Summer 1996 Student Questionnaire Results

Here they are, in a nutshell:

This page presents the results of the form based questionnaire for the Summer 1996 GNA-VSNS Biocomputing course. It was conducted anonymously during the last week of the course, and a few weeks beyond. Checked buttons represent the items that were actively set by the largest number of respondents. All percentages are calculated over 30 questionaires; they were solicited from the total of 37 students, no matter whether they were still participating, or not. The 1995 Student Questionnaire Results are available, too.

From which background are you coming?

Life Sciences (Biology, Medicine, etc): 16 (53%)
Mathematics / Computer Science / Engineering /Physics: 11 (37%)
Other: 3 (10%)
No Answer: 0

Current level of activity.

I read course newsletters and mail.
Agree 22 (74%) 7 (23%) 1 ( 3%) 0 ( 0%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I browse the course pages/notes with a WWW browser.
Agree 21 (70%) 6 (20%) 3 (10%) 0 ( 0%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I mail the course or send comments.
Agree 9 (30%) 10 (34%) 4 (13%) 6 (20%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 1 ( 3%)
I communicate directly with other students/instructors/organisers.
Agree 15 (50%) 8 (27%) 6 (20%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I do exercises on a regular basis.
Agree 7 (23%) 13 (44%) 6 (20%) 4 (13%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I help out as a consulting student.
Agree 9 (30%) 7 (23%) 3 (10%) 11 (37%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I download some/all of the material for local use.
Agree 15 (50%) 8 (27%) 4 (13%) 3 (10%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I read transcripts of the group meetings.
Agree 17 (57%) 7 (23%) 3 (10%) 3 (10%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I attend group meetings at BioMOO.
Agree 18 (60%) 8 (27%) 3 (10%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I visit BioMOO at other times, too.
Agree 6 (20%) 9 (30%) 5 (16%) 10 (34%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0

Real life activities.

I distribute course material to other people I know who are not on the course.
Agree 5 (16%) 9 (30%) 9 (30%) 7 (24%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I use course material in my teaching.
Agree 0 ( 0%) 7 (24%) 3 (10%) 18 (60%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 2 ( 6%)
I discuss the course with my friends and colleagues.
Agree 6 (20%) 12 (40%) 9 (30%) 3 (10%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0

Can you use the technology to follow the course?

I know how to send a message to a list.
Agree 27 (91%) 1 ( 3%) 0 ( 0%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 1 ( 3%)
I can connect to BioMOO and use it.
Agree 29 (97%) 1 ( 3%) 0 ( 0%) 0 (0%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I can connect to BioMOO and use the pairwise aligner.
Agree 21 (70%) 7 (24%) 1 ( 3%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
I can use sequence analysis utilities related to the course (FASTA,BLAST,GCG, etc...)
Agree 21 (71%) 6 ( 20%) 1 ( 3%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 1 ( 3%)
I can connect to other MOOs (Gna-Lab, Collegetown)
Agree 20 (67%) 1 ( 3%) 2 ( 7%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 6 (20%)
I am using the Hypertext Glossary of Biocomputing terms.
Agree 8 (27%) 10 (34%) 5 (16%) 6 (20%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 1 ( 3%)
I can use the Java-based Multiple Alignment Visualization Tool.
Agree 12 (40%) 3 (10%) 4 (14%) 6 (20%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 5 (16%)

Current weekly activity on the course.

I'm not actively participating: 3 (10%)
Less than 2 hours/week: 3 (10%)
2-5 hours/week: 16 (54%)
5-10 hours/week: 6 (20%)
More than 10 hours/week: 2 ( 6%)

Level of the course.

Too hard:1 ( 3%)
Harder than I expected: 11 (37%)
As I expected: 16 (54%)
Easier than I expected: 3 ( 6%)
Too easy: 0 ( 0%)

Coverage of the course.

Too narrow: 1 ( 3%)
Narrower than I expected: 6 (20%)
What I expected: 18 (60%)
Broader than I expected: 5 (17%)
Too broad: 0 ( 0%)
Too theoretical: 1 ( 3%)
More theoretical than I expected: 10 (34%)
What I expected: 15 (50%)
More practical than I expected: 3 (10%)
Too practical: 1 ( 3%)

Please tell us if any of the following are SERIOUS problems.

Hypertext is difficult to find my way around: 0 ( 0%)
I have trouble downloading the textbook: 1 ( 3%)
I have trouble printing out the textbook: 2 ( 6%)
It's not like a normal textbook: 1 ( 3%)
I don't know precisely what I have to do each week: 5 (16%)
Network delays (lags) make some/all of the course unusable: 6 (20%)
MOO sessions take too much time and few things get done: 12 (40%)
No one reacts to my problems or suggestions: 0 ( 0%)
The material is written by lots of different people: 0 ( 0%)
I spend all my effort on technology and not on the science: 1 ( 3%)
I get no feedback about how well I am doing: 4 (13%)
I'd like to see all the material at the start of the course: 5 (16%)
The exercises demand too much work: 4 (13%)
The exercises are trivial: 0 ( 0%)
Distance education is hard to handle: 2 ( 6%)
I have less time than I expected: 15 (50%)

Group Interaction.

Have the classroom sessions been useful?
Agree 11 (37%) 10 (33%) 8 (27%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 0
Do you get enough attention from your instructor?
Agree 21 (70%) 6 (20%) 1 ( 3%) 1 ( 3%) Disagree
Don't know/ No Answer: 1 ( 3%)

My study group is going too fast, is difficult to keep up: 3 (10%)
The speed is about right, I feel quite comfortable with it: 26 (87%)
My study group is too slow, I'd like to speed them up: 1 ( 3%)

Do any of these prevent you contributing to the course?

I cannot write HTML documents: 1 ( 3%)
I do not feel confident about contributing web pages: 1 ( 3%)
I do not feel confident about mailing the lists: 0 ( 0%)
I lack time: 20 (67%)
I don't know what I could contribute: 2 ( 6%)

Course PROs and CONs.

PROS

It's a fun way of learning: 25 (83%)
The material is well presented: 18 (60%)
The group activity is enjoyable: 16 (53%)
I make contact with new people: 20 (67%)
There's plenty of thought-provoking ideas and resources: 22 (73%)
The potential is tremendous, fascinating: 16 (53%)
I'm encouraged to be creative: 11 (37%)
I can learn from other people: 22 (73%)
The technology is easy to use: 15 (50%)
I can do as much or as little as I please: 19 (63%)
I can join in when I like: 15 (50%)

CONS

It's too difficult to follow: 3 (10%)
It all takes too much time: 9 (30%)
The technology is awkward and difficult: 5 (17%)
The group activity is low: 4 (13%)
The material is badly presented: 0 ( 0%)
I'm getting more information than I can handle: 6 (20%)
One can never tell what's going on and where you are: 1 ( 3%)
The organizers are anonymous: 0 ( 0%)
I don't want to learn so publicly: 0 ( 0%)
The various aspects of the course are ill organised: 0 ( 0%)
It's all too remote: 4 (13%)
Navigation is a nightmare: 1 ( 3%)
There's no personal feedback: 4 (13%)

Possible future developments.

I'd like to use some of the material after the course has finished: 24 (80%)
I'd like to see a repeat of the course fairly soon: 14 (47%)
I'd like to see similar courses in biocomputing: 23 (77%)
The organisers should rethink the whole approach before they plan new courses: 3 (10%)
I'd like to have access to the material in alternative form (please use the next text field in this form to provide details): 4 (13%)

Do you have any comment/suggestion? (sample answers)

Indeed a very nice course. Excellent instructions and very stimulating course material. Maybe I miss some references to the extensive literature in scientific journals; the references to books are not so useful.

I realise that the course demands a great deal of work from Georg & the tutors etc. but I think that it is crucial that the courses should continue. I have found the course very useful & rewarding. My main suggestion is that the number of exercises should be increased to include more exercises in "practical" biocomputing; this would allow participants who wanted a less theoretical/mathematical approach to get more from the course.

I found the content and level a little variable, sometimes I would be cruising and others confused - this I think was mainly due to different backgrounds. Perhaps in text & exercises you could have simple bits which can be skipped if you are already familiar with that area. Some of the exercises I found a little ambiguous - not quite sure what they wanted - usually I read too much into them. The MOO sessions were quite slow - but I tended to browse the text in the background [...]

Maybe there should be two levels of courses (elementary / advanced) or, alternatively, one course more directed toward applications and strategies and another directed more specifically to computer scientists (i.e. "Algorithms for Biocomputing").

Net lag is a problem. Also it takes me far more time to tipe things than to speak. This all makes communication via BioMOO difficult - maybe it's something to get used to (I'm new to MOOs). The course material is certainly very exciting and seems to be pretty much state of art. I did not have too many expectations (what can you expect??) and I was certainly satisfied. Unfortunatly I ended up having only very little time towards the end of the course - I didn't foresea that. Important comment: THANK YOU VERY MUCH for all the nighthours and the hard effort! I would appreciate if the www pages would stay there for a while so one could refer to them later again to go through some details again. [Comment: Our WWW pages will stay accessible for the forseeable future. G.F.]

It seems that the Text book was very wordy and hard to follow. A lot of conversions on MOO were more like guessing games over trivial issues that would eat up most of the time. My suggestion would be to try to cover more material by maybe taking interactive trips through the web, something similiar to going on a class trip to a museum, park, country, or cave. So that one can experience more then just discussion by a text window. I hope I haven't insulted anyone with my comments. I think that everyone tried hard to do a good job.

Summarizing I find there was much more self-discipline needed to keep track with the course, to read the chapters in time than with real-life learning, because it's easier to back out when the subject is on less interesting aspects. But, as a complimant and a fact, only technical problems or illness could keep me away from my classes !

Course would benefit from a formal section on "sequence->structure" and 2D->3D protein structure analysis/prediction techniques.

The questionaire was based on the VSNS-PPS Feedback Form, by Alan Mills and Peter Murray-Rust, with additional modifications by David G. Pisano and Chris Lilley.

Back to VSNS BioComputing Division Home Page.
VSNS-BCD Copyright 1996.
The data were tallied by Alexander Sczyrba, the introductory remarks are by Georg Fuellen.