TCBG Summer School - Urbana, Jun. 2-13, 2003

TCBG Summer School - Urbana, Jun. 2-13, 2003

Summer School feedback form

MS Word (.doc) file
Summer School Feedback form cover (.doc)

Rate the items below using the following scale:
1-Strongly disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Unsure, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree

I. OUTCOME Scale
1.The Summer School broadened my understanding of concepts and principles in the field of Computational and Theoretical Biophysics. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The Summer School improved my ability to carry out original research in the field of Computational and Theoretical Biophysics. 1 2 3 4 5
3.The Summer School improved significantly my computational skills. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The Summer School taught me techniques directly applicable to my career. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The material presented in the Summer School was relevant to my research. 1 2 3 4 5


II. LECTURES Scale
1.The instructors' knowledge of the subjects was good. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The instructors explained the material well. 1 2 3 4 5
3.The instructors provided real-world examples. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The instructors were prepared for the lectures. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The lectures were coordinated between instructors. 1 2 3 4 5
6.Lectures incorporated recent developments in the field. 1 2 3 4 5
7.The range of lectures captured the overall essentials of the field. 1 2 3 4 5
8.The level of the lectures was appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5
9.The underlying rationale of the techniques presented was clear. 1 2 3 4 5
10.We were exposed to a well representative range of techniques. 1 2 3 4 5
11.The instructors stimulated my intellectual curiosity. 1 2 3 4 5


III. HANDS-ON Scale
1.The hands-on sessions were important for the learning process in the summer School. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The 'Model Your Own System' opportunity improved my understanding of the lectures. 1 2 3 4 5
3.The jobs we ran during the hands-on sessions were useful for understanding the material. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The concrete examples in the hands-on tutorials increased my understanding of the lectures. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The hands-on sessions were long enough. 1 2 3 4 5
6.The hands-on sessions were coordinated with the lectures. 1 2 3 4 5
7.TAs were well-prepared to answer questions. 1 2 3 4 5
8.There were sufficient instructions to proceed with the hands-on assignments. 1 2 3 4 5


IV. CLUSTER BUILDING Scale
1.The cluster-building lecture was useful. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The cluster-building exercises were useful. 1 2 3 4 5
3.I think that I could now build my own cluster. 1 2 3 4 5


V. ENVIRONMENT & TECHNICAL RESOURCES Scale
1.The Sun computer lab was adequate for the exercises (if N/A go to V.3). 1 2 3 4 5
2.The computers in the Sun lab ran smoothly (if N/A go to V.3). 1 2 3 4 5
3.The Linux computer lab was adequate for the exercises. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The computers in the Linux lab ran smoothly. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The access to NCSA resources was valuable. 1 2 3 4 5
6.The lecture room (auditorium) was conducive to learning. 1 2 3 4 5
7.School access to the Internet was sufficient. 1 2 3 4 5
8.BioCoRE was helpful in submitting jobs to NCSA. 1 2 3 4 5


VI. COMMUNICATION & DISSEMINATION Scale
1.Instructors were readily available for Q&A outside the lecture periods. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The daily noon Q&A period was beneficial. 1 2 3 4 5
3.The Summer School web site was informative before the school started. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The Summer School web site was informative during the school period. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The online information was up-to-date. 1 2 3 4 5
6.The online material was organized. 1 2 3 4 5
7.BioCoRE facilitated interactions among students. 1 2 3 4 5
8.BioCoRE facilitated interactions between students and School staff. 1 2 3 4 5


VII. GENERAL ORGANIZATION Scale
1.The number of participants was reasonable. 1 2 3 4 5
2.The cost of the School was reasonable. 1 2 3 4 5
3.There were enough TAs and support staff to help the participants. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The banquet enhanced the Summer School experience. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The bus trip to Chicago was fun (if N/A go to VII.1). 1 2 3 4 5
4.The balance between lectures and hands-on sessions was optimal. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The Summer School addressed my research needs. 1 2 3 4 5
6.Overall, the Summer School met my expectations. 1 2 3 4 5


VIII. OVERALL SATISFACTION Scale
1.Overall technical support was good. 1 2 3 4 5
2.Overall general support was good. 1 2 3 4 5
3.The Summer School was well organized. 1 2 3 4 5
4.The balance between lectures and hands-on sessions was optimal. 1 2 3 4 5
5.The Summer School addressed my research needs. 1 2 3 4 5
6.Overall, the Summer School met my expectations. 1 2 3 4 5


IX. COMMENTS
1.What suggestions do you have for improving the summer school?
2.What suggestions do you have for similar workshops?