|
University
of North Carolina School of Public Health
Department of Epidemiology
EPID160, Principles of Epidemiology for Public Health
Instructors: Victor J. Schoenbach, Lorraine K. Alexander
Student comments from EPID160 Summer 2006
|
______________________________
|
“I am really enjoying the course so far. It is fast-paced and
there is a lot of interesting information. Thus, while it's
great, it is a lot of work! I think that the lectures are really
nice and the book is pretty good reading. Also, our TA, Anna,
is doing a very good job of communicating with the group.
I was disappointed this week that my group started early. There
were over 100 posts at the end of the day thursday! I hope
that won't happen again; it makes it hard to stay involved
in the discussion when you're already behind before it officially begins.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/25/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“This course is very well organized. I appreciate the structure
since it is all online. Thank you for asking!”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/28/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Lectures are informative and interesting. the case study questions
make me think. My only concern is the group discussion forum
seems unwieldy. My group is very enthusiastic about posting
and it's overwhelming to have to sort through all the responses.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/29/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I feel rushed and unsatisfied. I am spending too much time
on answering numerically based questions and not enough time
truly discussing epidemiological issues with my fellow students,
TA or you. The discussion forums are a joke if all we are going
to do is to compare what we have already answered. That doesn't
really lead to frank discussion or real understanding.
If you are going to dwell on the math of epidemiology at least
have the decency to put together a list of all the formulas
in one place.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/30/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“There is a lot of work to get done in one week. I am also taking
hebe like many others and working full-time plus, so it is
extremely demanding. No free time at all. I am however learning
a lot!!”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/30/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“So far, I feel that things in this course are going along with
the syllabus very well. I feel like I am right on target with
this course. if everything continues to go as well as it has
been thus far, I feel I will enjoy learning in this class.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/31/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“The biggest challenge for me is the discussion forum. I feel
like my group mates are far ahead of me as far as public health
and epidemiology is concerned. As a result, they go crazy posting
on the discussion forum talking about things that I don't understand
and don't have much desire to understand. In addition, it seems
a little difficult to figure out what I'm actually supposed
to be learning in the class. I think more individual post-tests
over the text reading and fewer discussion forums (maybe 3
or 4 total) would help. Definitely don't add post tests in
addition to the discussions! That way I could get a well rounded
general introduction to epidemiology.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/31/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I am not happy with the way we are doing the discussion board.
I don't feel like it is the best way to learn the material.
I am reading a lot of different opinions that may be incorrect.
it is also distracting to try to resolve last week's questions
while trying to learn this weeks material. instead of reaching
a consensus, how about discussion on a related topic initiated
by the TA. It would give us other real life opportunities to
learn. just a suggestion. thanks.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/31/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Since you asked...this week is a nightmare. to have a consensus
case study over a weekend and due wednesday while at the same
time reading a new chapter, listening to a lecture, reading
a new case study and answering 27 questions about it - also
due on Wednesday??? too much.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
05/31/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I am very impressed with how this course is organized. it is
obvious that a great deal of thought went into the reading
assignments, the project assignments, etc. there is much to
do, but I feel like I am learning a lot, and I am enjoying
it much more than I expected that I would. thank you for your”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
06/02/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“The course is very well-organized, and the case studies really
"make" the class. When you read the book and lectures, it
can be a bit dry and academic, but the case studies apply what
seem to be rather simple concepts to very real (and challenging).
The case study group consensuses are a bit cumbersome, but
I can see how it may help to see how others approached the problems.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
06/02/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I believe the workload is too big and this makes you run through
the materials without even thinking. there are many sources
of info at a distance of multiple mouse clicks and even the
process of finding these different materials and running/reading
through them (e.g. forums) consumes an enormous amount of time
(which is clearly above 12 hours per week!
Forums could help but there are too many questions to discuss
and interaction with faculty is kept at a minimum.
Live interaction with monitors could actually help make time
more effective since the issues discussed are very interesting.
the difficult thing here is to make people take the most assuming
time available is limited, conflicts with professional life
and the oher class assignments...”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
06/03/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Also I believe the .evaluation process. ends up taking too
much of the students time.
Focus should be learning and evaluating learning and not the
evaluating process. Since the workload is big (evaluations,
forums, case, exams (and sometimes all at the same time!),
the work is tightly structured and groups are also very big,
it is hard to see how evaluations can effectively supplement
the evaluation as a whole. (I mean, to have a significant ppv!
so once again useful time could be used to make people learn
instead of the intricate process of cross evaluations and also
cross works by the way (since when you finish you may have
gone too fast through too many important things).
Besides, discussing issues in the forum between people that
have very asymmetric information may not be very useful or
productive. In fact I believe we could learn more with moderator-led
discussions that could highlight specific points critical
to the understanding of epidemiological science and also keep
people participating. And they could do it interactively. And
this would clearly make people learn more than following a
thread of 12 (or more) questions in a forum with multiple additional
questions and calculations. Since this process is in itself
very long and time consuming it diminishes the ability to establish
interaction among the members of the group.”
|
|
(anonymous)
(HowAreThings1,
Internet course,
06/06/2006)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I've enjoyed our group and the discussions. As I said above,
I do enjoy it when all members contribute to the questions
rather than assigning questions to members. I might be assigned
Q 12 - which may contain a subject where I am weak and have
little to contribute, but I would have really been brilliant
on Q 11 had I been asked about my answer. The group discussion
is a good teaching tool. As an aside, assignments overlap at
quite a rapid pace in this course. I wish we had the week for
the exam with out Chapters and Case Study too. My head is spinning!
(But I was warned it was a challenging coarse).”
|
|
Dorothy,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Anna
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/08)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Generally, this group has been pretty supportive of one another,
and good about communicating. We are still trying to balance
coming up with consensus answers--one week there were 150 new
messages when I first checked and had to really hunt to get
a word in. Last week, we had to do a little prodding to get
a consensus on certain answers. But, overall, most people seem
to be reading and understanding the material.”
|
|
Elizabeth,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Anna
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/10)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I like the consensus answer format. Textbook is easy to read,
good examples.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/10)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I really like the structure of this class, in that so many
internet classes often lose the "close-knit" feel, this one
encourages you to use the groups, TAs, and instructors as a
resource instead of relying on just the text.”
|
|
Anna,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Brooke
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/08)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I think the class and the groups are too large for productive
on-line learning and interactions.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/06)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I think this was very difficult to do after-the fact. It would
be great to have an evaluation form in each case discussion
while fresh and we could submit in a timely manner. This way
one had to go through the threads of the case discussions again
to get information.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/11)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Course materials and assignments seem unnecessarily complex
and numerous.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/05)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Of all of the online courses, this is by far the best group
of students to work with. All seem supportive and helpful.
Not the usual cut throat competition that is found in some
groups.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/13)
|
|
______________________________
|
“My group is truly outstanding. However, it seems like certain
group members go a little overboard with their amount of participation.
I hope that is not what I have to measure up to, but instead,
the original 2-3 quality posts a per discussion forum.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/07)
|
|
______________________________
|
“It is a lot of work leading a discussion forum. I felt like
I could not devote the time I needed to focus on my weekly
assignment. It seems like something the teacher or teacher
assistant should be doing.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/09)
|
|
______________________________
|
“This is an amazing learning experience, but no one should consider
this "easier" than classroom based course. I have found the
attempts to form consensus answers for the case studies to
be very challenging. Grouping them all at the front end makes
it even more difficult. Perhaps they could be spread further
apart.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/09)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I would appreciate more of Cal's input, both in helping us
improve the process of discussions and in understanding class
content. I feel like we've been left to struggle on our own
a bit. I'm learning a lot in this course. I already feel more
qualified to interpret research studies and know that what
I'm learning will help me enormously in implementing my screening
program. I appreciate the challenging assignments (much as
they frustrate me at times!).”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/08)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Karminder keeps up and ahead of things with prompt responce
and feedback. I am at the end of the MPH program and Karminder
is among the most timely and responsive of all TAs I have had
at UNC.”
|
|
Frank,
MPH student,
HPAX,
TA: Karminder
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/11)
|
|
______________________________
|
“In general, the discussions have been great and I have enjoyed
reading everyone's contributions.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/09)
|
|
______________________________
|
“It's early in the semester and I have found this course enjoyable
but time consuming. I'm struggling with some of the rigid deadlines
but will continue to make every effort to adapt. I'm a bit
surprised at the highly scientific nature of our readings.
The reading volume is arguably excessive and the difficulty
in maintaining pace is only intensified by the enormous e-mail
volume (150+/week) generated on a weekly basis, all to be consumed
in a four day span. My classmates have been very productive
but the large majority seem to not be putting maximal effort
into the course, per the scale on the peer eval. Personally,
I hope the first four case studies are no reflection of how
I perform over the remainder of the semester. Kristal, thank
you for all your assistance.”
|
|
Michael,
MHA student,
HPAX,
TA: Kristal
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/10)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Our group had did not participate as well in the Week 4 discussion
compared to Week 3. I believe that this might be due to the
students being overwhelmed by the amount of posting needed
to discuss questions and arrive at a consensus. It seems as
though we were "burned out" from the Week 3 discussion. Perhaps
only selected questions could be discussed for each case study.
Of course, this could be because of our group approach to the
organization of consensus discussions, so we'll see what happens
with Week 5 discussion.”
|
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/06/08)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Anna was a wonderful TA. She always went above and beyond to
answer our questions and concerns thoroughly. She provided
quick responses and timely feedback. Thanks, Anna!”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/02)
|
|
______________________________
|
“We had fewer group discussions in the second half so less to
consider. I enjoyed everyone in the group - each having a lot
of experience to draw on and opinions to share. All very respectful.”
|
|
Dorothy,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Anna
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/07)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I know that I gave everyone 5's, but I seriously think that
this was a great group to work with. I learned a lot from everyones
ideas, insights and comments and I really enjoyed our weekly
discussions.”
|
|
Elizabeth,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Anna
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/07)
|
|
______________________________
|
“For the most part our group worked great together in discussions.
Everyone adding in their personal experiences made the discussions
stronger.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/01)
|
|
______________________________
|
“A lot of work! But..........I learned a lot about Epi. Anna
was awesome.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/01)
|
|
______________________________
|
“This course was taught at a high level. Students were pushed,
and learned a lot about epidemiology as a result. I can't think
of a course in which I learned more. My only recommendation
would be for the faculty to be a little more involved in the
discussion groups. I thought that they were interesting, but
had a bit of a "blind leading the blind" character at times.
An occasional post would also help the students feel more connected
to the instructors, I think.”
|
|
Thomas,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Brooke
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/03)
|
|
______________________________
|
“This group got along well and tended to pitch in and help each
other out. The group was very diverse in backgrounds and had
a variety of perspectives. I thoroughly enjoyed working with
my group and learning from them.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/09)
|
|
______________________________
|
“I thought the class was very fair. High amount of workload--almost
too much-- but I appreciated the attitude of helpfulness the
instructor and TA's brought to the course.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/06)
|
|
______________________________
|
“This group was very insightful and I learned quite a bit from
team members, especially in the last discussion forum. Our
broad range of backgrounds added a lot of "flavor" to each
discussion.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/03)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Given the limitations of a completely on-line course, it has
been an amazing learning and growth opportunity for me, as
well as lot of hard work. Don't plan on a vacation if you are
taking this in the summer!”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/08)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Enjoyable class. Thanks to Vic and Cal for all their work.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/07)
|
|
______________________________
|
“It's been a pleasure... glad it's over. thanks.”
|
|
Aaron,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Cindy
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/07)
|
|
______________________________
|
“Kristal, thank you for all your efforts this semester.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/04)
|
|
______________________________
|
“It was a little difficult to follow the rating guide for evaluating
each group member on question one. While contributions were
generally well thought out and added to the discussion, this
group did not have long discussions as has been the case with
other courses. During some forums, there wasn't enough discussion
to make more than one contribution.”
|
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2006/08/02)
|
(An additional 10 comments were received but the students did not
authorize their dissemination.)
2006b,
compiled 06/20/2006,08/13/2006 |