Course Evaluations Spring 1995

1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1995 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 100 008L1 INTRO PHI:KNOWL/REALITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 39.1 A 5 22.7 Sophomore 13 56.5 B 11 50.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 5 22.7 Senior 1 4.3 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 1 4.5 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University less than 1 hour 1 4.3 Studies Program 20 90.9 1 - 3 hours 16 69.6 Required by my major 0 0.0 4 - 6 hours 5 21.7 Other (e.g. elective) 2 9.1 7 - 10 hours 1 4.3 over 10 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 8.7 43.5 47.8 3.4 0.66 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 23 0.0 13.0 60.9 26.1 3.1 0.63 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 23 0.0 0.0 82.6 17.4 3.2 0.39 4. Exams reflected what was taught 23 0.0 8.7 60.9 30.4 3.2 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 23 4.3 17.4 56.5 21.7 3.0 0.77 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 23 0.0 4.3 73.9 21.7 3.2 0.49 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 8. Graded assignments included comments 22 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.53 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 23 0.0 13.0 65.2 21.7 3.1 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 23 0.0 0.0 43.5 56.5 3.6 0.51 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 5.0 60.0 35.0 3.3 0.57 12. Satisfact answered class questions 23 0.0 4.3 60.9 34.8 3.3 0.56 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 22 0.0 22.7 45.5 31.8 3.1 0.75 14. Encouraged class participation 23 0.0 4.3 43.5 52.2 3.5 0.59 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 22 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.46 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 23 0.0 4.3 52.2 43.5 3.4 0.58 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 20 0.0 25.0 45.0 30.0 3.1 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 22 0.0 9.1 72.7 18.2 3.1 0.53 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 23 4.3 39.1 39.1 17.4 2.7 0.82 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall quality of the course 22 0.0 9.1 68.2 22.7 3.1 0.56 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 4.8 61.9 33.3 3.3 0.56

1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1995 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 575 001L1 PHILOSOPHY OF MIND INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 2 15.4 Sophomore 1 7.7 B 8 61.5 Junior 6 46.2 C 2 15.4 Senior 4 30.8 D 0 0.0 Graduate 0 0.0 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 0 0.0 I 0 0.0 Other 2 15.4 Pass or Audit 1 7.7 Reason for taking course Number Percent Hrs/week spent Number Percent Required by University less than 1 hour 1 7.7 Studies Program 0 0.0 1 - 3 hours 7 53.8 Required by my major 6 46.2 4 - 6 hours 5 38.5 Other (e.g. elective) 7 53.8 7 - 10 hours 0 0.0 over 10 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 66.7 33.3 3.3 0.49 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 15 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.51 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 14 0.0 7.1 50.0 42.9 3.4 0.63 4. Exams reflected what was taught 11 9.1 0.0 54.5 36.4 3.2 0.87 5. Grading was fair and consistent 15 0.0 20.0 60.0 20.0 3.0 0.65 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 15 13.3 33.3 40.0 13.3 2.5 0.92 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 15 6.7 6.7 73.3 13.3 2.9 0.70 8. Graded assignments included comments 15 0.0 20.0 46.7 33.3 3.1 0.74 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 15 0.0 6.7 93.3 0.0 2.9 0.26 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 15 0.0 0.0 46.7 53.3 3.5 0.52 11. Was available for consultation 14 0.0 7.1 57.1 35.7 3.3 0.61 12. Satisfact answered class questions 15 6.7 6.7 73.3 13.3 2.9 0.70 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 14 0.0 14.3 64.3 21.4 3.1 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 15 0.0 13.3 46.7 40.0 3.3 0.70 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 12 0.0 0.0 83.3 16.7 3.2 0.39 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 0.0 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 14 0.0 0.0 64.3 35.7 3.4 0.50 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 14 0.0 21.4 42.9 35.7 3.1 0.77 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall quality of the course 15 6.7 0.0 66.7 26.7 3.1 0.74 21. Overall quality of teaching 15 0.0 13.3 53.3 33.3 3.2 0.68

1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1995 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 650 401S1 SEM METAPHYS/EPIST: IRRAT & MORAL PSYCH INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 80.0 Sophomore 0 0.0 B 1 20.0 Junior 0 0.0 C 0 0.0 Senior 0 0.0 D 0 0.0 Graduate 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 less than 1 hour 0 0.0 Studies Program 0 0.0 1 - 3 hours 3 50.0 Required by my major 0 0.0 4 - 6 hours 3 50.0 Other (e.g. elective) 6 100.0 7 - 10 hours 0 0.0 over 10 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 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 2 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 3.5 . 8. Graded assignments included comments 2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 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 57.1 42.9 3.4 . 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 7 0.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 3.3 . 14. Encouraged class participation 7 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 3.9 . SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 3 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 6 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 3.3 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 . 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 7 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 . % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall quality 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 .