Student comments from EPID600 Fall 2007

(in random order - click here for date order)

(About student comments)

______________________________

84: “Course is confusing in the following ways, the original syllabus was confusing in layout, the submission dates for tests and answer sets weren't explained fully in the beginning, and one point- attendance? Kind of a bummer that people are paying money for a graduate degree and not taking in the class, plus the prevalence of people using facebook or emailing during lecture is distracting.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/4/2007 12:52:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

77: “It will be helpful to maintain a current list of the group in Blackboard. Please make sure that all the slides all well-recorded.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/08)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

69: “Our TA, Emily, was terrific throughout the course from beginning to end. Always willing to help us understand difficult concepts and questions, but in a way that allowed us to figure it out on our own. She was great!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

72: “This was a great class - wish i could have taken it in person! Kelly is a great TA and very helpful... i think i was blessed with the discussion group i was in - they were all superstars!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

50: “Many of the questions asked in the labs can stimulate a lot of discussion, usually due to their ambiguity. I think it was good to talk about these questions at length, but my group and I always felt pressed for time and ultimately had to rush through the last questions.”
Mike, PHD student, NUTR, TA: Chris (2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/06)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

92: “Interesting course.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/9/2007 11:00:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

29: “This is my second online class ever, and I think it is very well set up. There was no discussion between the class members in my last class, and it was hard to tell what was going on. I feel in the know and excited about this class. I also feel everyone does their best to make sure they are a good and helpful member of the group. I feel like I'm almost an epid 600 groupie, I check my group site at least every night to see what my group members are saying. It's a lot of fun to me.”
Erika, MS student, BIOS, TA: Emily (1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/16)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

58: “I enjoyed the format of the course”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/02)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

31: “The course is great so far. I am learning a lot. Thanks!”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

91: “This is a great course that helped me learn how to read scientific journal articles.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/7/2007 4:29:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

120: “Please vet the teaching assistants better - my TA could not present materials well, could not explain concepts and was reluctant to provide us with any assistance during labs, which was our only opportunity to truly understand the materials. Additionally, the website, while comprehensive, is not organized clearly - please put everything in one place, with due dates more clearly indicated.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

115: “Exams were very long (took between 20-30 hours) which I thought was very excessive.The course webpage and blackboard site are very confusing; hard to find information.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

85: “I liked doing the case studies for the most part. Sitting in lecture isn't fun for me. I like being able to apply material that we learn in lecture into something practical. I feel like some of the case studies were bad. In fact I wonder how some of them got funded in the first place. I feel like some of them showed that if you look hard enough for something then there is a potential for any and everything to make you sick. I look forward to taking more EPID classes. Overall my experience was intellectually stimulating and challenging.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/5/2007 7:18:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

110: “I enjoyed this course. Particularly the group recitations. It facilitated my understanding of the subject.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

109: “1. For all the work and time that is put into the group case studies--both individual time and effort as well as group time and effort--the group work should count for more than 10% of the grade! A weight of at least 20% would more appropriately represent this portion of the class. 2. I was grateful to have no case study during the weeks of exam 1 and exam 2. However, there was a full case study assigned the week exam 3 was due. Even if work has begun on exam 3 from the start of the semester, some que stions and other finishing touches will be done the week exam 3 is due. Therefore, I would suggest either eliminating the case study during that week or at least scaling it down in length or difficulty. 3. For the future, I would suggest not including more than two multiple choice questions on any given exam. When there is no opportunity to gain partial credit, it's either all or nothing--and that can hurt a student when the question has a significant point value.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

8: “I really enjoy this class and the group discussions are so useful.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

103: “lectures need to be simplified. excess information confuses.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/5/2007 12:22:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

15: “I am really enjoying the course thus far. Professor Schoenbach keeps lectures engaging and uses examples that are applicable to everyday life.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/22)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

30: “The online program is amazing. I was concerned about consensus work but it really works out well. The knowledge of the group and contributions everyone makes really works well. Professionals that need to get a thorough set of skills in Epidemiological research under their belts should look at this program.”
Monica, CERT student, FEPI, TA: Emily (1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

128: “This questions for the case studies and exams were better suited to individuals with prior exposure to epidemiology rather than an intro class. I would have gotten more from lab had we been able to go over the questions with the TA and providing answers.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

4: “Maybe when we do the review slides in the beginning of lab, to go a little slower, just so we can copy things down and absorb them - I felt like this week's was a little rushed. But Anjum is very good! :)”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

70: “Make no mistakes about it, this is a hard course! In particular the case study questions and exams, are structured to truly make you apply what you "think you know." There were many times, I thought I understood something after reading it but quickly realized when attempting the case study questions that I needed to re-read the material or seek supplemental help. That said, Dr. Vic, you provided ample examples and tools to help us understand it. My TA was awesome and very approachable and very responsive. Plus, my group was very supportive and members sought to make sure that we understood the concepts and their application. Even when I went out on a limb to answer a question (knew I wasn't doing it correctly), my group mates encouraged me and prompted/pointed me until I figured it out. Although the material is challenging, the resources and support system serve to enhance the learning experience. I've been out of school for almost a decade and was apprehensive but soon realized that we are set up to succeed in this course. Thanks!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/11)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

99: “I thought the course was pretty great. I found most of the case studies incredibly interesting. My only critique would be to make the lab that addresses exam 3 earlier in the semester. It would have made it a lot easier to get a solid headstart on it.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/6/2007 1:46:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

137: “Perfect for a health policy student. It allowed me to gain an appreciation for the field of epidemiology without having to become a scientist at it.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

123: “I thought this class being an intro and required for most people shouldn't have been so time consuming. The tests were just way too long.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

97: “It may help to have the lab section that the TA's teach go over what was just talked about in lecture rather than waiting a week- this may help keep larger ideas clear.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/5/2007 4:29:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

126: “The structure of this course put the onus of learning on the students in such a way that I spent hours trying to figure out case study answers alone, then with my recitation group. I was highly frustrated by the TA and professor being unwilling to give dir ect answers, that they deducted points in exchange for answers about tests and that correct answers for case studies weren't available until 1-2 weeks after the work was turned in -- by which point I was struggling to understand yet another case study. The syllabus was insanely confusing and I felt like this class was a huge frustrating waste.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

132: “The website was a little confusing, but overall a GREAT course!”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

66: “The course was very interesting and fun. The math was overwhelming but the course readings were informative and will help me in my career.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

55: “This group always worked very well together, respected each other answers, and learned from each other.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

93: “My favorite class was the outbreak investigation one, with the guest speaker.....the subject matter was fascinating.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/10/2007 4:39:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

68: “I was very intimidated at the beginning of the course. EPID600 is my first class in 10 years! Luckily, Dr. S and Emily were very encouraging and responsive to any questions. The course covers A LOT of material, but I think the case studies and group work (which I am generally not a fan of)helped make sense of many of the concepts. The feedback on the exams was excellent - never have I had such a detailed response to my work.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

134: “This course could have been a lot better if it had been more of an Introduction to Epidemiology and it's role in the world, rather than an in-depth class that confused the graduate students who have had more experience than the undergraduates. I never wan ted to come to class because I hate being read to in a monotone voice. This is not engaging. I was really looking forward to this class at the beginning of the year, but was sorely disappointed this semester. The class was more frustrating than interest ing. Tests were subjective, yet were still counted wrong for thoughtful ideas. My interpretation of epidemiology was different than the professor's.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

52: “EPID600 is a great class that really gives you a great set of skills to deal with a variety of public health issues.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

121: “This class needs to be restructured for everyone to get something out of it. Because this topic is not the career choice of the students required to enroll in this class, it may be beneficial to have a basic class -- something like "epidemiology for dummie s"”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

34: “It is much easier to evaluate the students who are always in the same group of questions as myself, as there is more dialogue between us.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

80: “In general, rating "participation on group discussion forums" by using "missed __ or more discussion forms ..." was difficult when students dropping out of the class/forum was not something shared with the other members of the group, i.e. somewhere along in the semester, a student's name would just disappear off the list -- if one noticed -- but it was difficult to know if they were a non-participant due to leaving the course or just missing the forum.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

35: “So far, so good. This is my second course online through the Core Concepts program and I am definitely learning how to adapt to an online forum class. EPI600 is definitely more thought provoking than other courses, but I am enjoying the case study analysis approach to this course.”
Harold, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Sarah (1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

42: “Susan has been great for answering all questions, and she has tact. She does a good job of guiding the group when we are not on track. I think Vic should give her a raise.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

78: “Great class. Challenging for my first internet class, but I learned a lot.”
Chris, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Susan (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

82: “Susan is the absolute best! If every teaching assistant were as responsive and as positive as she is, we would all be incredibly successful. Susan has the ability to point you in the right direction while still requiring you to think for yourself.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

117: “The course web site was cumbersome. Please change the course schedule to make it more like a syllabus. Label course modules by week number. May work better to separate online coursework from classroom information. Case study articles did not always relate to the questions. Written feedback for individual case study questions would be helpful. Textbook was straightforward.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

73: “Kelly is a super TA. She was always helpful and assisted the forum discussions appropriately. She responded to questions and email quickly. I feel her assistance was invaluable to my learning.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

102: “The course material was generally interesting. I was often frustrated by the tests--the amount of time that they took and the idea that any reason, no matter how inane, warranted an extension. It made it difficult to force myself to find the time to work the exam. I also did not like the times scheduled for the case study modules--I thought it was too late in the evening (I often missed the last bus). However, the material covered in them and what I learned in doing them was very useful and I learned a lot from doing them as well as from other members of my group.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/3/2007 8:34:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

131: “The case studies were extremely frustrating and time consuming. It felt like a puzzle in which I had to search for clues rather than really learn the material.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

105: “The lab should be worth more. I put more work into the lab as a whole than any other assignment in the class.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/6/2007 10:41:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

47: “Enjoyed the course. Thank you for an enjoyable semester and worthwhile class.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

90: “The exam hints were often unhelpful.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/7/2007 3:38:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

133: “This introductory course in epidemiology was intellectually stimulating and a true learning experience for several reasons. The lecturer did a great job of introducing the fundamentals and getting students to apply concepts. It was hands-on, challenging an d truly invigorating. However, the course needs considerable reorganization unless its name could be changed to "EPID600 for those who care about biostatistics more than anything else." Epidemiology rests on the shoulders of basic mathematics, and a mathem atical approach to the science is inevitable. But this course placed disproportionate weight on quantitative problem solving at the expense of conceptual understanding. Clearly, Vic's Cartesian approach to course design is commendable, but it leaves much t o be desired. A couple of cursory lectures on epidemiology for public health that wrapped up the course hardly does justice to the role this discipline plays in shaping global public health.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

62: “This was the toughest class I have taken so far. That is a good thing because it challenged me to think, a lot. The TA was supportive, helpful, and available to help which was great. This class requires a large amount of time and focus, but it is well worth it.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

61: “Despite the challenges of the study subject, this has been the best class I have taken of the core certificate program classes. The use of case study as a way of teaching the subject matter has been most effective. If not anything, at least I can walk away knowing that I am not intimidated by peer reviewed journals anymore! Arigato, Si'yabonga(Zulu, SA/Zim), Ame'segenalehu(Amharic-Eth) ,Asante Sana (Kiswahili) and Sala Kahle”
Bemnet, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Bradley (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

81: “This was a great class... my first internet one. You guys not only brought out the material but made it come alive. A special thanks to Susan. She's sharp, has a good heart and even though I couldn't read it, I think I heard her laugh a few times.”
Roger, CERT student, FEPI, TA: Susan (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

101: “I enjoyed the format of the course lectures and case studies. This was the first time in college that I had weekly group work, and it was definitely a great experience. Our group dynamic was wonderful!”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/3/2007 12:14:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

5: “Originally I was not looking forward to these group meetings due to negative experiences in past group based work. However, my group is outstanding! Everyone is prepared, actively involved, friendly, and efficient. Those who have missed meetings have notified us a week in advance and still submitted their answers to the case study to other members via email. Even though they may not have physically been present during the meeting, their input was still available. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, if someone has a question there is always a member who helps explain how and why the group has arrived at a particular answer.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

125: “great course; wouldn't change a thing.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

135: “This class was a great introductory course. I heard some students complain about the amount of work, but I was fine with it. I would say that there should be more incentive for going to lecture, extra hints, tips, etc. for the test as otherwise, the PPTs a re all available online and there is little incentive to attend.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

13: “I feel very comfortable with going to Pam with questions. She makes herself very available to us as a group and individually. She also does a good job of summarizing concepts at the beginning of recitation section. Great job overall!”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

65: “I would strongly recommend that you re-examine the expected workload. I found it very difficult to absorb and truly learn the material as we were on a crazy pace to complete the case studies. As much as I looked forward to this course I am disappointed in the return on investment.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/11/29)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

113: “This was a very challenging course, the workload was very heavy and the lecturer tended to make things more difficult than they sometimes needed to be. He was a little absrract.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

108: “Best part: funny jokes Worst part: long, tedious take-home exams that had way too many tricks in them and were poorly designed for people who were not good at math and were just taking epid 600 for general SOPH requirements, test questions did not adequat ely assess what we had learned in our case studies”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

14: “I find that having the powerpoint slides--both class and lab--available on the internet very helpful. It's nice when we are away from class to have that information available to us.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

43: “Great information. Learning more than I ever thought! One suggestion I would make is to have a preprinted course pack to purchase with all of the materials in it that are not in the text. I spend a lot of time looking for material, printing, organizing, etc the loose internet material that could be spent on studying. I hope I didn't miss it if it's available, but all the bookstore sent was the text.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

136: “Workload is far too great for a three credit course. Exams were not useful-- more likely to be a wild goose chase on google than applied concepts from the book.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

89: “great job!”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/7/2007 12:51:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

64: “I enjoyed working with each and every person in group 4.”
Jeanne, CERT student, FEPI, TA: Emily (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

88: “Thank you!”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/6/2007 5:29:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

57: “My group was good! We generally worked well together.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

100: “Case studies were very involved but I learned a lot.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 11/29/2007 11:53:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

86: “The lectures were paced far to slow. The case studies involved more busy work than problem solving .”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/5/2007 9:23:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

40: “It is enjoyable to participate in this course, but sometimes I am really confused with some facts, because it is my first time with epidemiology, and occasionally I do not understand all the concepts used. I am improving.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

124: “I understand that the slides with notes are posted for convenience, but I really found it hard to stay focused and pay attention in lecture when the instructor simply read the notes section of the slides in powerpoint. It was kind of boring.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

41: “Overall I feel that everyone does well in the discussion forums. I think that it can be a little difficult to evaluate others based on their answers because the first person to answer the question is most likely to get the higher grade. I usually get online on Sunday night or Monday mornings due to my work schedule, by this time the first person as answered and if you agree or had the exact same calculations and answers there is not much more to say other than "i agree". I mean you could just retype the calculation, but that does not really add to the discussion.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

22: “You guys are great! I'm really enjoying this class so far!”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

118: “The structure of lab sections and grading for lab sections could be improved.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

3: “Tough class, but interesting!!!”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/22)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

51: “Chris was always very helpful, and the powerpoint presentations he provided us with were very useful in further understanding the material. He was especially helpful when he met with me the week that I was a facilitator, helping me make sure that I understood all the concepts well. He was a great TA overall.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/10)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

95: “lectures were very helpful and brief and it was good. Thanks!”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/1/2007 7:37:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

98: “By the end of the semester I was very tired of completing case studies! They were good preparation for the exams, but a little more variety in lab would have been appreciated.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/6/2007 12:31:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

94: “Thought the case studies were great ways to really understand the material!!!”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/10/2007 9:57:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

46: “EPID 600 is one of the most useful classes that Ive had at UNC. It gives a good basis for thinking about scientific studies as well as how to read scientific articles.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

96: “Case studies were very helpful.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/2/2007 4:21:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

23: “Hi Emily, I must admit that I really only have a very general feeling of everybody. I think it is too short of a time for me to get more than that. Everyone in my group has participated in each question in each module. I feel like I am still trying to really understand the material so it is hard for me to judge how well someone else knows it. This is my first internet class, and I must tell you, I am really pleased with how personal it is. I really have learned from what others have said, or how they answered the questions. The accessibility of you and Vic is also a pleasant surprise. Even though I am still trying to balance the time, and I find the class very challenging, I am enjoy it, and learning a lot. Thanks, Jeanne”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/16)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

26: “The way the case study individual submittals are set up, one only has a few hours after work on Friday evening to read the case study paper and solve the starred questions. The earlier part of the work week is used by students to go through the lecture materials and to read the book chapter. It would be better to extend the individual submittal deadline to sometime Saturday morning so that the student can either (1) stay up all night and finish answering the questions, or (2) read the case study the night before and get up early next morning to finish answering the questions. The jokes and observations in the PowerPoint slides are great. Keep 'em coming. Thanks.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

24: “Emily is doing an outstanding job of keeping our group in the loop. Her communication has been extremely helpful so far this semester. Vic is also very informative and has set-up a wonderful website that is completely separate from the dreaded Blackboard (a system that can sometimes be "down" for hours!). My only negative opinion about this course is that it feels like it goes by WAY too quickly! I feel as though I do not have enough time to really absorb everything before I start on the next module, and I feel like this is really preventing me from fully understanding everything. Now, mind you, I have been busy in my personal life so far this semester (captain of the soccer team, I moved into a new office building, and I just moved into my new house), so I believe that has a lot to do with it as well. But, still, it would be nice to go at a slower pace, just to make sure I understand everything. Thanks for everything so far! Fortunately, my life slows down after this weekend, so I will have to reread everything. :)”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

11: “My group is excellent. Everyone participates and does their homework prior to class. The group setting has been a great device for learning.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

56: “Great enthusiasm for teaching and followed every rule.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/06)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

130: “I think this is the worst class that I have taken in the UNC School of Public Health. The syllabus is confusing and it is easy to the wrong assigned case study for the week (this happened to several students in my small group). The course slides are good since they have verbatim lecture notes in the notes pages. However, the instructors method of lecture delivery is dry, monotonous, and needs to be re-invigorated somehow. These two points combined caused the majority of the class to stop attending lectu res and only attend recitation. The recitations were a good refresher and the small group work was where we really learned. The TAs should be encouraged to help the students out with the case studies instead of initally saying they can't offer any advice on answers. This did not help the learning process.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

38: “To be completely honest, I think the work load in this class is obscene. I initially bypassed this class somehow and wound up taking the following 3 Epidemiology courses over the past year and a half. Going back to this class, which is clearly a survey course, is actually more difficult because I had to learn preliminary material on my own in order to complete those other courses. Modules every week are very difficult, especially with another class. The sheer amount of reading alone makes this difficult. It is obvious to me this class is used to weed people out. I have done very well in all other classes and I am very afraid that this course is going to bring everything I have done so far down.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/16)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

63: “This class, EPID 600, was an eye opening experience for me. I have a new found respect for data collection and analysis!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/11)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

129: “The class was really useful, but the group case studies and exams were too long and involved. I had to struggle to finish them, instead of really being able to apply what I had learned to my other classes.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

76: “The has been the most through provoking class of my lifetime educational experience. I would strongly urge students to take the BIOStats course prior to this one, just to have a background in understanding the statistics references present in study material. However, it was never necessary in the course to have this background, another appreciated factor.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

111: “Dr. Schoenbach is a wonderfully gifted teacher. He actually made epidemiology interesting and worth learning.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

122: “Dr. Schoenbach is a great person! I enjoyed his lectures but they were rarely congruent with what was asked on the tests. The tests were ridiculously challenging and too much time was spent trying to decipher the question! Dr. S should pretest his tests fi rst.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

107: “the entire course felt like busy work. It is extremely nice to have the lecture notes online, but do not read them during lecture.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

119: “I really do not like the fact that this course is a combination of both graduates and undergraduates. As an undergraduate, I felt as though I did not have as much to contribute during the lab times, because most of my fellow students are much older and sma rter than I am in the field of epidemiology.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

33: “Depending how questions are divided up among group members this evaluation is biased towards contributions made on blackboard. While blackboard is the primary medium for group discussions, it is possible for individuals to have collaborated with others in the group over the phone or in private e-mails (especially if they are traveling). Such collaborations would not be known by the rest of the group.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

79: “This was an excellent class, and I really enjoyed the group work on the case studies. The readings were interesting, and the questions were relevant to the topics covered in the textbook and lectures. The case study work helped me to better understand the concepts and how they are applied in actual practice.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

12: “My group is great!”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/21)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

67: “I only wish I had more time to devote to the study of Epidemiology. The material was spot-on and the case studies interesting. The exams were challenging and stimulating and I learned as much from the 'Exam' experience as the course materials. If I had it to do over again I would reduce some of my other commitments to have time to more fully participate in the group discussions. I will be using the material learned in the class for years to come.”
Robert, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Emily (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

28: “So far, this class has been a challenge on many levels. The material is very interesting and sometimes I find it frustrating that just as I think we are getting to a place of understanding, we are moving on to something else. I do understand that this is a survey course and so it probably has to be that way, but the pace does not allow for any deeper examination of key issues. As always, the online discussions are somewhat difficult, given the complexity and amount of questions posed for each discussion. It may be better to consider fewer questions per module, to allow us the time to really examine the material and delve deeper into answering and understanding the questions posed. All in all, I have found it challenging but enjoyable and very interesting. On a side note - I found it difficult to judge and scale my fellow group members participation this early in the class. I hope I did it fairly. Thanks”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/22)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

104: “Lectures were concise and contained the most relevant information that would assist us on a particular case study.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/5/2007 1:56:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

27: “Emily has been great to gide us in the right direction and give us pointers.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/22)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

19: “I think our group has done a great job so far with the discussion. I think it takes some time getting used to this time of learning and communicating, but our TA and group have really worked hard!”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

87: “The case study & group work is a nice way to learn the material.”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/6/2007 2:08:00 AM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

7: “Anjum does a great job recapping all the information Vic goes over and is really helpful in pulling us into a quick discussion, and in acting as a sounding board as we figure stuff out on our own. She's great. Thanks!!!”
Stephen, MPH student, PUBH, TA: Anjum (1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

106: “Case studies were long, but informative and good preparation for exam material”
(taeval2, Classroom course, 12/11/2007 7:18:00 PM)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

112: “It would make more sense to focus on really understanding the concepts of epi instead of focusing on very small details. I felt the teaching was not effective at communicating the course material and was only able to grasp some of the concepts during the TA sessions. The overwhelming detail on the course materials also lead to confusion and ended up making it difficult to find important information because there was just so much information.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

45: “Each week so far I have lead my individual group and they have always been late with answering questions and so I have been forced to submit my own answers without group consensus on Monday nights which has been a bit frustrating but has forced me never the less to really sort the questions out by myself.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

32: “Kelly is working hard to keep us on track”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

114: “This course was absolutely terrible. First, why can't we have a single-page syllabus like any other class? Second, I've been taking classes for over 20 years and have never had trouble figuring out when an assignment is due. In this class, I got it righ t about 7/10 of the time and eventually totally gave up, especially after I emailed Vic and my TA and neither one could explain the syllabus to standard. Third, about 10% of this class' students care-- take it from someone who heard the behind-the-scenes talk. STOP GIVING US EXTRA WORK TO DO ASIDE FROM THE ASSIGNMENTS”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

48: “I believe that better case studies could be found for the various topics.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

116: “I was impressed with Vic's dedication to the course. He did more than teach an intro epi course, he got students working together to learn and engage in the material (through labs). This seems unusual in an intro course and it was much appreciated.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

2: “I appreciate the thoroughness of the instructions given for all assignments and lectures and can see how that cuts down on questions asked or need for clarifications; however sometimes the material is "crowded" and difficult to read. Lecture slides are very conscise and well formatted, however.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

127: “This course was incredibly difficult. I am a grad student in another program and spent 95% of my time on this class. Some of the work should be scaled back.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2007/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

37: “Great class ... case studies make us really learn the materials! And makes my head hurt :)”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

59: “Thank you for your efforts to help us better understand epidemiology. The case studies were excellent sources to help us learn the concepts.”
Kathryn, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Bradley (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

83: “Susan was an excellent TA. She always responded to e-mails very promptly. Her comments and suggestions were very helpful and led our group in the right direction without giving too much assistance. I think she did an outstanding job throughout the semester.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

44: “Undoubtedly, a superior format for learning from the highest caliber professor I have experienced. This course is first humbling and always challenging.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2007/09/19)
Order by date submitted.

(An additional 19 comments were received but the students did not authorize their dissemination.)

Back to top Information for students EPID160 home page

2007cd, compiled 12/18/2007