Christian Perring's Course Evals S97

1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1997 TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS COLLEGE = Arts and Sciences DEPARTMENT = Philosophy FACULTY TYPE = Faculty COURSE = PHI 100 006L1 INTRO PHI:KNOWL/REALITY INSTRUCTOR EVALUATED = Perring, Christian SECTION A - STUDENT INFORMATION Classification Number Percent Expected grade Number Percent Freshman 13 72.2 A 6 35.3 Sophomore 2 11.1 B 11 64.7 Junior 2 11.1 C 0 0.0 Senior 1 5.6 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 3 16.7 Studies Program 12 70.6 2 hours 10 55.6 Required by my major 2 11.8 3 hours 4 22.2 Other (e.g. elective) 3 17.6 4 - 5 hours 0 0.0 6 - 7 hours 1 5.6 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 21 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 3.6 0.51 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 20 0.0 10.0 60.0 30.0 3.2 0.62 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 20 0.0 5.0 55.0 40.0 3.4 0.59 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 4.8 66.7 28.6 3.2 0.54 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 20 5.0 0.0 55.0 40.0 3.3 0.73 8. Graded assignments included comments 19 0.0 5.3 42.1 52.6 3.5 0.61 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 4.8 28.6 66.7 3.6 0.59 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 19.0 81.0 3.8 0.40 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 0.0 38.1 61.9 3.6 0.50 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 4.8 4.8 23.8 66.7 3.5 0.81 14. Encouraged class participation 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 20 0.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 3.7 0.49 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 20 0.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 3.6 0.50 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 18 5.6 5.6 61.1 27.8 3.1 0.76 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 20 0.0 0.0 45.0 55.0 3.6 0.51 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 9.5 9.5 57.1 23.8 3.0 0.86 % % % % N Poor Fair Good Excellent Mean SD (1) (2) (3) (4) SECTION E - SUMMARY ITEMS 20. Overall value of the course 20 0.0 15.0 30.0 55.0 3.4 0.75 21. Overall quality of teaching 20 0.0 5.0 10.0 85.0 3.8 0.52 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1997 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 15 71.4 A 5 26.3 Sophomore 4 19.0 B 11 57.9 Junior 2 9.5 C 3 15.8 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 7 33.3 Studies Program 13 61.9 2 hours 6 28.6 Required by my major 2 9.5 3 hours 2 9.5 Other (e.g. elective) 6 28.6 4 - 5 hours 4 19.0 6 - 7 hours 2 9.5 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 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 21 4.8 4.8 61.9 28.6 3.1 0.73 3. Suppl read & assign helped understan 21 0.0 9.5 47.6 42.9 3.3 0.66 4. Exams reflected what was taught 21 0.0 9.5 42.9 47.6 3.4 0.67 5. Grading was fair and consistent 21 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 3.4 0.51 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 21 0.0 0.0 47.6 52.4 3.5 0.51 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 21 0.0 4.8 57.1 38.1 3.3 0.58 8. Graded assignments included comments 21 0.0 28.6 52.4 19.0 2.9 0.70 SECTION C - INSTRUCTOR ITEMS 9. Presented material effectively 21 0.0 4.8 47.6 47.6 3.4 0.60 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 21 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 3.7 0.46 11. Was available for consultation 20 0.0 0.0 60.0 40.0 3.4 0.50 12. Satisfact answered class questions 21 0.0 9.5 42.9 47.6 3.4 0.67 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 21 9.5 4.8 47.6 38.1 3.1 0.91 14. Encouraged class participation 20 0.0 5.0 30.0 65.0 3.6 0.60 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 21 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 0.72 16. Inc my abil to analyze & evaluate 21 0.0 14.3 42.9 42.9 3.3 0.72 17. Course helped abil to solve problem 15 0.0 20.0 66.7 13.3 2.9 0.59 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 21 0.0 4.8 52.4 42.9 3.4 0.59 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 21 4.8 23.8 38.1 33.3 3.0 0.89 % % % % 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 52.4 38.1 3.3 0.64 21. Overall quality of teaching 21 0.0 14.3 38.1 47.6 3.3 0.73 1LEXINGTON CAMPUS - PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Page 1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - SPRING 1997 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 5 45.5 Sophomore 2 18.2 B 5 45.5 Junior 1 9.1 C 1 9.1 Senior 5 45.5 D 0 0.0 Graduate 3 27.3 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 9.1 Studies Program 0 0.0 2 hours 5 45.5 Required by my major 4 36.4 3 hours 1 9.1 Other (e.g. elective) 7 63.6 4 - 5 hours 1 9.1 6 - 7 hours 3 27.3 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 81.8 18.2 3.2 0.40 2. Textbook contributed to understandin 10 0.0 10.0 90.0 0.0 2.9 0.32 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 3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 . 5. Grading was fair and consistent 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 6. Assignments were distributed evenly 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 7. Graded assignments returned promptly 10 0.0 0.0 90.0 10.0 3.1 0.32 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 11 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 2.9 0.54 10. Had good knowledge of subject matte 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 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 18.2 63.6 18.2 3.0 0.63 13. Stimulated interest of the subject 11 0.0 0.0 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 14. Encouraged class participation 11 0.0 0.0 36.4 63.6 3.6 0.50 SECTION D - LEARNING OUTCOMES 15. Learned respect different viewpoint 11 0.0 0.0 72.7 27.3 3.3 0.47 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 7 0.0 14.3 71.4 14.3 3.0 . 18. Gained undrstnd of concepts & prin. 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60 19. Course stimulated me to read furthe 11 0.0 0.0 63.6 36.4 3.4 0.50 % % % % 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 54.5 45.5 3.5 0.52 21. Overall quality of teaching 11 0.0 9.1 63.6 27.3 3.2 0.60