Question 41 46 0.0 2.2 10.9 52.2 34.8 4.2 0.72 42. Question 42 46 0.0 2.2 10.9 63.0 23.9 4.1 0.66 43. Question 43 45 2.2 4.4 11.1 60.0 22.2 4.0 0.85 Number of forms preslugged = 55 Number of forms scanned = 49 Number of forms with at least one student response = 49 Percent completed = 89.1 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 325 001L1 ELEMENTS HEAT TRANSFER INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tagavi, Kaveh ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 25.8 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 16 51.6 Junior 2 6.3 C 7 22.6 Senior 29 90.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 3.1 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 8 25.0 Required by my major 32 100.0 3 hours 16 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 7 21.9 6 - 7 hours 1 3.1 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 33 0.0 6.1 84.8 9.1 3.0 0.39 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 33 6.1 6.1 81.8 6.1 2.9 0.60 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 33 0.0 6.1 75.8 18.2 3.1 0.48 4. Exams reflected what was taught 33 0.0 15.2 78.8 6.1 2.9 0.46 5. Grading was fair and consistent 33 6.1 12.1 72.7 9.1 2.8 0.67 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 33 0.0 9.1 78.8 12.1 3.0 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 33 15.2 36.4 39.4 9.1 2.4 0.87 8. Graded assignments included comments 33 9.1 24.2 60.6 6.1 2.6 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 33 6.1 24.2 54.5 15.2 2.8 0.78 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 33 0.0 12.1 51.5 36.4 3.2 0.66 11. Was available for consultation 33 0.0 3.0 72.7 24.2 3.2 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 33 3.0 15.2 66.7 15.2 2.9 0.66 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 32 3.1 37.5 53.1 6.3 2.6 0.66 14. Encouraged class participation 33 3.0 0.0 78.8 18.2 3.1 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 16.0 80.0 4.0 2.9 0.44 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 33 0.0 12.1 72.7 15.2 3.0 0.53 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 33 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.52 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 33 0.0 18.2 66.7 15.2 3.0 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 31 3.2 51.6 35.5 9.7 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 33 6.1 18.2 54.5 21.2 2.9 0.80 21. Overall quality of teaching 33 18.2 12.1 54.5 15.2 2.7 0.96. % % 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 33 0.0 3.0 15.2 57.6 24.2 4.0 0.73 38. Question 38 33 0.0 9.1 18.2 69.7 3.0 3.7 0.69 39. Question 39 33 3.0 12.1 36.4 45.5 3.0 3.3 0.85 40. Question 40 33 3.0 12.1 24.2 51.5 9.1 3.5 0.94 41. Question 41 33 0.0 21.2 18.2 48.5 12.1 3.5 0.97 Number of forms preslugged = 39 Number of forms scanned = 33 Number of forms with at least one student response = 33 Percent completed = 84.6 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 310 201A1 ENGR EXPERIMENTATION I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Thiede, Theodore ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 1 11.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 7 77.8 Junior 7 77.8 C 1 11.1 Senior 2 22.2 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 1 11.1 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 8 88.9 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 22.2 6 - 7 hours 1 11.1 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 10 10.0 10.0 80.0 0.0 2.7 0.67 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 50.0 30.0 20.0 0.0 1.7 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 10.0 60.0 30.0 0.0 2.2 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 10.0 40.0 50.0 0.0 2.4 0.70 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 80.0 10.0 3.0 0.47 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 30.0 30.0 40.0 0.0 2.1 0.88 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.84 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 30.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 1.9 0.74 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 2.7 0.67 11. Was available for consultation 10 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 0.79 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 30.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 2.2 1.03 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 9 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 2.1 . 14. Encouraged class participation 9 11.1 11.1 77.8 0.0 2.7 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 14.3 28.6 57.1 0.0 2.4 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 20.0 20.0 50.0 10.0 2.5 0.97 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.84 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 30.0 20.0 40.0 10.0 2.3 1.06 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 30.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 2.2 1.03 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 30.0 40.0 20.0 10.0 2.1 0.99 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 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 37. Question 37 10 30.0 10.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 2.5 1.18 38. Question 38 10 10.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 10.0 2.8 1.14 39. Question 39 10 20.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 2.8 1.32 40. Question 40 10 20.0 10.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 2.8 1.14 43. Question 43 10 10.0 0.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 3.6 1.17 44. Question 44 10 20.0 10.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 2.7 1.06 Number of forms preslugged = 11 Number of forms scanned = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 90.9 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 412 001L1 SENIOR DESIGN PROJECT INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tzou, Hornsen S ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 22 88.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 12.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 26 100.0 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 0 0.0 Required by my major 26 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 7.7 6 - 7 hours 4 15.4 8 or more hours 20 76.9 % % 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 11.1 66.7 22.2 3.1 0.58 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 11 9.1 9.1 45.5 36.4 3.1 0.94 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 78.3 21.7 3.2 0.42 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 0.0 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.64 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 11.5 69.2 19.2 3.1 0.56 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 19 5.3 5.3 63.2 26.3 3.1 0.74 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 4.8 4.8 61.9 28.6 3.1 0.73 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 27 0.0 14.8 59.3 25.9 3.1 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 26 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 27 0.0 3.7 51.9 44.4 3.4 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 3.8 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 0.0 11.5 61.5 26.9 3.2 0.61 14. Encouraged class participation 26 0.0 3.8 46.2 50.0 3.5 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 26 0.0 3.8 53.8 42.3 3.4 0.57 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 26 0.0 3.8 57.7 38.5 3.3 0.56 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 8.0 52.0 40.0 3.3 0.63 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 26 0.0 15.4 57.7 26.9 3.1 0.65 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 27 0.0 7.4 55.6 37.0 3.3 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 27 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 3.2 0.64. % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION F - UNIVERSITY STUDIES PROGRAM COURSES ONLY 22. USSC/ understand scientific inquiry 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 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 27 0.0 0.0 11.1 63.0 25.9 4.1 0.60 38. Question 38 26 0.0 7.7 7.7 53.8 30.8 4.1 0.84 39. Question 39 27 0.0 0.0 14.8 44.4 40.7 4.3 0.71 40. Question 40 27 0.0 3.7 11.1 55.6 29.6 4.1 0.75 41. Question 41 27 0.0 3.7 14.8 59.3 22.2 4.0 0.73 42. Question 42 27 0.0 3.7 18.5 51.9 25.9 4.0 0.78 43. Question 43 27 0.0 3.7 14.8 59.3 22.2 4.0 0.73 44. Question 44 27 0.0 7.4 11.1 63.0 18.5 3.9 0.78 45. Question 45 27 0.0 3.7 11.1 51.9 33.3 4.1 0.77 46. Question 46 27 0.0 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 4.2 0.64 47. Question 47 27 0.0 7.4 3.7 63.0 25.9 4.1 0.78 48. Question 48 26 3.8 0.0 11.5 61.5 23.1 4.0 0.85 49. Question 49 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 . Number of forms preslugged = 30 Number of forms scanned = 27 Number of forms with at least one student response = 27 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 406 001L1 COMPUTER-AID GRAPH/DESGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vallance, Ryan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 7 41.2 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 10 58.8 Junior 1 6.3 C 0 0.0 Senior 15 93.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 5.9 Required by my major 17 100.0 3 hours 1 5.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 23.5 6 - 7 hours 2 11.8 8 or more hours 9 52.9 % % 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 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.31 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 5.0 65.0 30.0 3.3 0.55 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 0.44 4. Exams reflected what was taught 20 5.0 5.0 85.0 5.0 2.9 0.55 5. Grading was fair and consistent 20 10.0 10.0 75.0 5.0 2.8 0.72 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 20 20.0 30.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.80 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 25.0 35.0 35.0 5.0 2.2 0.89 8. Graded assignments included comments 20 0.0 35.0 60.0 5.0 2.7 0.57 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 20 0.0 0.0 85.0 15.0 3.2 0.37 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.47 11. Was available for consultation 19 15.8 21.1 52.6 10.5 2.6 0.90 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 0.0 5.0 75.0 20.0 3.2 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 19 0.0 10.5 78.9 10.5 3.0 0.47 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 80.0 15.0 3.1 0.45 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 14 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 0.00 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 0.0 85.0 15.0 3.2 0.37 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.41 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 0.0 27.8 66.7 5.6 2.8 0.55 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 5.0 85.0 10.0 3.1 0.39 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 20.0 55.0 25.0 3.1 0.69. % % 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 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 64.7 17.6 4.0 0.61 38. Question 38 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 52.9 29.4 4.1 0.70 39. Question 39 17 0.0 0.0 23.5 52.9 23.5 4.0 0.71 40. Question 40 17 0.0 5.9 35.3 52.9 5.9 3.6 0.71 41. Question 41 17 0.0 0.0 17.6 64.7 17.6 4.0 0.61 42. Question 42 17 0.0 0.0 11.8 64.7 23.5 4.1 0.60 43. Question 43 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 60.0 13.3 3.9 0.64 44. Question 44 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 53.3 26.7 4.1 0.70 45. Question 45 15 0.0 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 3.9 0.59 46. Question 46 15 0.0 6.7 26.7 53.3 13.3 3.7 0.80 47. Question 47 16 0.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 4.0 0.73 Number of forms preslugged = 23 Number of forms scanned = 20 Number of forms with at least one student response = 20 Percent completed = 87.0 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 406 002L1 COMPUTER-AID GRAPH/DESGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vallance, Ryan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 28.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 71.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 7 100.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 7 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 14.3 6 - 7 hours 2 28.6 8 or more hours 3 42.9 % % 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 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 12.5 12.5 50.0 25.0 2.9 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 8 12.5 50.0 37.5 0.0 2.3 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 8 0.0 12.5 37.5 50.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 8 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 11. Was available for consultation 8 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 2.9 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 8 0.0 12.5 75.0 12.5 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 8 0.0 0.0 87.5 12.5 3.1 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . . % % 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 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 4.3 . 38. Question 38 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 4.3 . 39. Question 39 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 4.3 . 40. Question 40 6 0.0 16.7 33.3 16.7 33.3 3.7 . 41. Question 41 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 4.0 . 42. Question 42 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 4.0 . 43. Question 43 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 4.3 . 44. Question 44 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 4.2 . 45. Question 45 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 4.2 . 46. Question 46 6 0.0 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 4.0 . 47. Question 47 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 4.2 . Number of forms preslugged = 26 Number of forms scanned = 8 Number of forms with at least one student response = 8 Percent completed = 30.8 % *********************************************************************** * 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 699 002L1 TOP IN ME:ADVANCED CONCURRENT DESIGN INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Vallance, Ryan ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 42.9 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 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 14.3 Required by my major 4 57.1 3 hours 1 14.3 Other (e.g. elective) 3 42.9 4 - 5 hours 3 42.9 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 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 8 0.0 0.0 37.5 62.5 3.6 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 3.5 0.71 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 9 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 9 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 9 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 3.8 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.52 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 0.00 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 10.0 10.0 80.0 3.7 0.67 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 14. Encouraged class participation 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 10 0.0 0.0 30.0 70.0 3.7 0.48 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 3.9 0.32 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 0.0 0.0 20.0 80.0 3.8 0.42 % % % % 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 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 = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 105 001L1 BASIC ENGR GRAPHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Walker, Robert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 39.1 A 12 52.2 Sophomore 4 17.4 B 11 47.8 Junior 7 30.4 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 13.0 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 14 60.9 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 4 17.4 Required by my major 23 100.0 3 hours 2 8.7 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 8.7 6 - 7 hours 1 4.3 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 24 0.0 4.2 79.2 16.7 3.1 0.45 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 0.0 4.2 70.8 25.0 3.2 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 4.3 78.3 17.4 3.1 0.46 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 4.2 16.7 58.3 20.8 3.0 0.75 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 4.2 12.5 75.0 8.3 2.9 0.61 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 8.7 82.6 8.7 3.0 0.43 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 0.0 29.2 66.7 4.2 2.8 0.53 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 4.5 22.7 68.2 4.5 2.7 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 3.1 0.50 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 0.0 0.0 70.8 29.2 3.3 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 10.0 85.0 5.0 3.0 0.39 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 4.2 8.3 83.3 4.2 2.9 0.54 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 20.8 66.7 12.5 2.9 0.58 14. Encouraged class participation 22 9.1 27.3 59.1 4.5 2.6 0.73 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 17 0.0 41.2 52.9 5.9 2.6 0.61 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 4.2 4.2 70.8 20.8 3.1 0.65 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 4.2 4.2 79.2 12.5 3.0 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 4.2 0.0 79.2 16.7 3.1 0.58 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 8.7 39.1 47.8 4.3 2.5 0.73 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 24 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 0.61 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 4.2 16.7 50.0 29.2 3.0 0.81. % % 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 105 002L1 BASIC ENGR GRAPHICS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Walker, Robert ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 16 69.6 A 17 73.9 Sophomore 1 4.3 B 4 17.4 Junior 3 13.0 C 2 8.7 Senior 3 13.0 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 16 69.6 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 13.0 Required by my major 21 91.3 3 hours 1 4.3 Other (e.g. elective) 2 8.7 4 - 5 hours 2 8.7 6 - 7 hours 1 4.3 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 24 8.3 8.3 41.7 41.7 3.2 0.92 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 24 8.3 12.5 62.5 16.7 2.9 0.80 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 24 8.3 8.3 50.0 33.3 3.1 0.88 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 12.5 12.5 58.3 16.7 2.8 0.88 5. Grading was fair and consistent 24 8.3 12.5 62.5 16.7 2.9 0.80 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 24 8.3 12.5 54.2 25.0 3.0 0.86 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 24 8.3 16.7 50.0 25.0 2.9 0.88 8. Graded assignments included comments 23 8.7 17.4 47.8 26.1 2.9 0.90 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 24 8.3 12.5 50.0 29.2 3.0 0.88 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 24 8.3 4.2 50.0 37.5 3.2 0.87 11. Was available for consultation 18 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 3.0 0.84 12. Satisfact answered class questions 24 8.3 8.3 54.2 29.2 3.0 0.86 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 8.3 20.8 45.8 25.0 2.9 0.90 14. Encouraged class participation 22 9.1 22.7 50.0 18.2 2.8 0.87 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 15 6.7 40.0 53.3 0.0 2.5 0.64 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 4.3 8.7 43.5 43.5 3.3 0.81 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 24 4.2 8.3 41.7 45.8 3.3 0.81 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 24 4.2 0.0 41.7 54.2 3.5 0.72 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 24 8.3 50.0 33.3 8.3 2.4 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 16.7 20.8 58.3 3.3 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 4.2 33.3 12.5 50.0 3.1 1.02. % % 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 = 24 Number of forms with at least one student response = 24 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = ME 503 001L1 LEAN MANUFACTURING PRIN AND PRACTICES INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Yingling, Jon C ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 11 78.6 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 3 21.4 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 10 71.4 D 0 0.0 Graduate 4 28.6 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 2 14.3 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 1 7.1 Required by my major 4 28.6 3 hours 9 64.3 Other (e.g. elective) 10 71.4 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 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 6.7 26.7 33.3 33.3 2.9 0.96 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 15 0.0 6.7 40.0 53.3 3.5 0.64 4. Exams reflected what was taught 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 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 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 6.7 53.3 40.0 3.3 0.62 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 0.0 0.0 26.7 73.3 3.7 0.46 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 15 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.51 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 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 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 3.3 0.65 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 % % % % 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 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52. % % 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 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 28. Guided student report preparation 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 29. Students free to express opinions 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 30. Discussions broadened my knowledge 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 31. Developed abil to conduct research 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . SECTION H - LABORATORY & DISCUSSION SECTIONS ONLY 32. Clarified lecture material 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 = 30 Number of forms scanned = 15 Number of forms with at least one student response = 15 Percent completed = 50.0 % *********************************************************************** * WARNING: THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THIS CLASS WAS LESS THAN 66.7%. * * Research shows that results may not be valid if more than a third * * of the class is absent or does not respond. * *********************************************************************** For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************************** UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mechanical Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Part-time instructors COURSE = ME 151 401L1 MANUFACTURING ENGR INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Young, William ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 3 13.6 A 5 21.7 Sophomore 11 50.0 B 15 65.2 Junior 5 22.7 C 3 13.0 Senior 3 13.6 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 3 13.0 2 hours 6 26.1 Required by my major 20 87.0 3 hours 10 43.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 4.3 6 - 7 hours 1 4.3 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 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 28 0.0 17.9 64.3 17.9 3.0 0.61 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 28 7.1 10.7 71.4 10.7 2.9 0.71 4. Exams reflected what was taught 28 0.0 0.0 67.9 32.1 3.3 0.48 5. Grading was fair and consistent 28 3.6 0.0 53.6 42.9 3.4 0.68 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 26 0.0 19.2 53.8 26.9 3.1 0.69 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 8. Graded assignments included comments 24 4.2 54.2 33.3 8.3 2.5 0.72 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 28 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.1 3.0 0.38 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 28 0.0 0.0 67.9 32.1 3.3 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 19 0.0 0.0 73.7 26.3 3.3 0.45 12. Satisfact answered class questions 26 0.0 3.8 73.1 23.1 3.2 0.49 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 26 7.7 26.9 61.5 3.8 2.6 0.70 14. Encouraged class participation 27 3.7 25.9 70.4 0.0 2.7 0.55 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 45.0 55.0 0.0 2.6 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 25.0 70.8 4.2 2.8 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 36.0 56.0 8.0 2.7 0.61 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 28 0.0 0.0 78.6 21.4 3.2 0.42 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 28 3.6 32.1 57.1 7.1 2.7 0.67 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 28 3.6 25.0 60.7 10.7 2.8 0.69 21. Overall quality of teaching 28 0.0 14.3 75.0 10.7 3.0 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 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 23. Saw how discipline relates to other 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 24. Writing assign helps understand sub 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 25. Cross-Cult/understand other culture 3 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 2.3 . 26. Cross-Discipline/ links were eviden 2 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 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 2 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 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 0.0 0.0 40.0 50.0 10.0 3.7 0.66 38. Question 38 21 4.8 14.3 33.3 33.3 14.3 3.4 1.07 39. Question 39 21 9.5 9.5 42.9 28.6 9.5 3.2 1.08 Number of forms preslugged = 31 Number of forms scanned = 28 Number of forms with at least one student response = 28 Percent completed = 90.3 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 599 002L1 TOPIC IN MINING ENGR: BLASTING/FRAGMENTATION INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Lineberry, Gene T ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 50.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 2 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 50.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 50.0 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 25.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 3 hours 2 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 4 100.0 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 25.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 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 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 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 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 4 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 3.8 . 38. Question 38 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 3.8 . 39. Question 39 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 75.0 4.8 . 40. Question 40 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 3.5 . Number of forms preslugged = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 264 001L1 UNDERGRND MINING OPERTNS INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Sottile, Joseph ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 1 14.3 A 4 57.1 Sophomore 3 42.9 B 3 42.9 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 2 28.6 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 14.3 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 2 28.6 Studies Program 1 14.3 2 hours 1 14.3 Required by my major 6 85.7 3 hours 3 42.9 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 1 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 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 4 25.0 0.0 50.0 25.0 2.8 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 11. Was available for consultation 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 3.6 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . . % % 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 37. Question 37 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 4.4 . 38. Question 38 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 4.7 . 39. Question 39 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 57.1 14.3 3.9 . 40. Question 40 7 0.0 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 4.1 . 41. Question 41 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 14.3 71.4 4.6 . 42. Question 42 7 0.0 0.0 28.6 14.3 57.1 4.3 . 43. Question 43 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 4.3 . 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 301 001L1 MINERALS PROCESSING INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tao, Daniel ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 Sophomore 2 40.0 B 5 100.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 2 40.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 2.6 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 80.0 20.0 0.0 2.2 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 5 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 40.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1.8 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 2.2 . . % % 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 302 001A1 MINERALS PROCESSING LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Tao, Daniel ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 2 40.0 B 1 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 3 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 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 0 0.0 Required by my major 5 100.0 3 hours 0 0.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 4 80.0 6 - 7 hours 1 20.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 5 0.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 3.0 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 4. Exams reflected what was taught 4 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 20.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 2.2 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 2.8 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 3.2 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 80.0 0.0 20.0 2.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 2.8 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 40.0 60.0 0.0 2.6 . . % % 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 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 3 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.7 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 3 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 = 5 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 303 001A1 DEFORMABLE SOLIDS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Unrug, Konstanty F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 8 40.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 9 45.0 Junior 5 25.0 C 3 15.0 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 2 10.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 25.0 Required by my major 20 100.0 3 hours 7 35.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 5 25.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.0 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 20 15.0 40.0 45.0 0.0 2.3 0.73 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 30.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 2.0 0.82 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 35.0 10.0 55.0 0.0 2.2 0.95 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 47.6 23.8 28.6 0.0 1.8 0.87 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 28.6 19.0 52.4 0.0 2.2 0.89 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 9.5 0.0 90.5 0.0 2.8 0.60 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 9.5 33.3 57.1 0.0 2.5 0.68 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 15.8 26.3 57.9 0.0 2.4 0.77 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 23.8 23.8 47.6 4.8 2.3 0.91 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 20 10.0 5.0 80.0 5.0 2.8 0.70 11. Was available for consultation 21 23.8 14.3 61.9 0.0 2.4 0.86 12. Satisfact answered class questions 20 20.0 20.0 60.0 0.0 2.4 0.82 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 20 30.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 2.0 0.79 14. Encouraged class participation 19 15.8 15.8 68.4 0.0 2.5 0.77 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 13 23.1 15.4 61.5 0.0 2.4 0.87 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 18 22.2 16.7 61.1 0.0 2.4 0.85 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 16.7 22.2 61.1 0.0 2.4 0.78 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 18 16.7 27.8 55.6 0.0 2.4 0.78 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 18 33.3 38.9 27.8 0.0 1.9 0.80 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 50.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 1.8 0.85 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 40.0 25.0 35.0 0.0 2.0 0.89. % % 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 22.2 22.2 55.6 0.0 2.3 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 9 22.2 11.1 66.7 0.0 2.4 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 9 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 9 22.2 22.2 55.6 0.0 2.3 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 9 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . % 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 = 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 303 002A1 DEFORMABLE SOLIDS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Unrug, Konstanty F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 3 30.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 5 50.0 Junior 3 30.0 C 2 20.0 Senior 7 70.0 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 20.0 Required by my major 10 100.0 3 hours 5 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 3 30.0 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 10 0.0 30.0 60.0 10.0 2.8 0.63 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 14.3 42.9 42.9 0.0 2.3 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 10 20.0 10.0 50.0 20.0 2.7 1.06 4. Exams reflected what was taught 10 30.0 20.0 40.0 10.0 2.3 1.06 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 30.0 60.0 10.0 2.8 0.63 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 10 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 3.2 0.42 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 8. Graded assignments included comments 10 10.0 20.0 60.0 10.0 2.7 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 10 10.0 20.0 60.0 10.0 2.7 0.82 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 11. Was available for consultation 9 0.0 33.3 55.6 11.1 2.8 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 10 0.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 2.9 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 10 20.0 30.0 40.0 10.0 2.4 0.97 14. Encouraged class participation 10 10.0 20.0 50.0 20.0 2.8 0.92 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 7 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 10 10.0 10.0 70.0 10.0 2.8 0.79 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 2.8 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 10 10.0 10.0 80.0 0.0 2.7 0.67 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 10 20.0 30.0 50.0 0.0 2.3 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 10 20.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 2.2 0.92 21. Overall quality of teaching 10 20.0 40.0 30.0 10.0 2.3 0.95. % % 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 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 2.2 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 6 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 6 50.0 16.7 33.3 0.0 1.8 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 5 20.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 2.6 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 6 33.3 33.3 33.3 0.0 2.0 . % 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 = 10 Number of forms with at least one student response = 10 Percent completed = 76.9 % 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 303 003A1 DEFORMABLE SOLIDS LAB INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Unrug, Konstanty F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 45.5 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 6 54.5 Junior 11 100.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 0 0.0 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University 1 hour or less 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 3 27.3 Required by my major 11 100.0 3 hours 6 54.5 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 18.2 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 14 14.3 14.3 57.1 14.3 2.7 0.91 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 7 28.6 14.3 28.6 28.6 2.6 . 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 13 0.0 0.0 92.3 7.7 3.1 0.28 4. Exams reflected what was taught 14 14.3 21.4 57.1 7.1 2.6 0.85 5. Grading was fair and consistent 14 14.3 42.9 28.6 14.3 2.4 0.94 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 14 7.1 0.0 71.4 21.4 3.1 0.73 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 8. Graded assignments included comments 12 0.0 41.7 41.7 16.7 2.8 0.75 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 12 0.0 33.3 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.72 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 14 0.0 14.3 57.1 28.6 3.1 0.66 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 14 0.0 0.0 85.7 14.3 3.1 0.36 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 0.0 46.2 46.2 7.7 2.6 0.65 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 18.2 27.3 45.5 9.1 2.5 0.93 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 69.2 23.1 3.2 0.55 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 14 7.1 0.0 78.6 14.3 3.0 0.68 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 84.6 15.4 3.2 0.38 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 53.8 30.8 7.7 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 13 7.7 30.8 53.8 7.7 2.6 0.77 21. Overall quality of teaching 12 8.3 25.0 50.0 16.7 2.8 0.87. % % 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 12.5 62.5 25.0 3.1 . 33. Amount of work appropriate 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 34. Instructor explained expectations 8 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . 35. Instructor helped with my problems 8 12.5 0.0 62.5 25.0 3.0 . 36. Lab equipment use satis explained 8 0.0 12.5 62.5 25.0 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 = 16 Number of forms scanned = 14 Number of forms with at least one student response = 14 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 - FALL 2000 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Engineering DEPARTMENT = Mining Engineering FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = MNG 591 001L1 MINE DESIGN PROJECT I INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Unrug, Konstanty F ----------------------------------------------------- SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 5 100.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 0 0.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 4 80.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 1 20.0 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 5 100.0 3 hours 3 60.0 Other (e.g. elective) 0 0.0 4 - 5 hours 2 40.0 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 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 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 4 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0 3.3 . SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 11. Was available for consultation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 12. Satisfact answered class questions 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 14. Encouraged class participation 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 4 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 5 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 . 21. Overall quality of teaching 5 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 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 = 6 Number of forms scanned = 5 Number of forms with at least one student response = 5 Percent completed = 83.3 % For help with interpretation of the results, refer to your copy of "STUDENT RATINGS OF TEACHING - INTERPRETATION GUIDELINES AND OBSERVATIONS." If a copy is not attached, see your department chairperson. An electronic copy is also available at our UK web page for Assessment & Instituttional Data. ****************************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************************