Introduction to Morality and Society (2 sections) LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 130 006L1 INTRO PHI:MORALIT/SOCIET INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 5 18.5 A 7 25.9 Sophomore 5 18.5 B 18 66.7 Junior 9 33.3 C 2 7.4 Senior 8 29.6 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 6 22.2 Studies Program 19 73.1 2 hours 12 44.4 Required by my major 3 11.5 3 hours 7 25.9 Other (e.g. elective) 4 15.4 4 - 5 hours 2 7.4 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 41.4 58.6 3.6 0.50 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 30 0.0 10.0 43.3 46.7 3.4 0.67 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 30 0.0 3.3 50.0 46.7 3.4 0.57 4. Exams reflected what was taught 30 0.0 3.3 50.0 46.7 3.4 0.57 5. Grading was fair and consistent 29 3.4 13.8 48.3 34.5 3.1 0.79 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 30 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 3.4 0.50 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 30 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 8. Graded assignments included comments 30 0.0 13.3 60.0 26.7 3.1 0.63 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 30 0.0 3.3 53.3 43.3 3.4 0.56 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 30 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 11. Was available for consultation 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 30 0.0 3.3 50.0 46.7 3.4 0.57 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 30 0.0 16.7 53.3 30.0 3.1 0.68 14. Encouraged class participation 30 0.0 3.3 46.7 50.0 3.5 0.57 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 29 0.0 3.4 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.57 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 29 0.0 10.3 44.8 44.8 3.3 0.67 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 25 0.0 16.0 60.0 24.0 3.1 0.64 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 29 0.0 6.9 51.7 41.4 3.3 0.61 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 30 6.7 33.3 43.3 16.7 2.7 0.84 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 30 0.0 13.3 43.3 43.3 3.3 0.70 21. Overall quality of teaching 30 0.0 6.7 26.7 66.7 3.6 0.62 LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 130 007L1 INTRO PHI:MORALIT/SOCIET INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 9 37.5 A 6 25.0 Sophomore 2 8.3 B 17 70.8 Junior 8 33.3 C 1 4.2 Senior 5 20.8 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 14 58.3 2 hours 10 41.7 Required by my major 3 12.5 3 hours 7 29.2 Other (e.g. elective) 7 29.2 4 - 5 hours 3 12.5 6 - 7 hours 0 0.0 8 or more hours 0 0.0 % % Strongly % % Strongly N Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION B - COURSE ITEMS 1. Outlined course material and grading 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 25 0.0 12.0 56.0 32.0 3.2 0.65 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 25 0.0 8.0 76.0 16.0 3.1 0.49 4. Exams reflected what was taught 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 5. Grading was fair and consistent 25 4.0 8.0 60.0 28.0 3.1 0.73 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 25 0.0 4.0 56.0 40.0 3.4 0.57 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 25 0.0 4.0 64.0 32.0 3.3 0.54 8. Graded assignments included comments 25 8.0 8.0 60.0 24.0 3.0 0.82 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 25 0.0 4.0 44.0 52.0 3.5 0.59 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 22 4.5 9.1 50.0 36.4 3.2 0.80 12. Satisfact answered class questions 25 0.0 0.0 52.0 48.0 3.5 0.51 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 24 0.0 8.3 54.2 37.5 3.3 0.62 14. Encouraged class participation 25 0.0 4.0 48.0 48.0 3.4 0.58 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 25 0.0 0.0 48.0 52.0 3.5 0.51 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 24 0.0 0.0 54.2 45.8 3.5 0.51 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 21 0.0 19.0 52.4 28.6 3.1 0.70 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 25 0.0 0.0 68.0 32.0 3.3 0.48 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 25 8.0 28.0 52.0 12.0 2.7 0.80 % % % % 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 54.2 33.3 3.2 0.66 21. Overall quality of teaching 24 0.0 8.3 37.5 54.2 3.5 0.66 Number of forms preslugged = 32 Number of forms scanned = 25 Number of forms with at least one student response = 25 Percent completed = 78.1 % Philosophy of Law LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - Spring 1996 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 537 001L1 PHILOSOPHY OF LAW INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 0 0.0 A 4 33.3 Sophomore 1 8.3 B 4 33.3 Junior 2 16.7 C 1 8.3 Senior 4 33.3 D 0 0.0 Graduate 2 16.7 E/Fail 0 0.0 Professional 3 25.0 I 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Pass or Audit 3 25.0 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 3 25.0 Required by my major 1 8.3 3 hours 4 33.3 Other (e.g. elective) 11 91.7 4 - 5 hours 4 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 13 0.0 0.0 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 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 61.5 38.5 3.4 0.51 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 61.5 38.5 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 46.2 53.8 3.5 0.52 8. Graded assignments included comments 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 13 0.0 15.4 61.5 23.1 3.1 0.64 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 13 0.0 0.0 30.8 69.2 3.7 0.48 11. Was available for consultation 10 0.0 0.0 70.0 30.0 3.3 0.48 12. Satisfact answered class questions 13 0.0 0.0 76.9 23.1 3.2 0.44 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 13 7.7 0.0 53.8 38.5 3.2 0.83 14. Encouraged class participation 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.66 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 18.2 45.5 36.4 3.2 0.75 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 13 0.0 7.7 30.8 61.5 3.5 0.66 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 12 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 3.2 0.58 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 13 0.0 0.0 53.8 46.2 3.5 0.52 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 13 7.7 7.7 46.2 38.5 3.2 0.90 % % % % 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 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 21. Overall quality of teaching 13 0.0 7.7 61.5 30.8 3.2 0.60 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. * ***********************************************************************