General Evaluation of the Computational Biophysics Workshop at Urbana, July 18-20, 2018

On the last day of the workshop, participants were asked to complete a general evaluation form consisting of questions about outcomes, lectures, hands-on tutorial sessions, environment and technical resources, communication and dissemination, overall satisfaction.

 

I. Outcomes

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The Workshop broadened my understanding of concepts and principles in the field of Computational and Theoretical Biophysics. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
2. The Workshop improved my ability to carry out original research in the field of Theoretical and Computational Biophysics. 7 0% 0% 43% 43% 14%
3. The Workshop improved significantly my computational skills. 7 0% 0% 29% 57% 14%
4. The Workshop taught me techniques directly applicable to my career. 7 0% 29% 14% 29% 28%
5. The material presented in the Workshop was relevant to my research. 7 0% 29% 14% 29% 28%

 

II. Lectures

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The instructors' knowledge of the subjects was good. 7 0% 0% 14% 29% 57%
2. The instructors explained the material well. 7 0% 0% 14% 29% 57%
3. The instructors provided real-world examples. 7 0% 0% 14% 14% 72%
4. The instructors were prepared for the lectures. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
5. The lectures were coordinated between instructors. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
6. Lectures incorporated recent developments in the field. 7 0% 0% 0% 14% 86%
7. The range of lectures captured the overall essentials of the field 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
8. The level of the lectures was appropriate. 7 0% 0% 14% 43% 43%
9. The underlying rationale of the techniques presented was clear. 7 0% 0% 14% 43% 43%
10. The instructors stimulated my intellectual curiosity. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
11. The daily Q & A period was beneficial. 7 0% 0% 0% 14% 86%

 

III. Hands-On Sessions

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The hands-on sessions were important for the learning process in the Workshop. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
2. There were sufficient instructions to proceed with the hands-on assignments. 7 0% 0% 14% 57% 29%
3. The concrete examples in the hands-on tutorials increased my understanding of the lectures. 7 0% 0% 14% 29% 57%
4. The hands-on sessions were long enough. 7 0% 0% 0% 29% 71%
5. The hands-on sessions were coordinated with the lectures. 7 0% 0% 0% 14% 86%
6. TAs were well-prepared to answer questions. 7 0% 0% 14% 14% 72%
7. There were enough TAs / instructional staff to help the participants. 7 0% 0% 14% 14% 72%
8. The tutorial options accommodated the differing interests of participants. 5 0% 0% 20% 40% 40%
9. The tutorial options accommodated the differing expertise levels of participants. 5 0% 0% 20% 40% 40%

 

IV. Environment and Technical Resources

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The software used in the Workshop ran well on my (circle one: Windows/Mac/Linux) laptop. 5 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
2. The lecture room was conducive to learning. 6 0% 0% 17% 33% 50%
3. The projection system was sufficient for the lectures. 6 0% 0% 17% 33% 50%
4. The recommended hotels provided sufficient accommodations (answer if applicable to you). 2 0% 0% 0% 50% 50%

 

V. Communication and Dissemination

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. Instructors were readily available for Q&A outside the lecture periods. 6 0% 0% 0% 17% 83%
2. The Workshop website was informative about the event. 5 0% 0% 0% 40% 60%
3. The organizational emails before the Workshop were helpful. 6 0% 0% 0% 50% 50%

 

VI. Overall Satisfaction

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The Workshop was well organized. 6 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
2. The balance between lectures and hands-on sessions was optimal. 6 0% 0% 0% 67% 33%
3. The Workshop addressed my research needs. 6 0% 17% 17% 33% 33%
4. Overall, the Workshop met my expectations. 6 0% 0% 0% 33% 67%
5. I would recommend this Workshop to others. 6 0% 0% 0% 17% 83%