General Evaluation of the Computational Biophysics Workshop at Pittsburgh, May 21-25, 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. 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
2. The Workshop improved my ability to carry out original research in the field of Theoretical and Computational Biophysics. 15 0% 7% 7% 13% 73%
3. The Workshop improved significantly my computational skills. 15 0% 0% 40% 33% 27%
4. The Workshop taught me techniques directly applicable to my career. 15 0% 0% 13% 33% 54%
5. The material presented in the Workshop was relevant to my research. 15 0% 0% 20% 33% 47%

 

II. Lectures

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The instructors' knowledge of the subjects was good. 15 0% 0% 0% 7% 93%
2. The instructors explained the material well. 15 0% 0% 7% 0% 93%
3. The instructors provided real-world examples. 15 0% 0% 0% 20% 80%
4. The instructors were prepared for the lectures. 15 0% 0% 0% 0% 100
5. The lectures were coordinated between instructors. 15 0% 0% 7% 13% 80%
6. Lectures incorporated recent developments in the field. 15 0% 0% 0% 20% 80%
7. The range of lectures captured the overall essentials of the field 15 0% 0% 0% 20% 80%
8. The level of the lectures was appropriate. 15 0% 0% 0% 27% 73%
9. The underlying rationale of the techniques presented was clear. 15 0% 0% 7% 27% 66%
10. The instructors stimulated my intellectual curiosity. 15 0% 0% 0% 13% 83%
11. The daily Q & A period was beneficial. 15 0% 0% 13% 13% 74%

 

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. 15 0% 13% 7% 13% 67%
2. There were sufficient instructions to proceed with the hands-on assignments. 15 0% 0% 27% 27% 46%
3. The concrete examples in the hands-on tutorials increased my understanding of the lectures. 15 0% 7% 13% 27% 53%
4. The hands-on sessions were long enough. 15 0% 0% 13% 33% 54%
5. The hands-on sessions were coordinated with the lectures. 15 0% 0% 7% 33% 60%
6. TAs were well-prepared to answer questions. 15 0% 0% 0% 47% 53%
7. There were enough TAs / instructional staff to help the participants. 15 0% 0% 7% 27% 66%
8. The tutorial options accommodated the differing interests of participants. 15 0% 0% 13% 33% 54%
9. The tutorial options accommodated the differing expertise levels of participants. 15 0% 0% 20% 27% 53%

 

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. 15 0% 0% 20% 27% 53%
2. The lecture room was conducive to learning. 15 0% 0% 0% 20% 80%
3. The projection system was sufficient for the lectures. 15 7% 0% 0% 20% 80%
4. The University of Pittsburgh Bouquet Gardens provided sufficient accommodations (answer if applicable to you). 15 7% 0% 13% 13% 67%

 

V. Communication and Dissemination

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. Instructors were readily available for Q&A outside the lecture periods. 15 0% 0% 7% 20% 73%
2. The Workshop website was informative about the event. 15 0% 0% 27% 20% 53%
3. The organizational emails before the Workshop were helpful. 15 0% 0% 7% 20% 73%

 

VI. Overall Satisfaction

  N Strongly Disagree Disagree Unsure Agree Strongly Agree
1. The Workshop was well organized. 15 0% 0% 0% 27% 73%
2. The balance between lectures and hands-on sessions was optimal. 15 0% 0% 7% 40% 53%
3. The Workshop addressed my research needs. 15 0% 0% 13% 20% 67%
4. Overall, the Workshop met my expectations. 15 0% 0% 7% 27% 66%
5. I would recommend this Workshop to others. 15 0% 0% 7% 20% 73%