Student comments from EPID600 Fall 2008

(in random order - click here for date order)

(About student comments)

______________________________

85: “Overall the course was very good and challenging. I do feel however that being a required SPH course it could incorporate other departmental focuses into the case studies. As a HPM student I would have loved to have looked at the hospital example of epidemiology and the role it plays in modern medicine. Other than that the course is well set up.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

21: “A bit of a rough start as in any course new. Thanks to the TA and professor for helping during the rough begining. I think many/most of us have a handle of this course now. I know I do.”
Moses, MPH student, HPAX, TA: Atu (1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

81: “I think the online notes were fantastic. When Vic let us know that those notes contained much of what he covered in class along with the supplemental material on his website, I decided not to attend class and just do the online content he had and felt that I still gained a lot of learning and was able to keep up with it as much as any of the other students. I feel that this online content is really the strength of the class.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

108: “While I learned a lot through the coursework of the class, I felt the workload was a bit heavier than most 3 hour courses. I also felt inundated with announcements, emails, articles, folders, and blackboard resources. While I recognize the professor's good intentions in providing supplementary information, it is difficult to sort through extraneous data while searching for the necessary resources. Most students are extremely busy & could benefit by our professors setting a positive leadership example: Provide information in a clear and succinct manner, proving more efficient for all.

On a positive note, it is evident how much Vic cares for his students and aims to accommodate each and every one of us. Thanks for helping me learn about epidemiology this semester!”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

18: “Dear Atu, Thanks for your constructive feedback on our discussion board, the encouragement you give to the discussion facilitators, your genuine kindness and demonstrated interest in our succeeding in this course, the promptness of your correspondence, and the significant amount of time you invest in assisting us. You're a great TA. Thanks.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

31: “The lectures and materials are very well done. I have used many of the external links as well. I am becoming more confident in evaluating the scientific literature.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

14: “I like the "cooperative learning" method used in the class. It simulates the decision-making process groups face in real-life situations.”
Jim, PHD student, NUTR, TA: Leah (1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/16)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

101: “This course was very helpful to understand epidemiological concepts. I appreciated reading case study articles from many different disciplines, as it is easier for me to understand concepts with concrete examples. My TA, Leah Sirkus, did an amazing job at clarifying what could occasionally be a verbose and complicated lecture from Vic (only because he knows so much and wants us all to understand).”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

97: “This class was great, but all of the web related instructions were pretty complicated. I realize that the web helps keep everything organized for the TA's and for Dr. Schoenbach, but it was a little overboard at times.

Learned a lot in the class... Dr. Schoenbach and Ahinee were great.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/04/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

42: “Leah is an excellent TA. Her slides are clear, thorough, helpful. Her explanations always clarified problems, and she was always accessible. Leah would make a great professor! And Vic, your class slides were always interesting, if a bit confusing at times. I like how the class is structured so that there are many ways to learn the material- from the book, from lecture, from case studies and each other. Thanks for introducing me to Epidemiology!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

51: “Overall, Group 1 was not that active. We all could have done a better job of participating. The ratings I gave to everyone were all relative to each other. The probably wouldn't be that high if this group were compared to other online groups.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

52: “Overall, I truly enjoyed working with everyone. It was quite challenging and an experience that I have truly learned from. Thank you to all for making this class fun.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

72: “This was an excellent course. The organization, planning, and execution of the course were complex involving multiple learning tools and media, but it made the course easy to follow and very enjoyable. Performing calculations in the case studies helped me the most to understand basic epidemiologic concepts such as incidence and mortality rates. The TA's performance was excellent; she was very approachable, explained things in a simple manner, and made herself available for questions at all time. If I would change something it would be the proportion of the grade assigned to the case studies.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

84: “information is interesting but lectures are boring to the point that its nearly impossible to even stay awake much less listen attentively for an hour plus. Also group meetings are extremely tedious at terrible times. Exams are the only positive in the class as they force you to apply what you have learned in a practical sense”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

89: “The course was very well planned and explained. Improvements that could be made are to improve clarity in wording case study questions and exams. Overall, the course was thorough and very helpful in introducing non-epidemiology students to epidemiology. The instructor and both TAs were extremely helpful in explaining concepts and going out of their way to make sure that anyone who needed clarification on any concept or assignment received it.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

66: “Due to a few of us changing groups (including me), I am concerned that our evaluations from the new group we were placed in will be lower. I didn't receive a reminder email about who these members were and to take that into consideration when going back over the forums. Just wanted to put that out there....thanks.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/02)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

96: “This class was extremely difficult. I am a graduate student, so I expected this. I think that it was too difficult for undergraduate students, especially if this was their first epi course. I didn't like the constant dependence on online systems. I also didn't like that the professor read from a script during lecture. It made the lectures very dry. I also didn't like that we were charged for help on exams. That doesn't encourage students to seek help to better understand concepts. I also think that the case studies should make up a greater percentage of the overall grade. There is so much work that goes into completing them and they are a very small portion of our grade!”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

62: “Wow!! This was an exhaustingly difficult class, as I often felt I was learning a new language. Despite that, I learned a great deal and a whole new window has opened for me. Thanks!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

36: “I found this course to be very demanding overall in the case studies and especially exams. In fact, I think I managed to obtain about 70% most of the time (when I felt like I was putting in 150% effort). But I have such a greater understanding of research literature. I hope to be able to contribute these concepts when I return to the public health field. I think I have learned, the most out of any intro course I have ever taken. The instructor is just amazing in his willingness to make every resource available (lecture slides, additional exam info, questions, resources, guest speakers) Also- as hard as the exams are, they truly pull the concepts together. Great job TA's!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/26)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

40: “The course is very challenging but also very rewarding. I thought the structure of the course (case studies, take home exams, group work) was excellent and provided an optimal learning environment while at the same time spacing out the concepts and work adequately to give everyone time to grasp the concepts. In my opinion the course is a model of how epidemiology should be taught.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/24)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

90: “The course was well executed and material was stimulating. TA was great!”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

102: “This course was very useful to me as a student. I was forced to think critically, effectively manage my time and the course load, and work well with a group to reach a weekly goal. Initially I thought this course was too hard and that the amount of reading was ridiculous. Now, I think Vic (and the TAs) did an amazing job of covering a great deal of very difficult material in a relatively short period of time. Unlike some other courses that I have taken with a lot of reading and exams, I feel like I actually engaged this material and can draw on what I've learned well into the future instead of just "brain-dumping" on the exam and forgetting it all a day later.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

39: “I really lucked out with my group. They were all wonderful and am thankful to have had the chance to get to know them.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

46: “A great class for the development of critical thinking skills--you will graduate from it more adept at pinpointing weaknesses in articles of any scholastic discipline, and at reading statistics for "meaning"”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

100: “This course was really great; however, I ended up learning more in the recitations than I did from the class. The powerpoints were well put together but were overwhelming at times. I found that class wasn't really helpful to me. I would definitely recommend the class to other students because it included a lot of interesting material and I got to learn something new.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

92: “The notes for this course were fair and the TA notes were above average. The exams were far too difficult. This was definitely a class where the amount of work required exceeded the benefits of the course. I do not feel that putting more effort into learning and applying the material would have made an improvement in my grade. The assigned questions were vague and unclear. I took a long time to think about them, but often my answers were not what the question was supposed to be asking. I asked questions about the assignments, but the hints given did not help lead me in the right direction. I tried to learn from my wrong answers, but the correct answers were often vague or similar. I could have asked more questions afterward but did not feel that it would increase my knowledge or improve my grade enough to be worthwhile. It is hard to be able to answer questions about journal articles at the level asked without previous field experience in epidemiology. I feel that the introductory course for epi majors would be better for undergraduates, since it covers more about models used to do research which may give more understanding about the field. My performance in this class has discouraged me from reading journal articles even with notes present, because I'm afraid I will miss something and determine and incorrect conclusion. I also feel like I am never supposed to believe any study now. The benefits of epidemiological studies were emphasized in class but a little more needs to be represented in assignment questions.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

64: “This class is challenging to complete on line, as I'm sure you know. I think that quidance is the key to helping with some of these challenging concepts. Our TA was willing to help when called upon, but when there was certain struggles within the group questions, more quidance would have been helpful - like "looks like you are on the right tract" or "why don't you refocus your attention here". I know this would have helped me and given some boosts when things became challenging! Of course, by no means do I mean give the answer! This would take the fun out of learning. Thanks - all in all I learned a lot!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

35: “Ginger was a fantastic TA. She was very helpful during lab by helping us work through the questions that we were struggling with. The mini-lectures were also a great resource, and the final "performance" was, well, inspiring.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/04)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

95: “The presentation of concepts during lecture was not always clear. Most of learning of concepts occured between the reading and TA sessions. I would also recommend that TA's present the same concepts that are presented in lecture so information is well defined prior to working on case studies. I felt that this class also heavily relied on group learning and self learning through doing the case studies, there was little immediate feed back interms of assessing if the concepts had truly been learned and understood.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

106: “Vic is great.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

71: “EPID 600 is the first course for which I skipped class sessions without a reason (like a doctor's appointment, conference, etc.). As a graduate student, I think that says something. I'm not talking about the availability of verbatim speaker's notes online - if someone learns better on their own, that's fine. I personally learn better in class. I thought that the material was generally interesting and will prove useful in my career, so I usually made the effort to attend. However, the way that the lectures were structured did not encourage attedence and participation in the least. Having the final submitted before Thanksgiving made the last two classes seem like a poor use of time. I realize that the outbreak lecture should have been one of those classes, and I hope that the schedule will work out like that in the future since that lecture was not only interesting but applicable to an upcoming assignment.

Given that lecture attendence is so low, I think it would be feasible and certainly helpful to make the class more participatory. It was easy to fade a little over the hour-and-a-half when there was no possibility of being called on to speak. / / I enjoyed the case studies. They sometimes made me want to pull out my hair, but I really learned the material doing them. I appreciate that the class was not about memorizing formulae but instead applying the material to better understand real world problems and epidemiology research.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

53: “It is a shame that in the end, what we have learned in this course will be reflected in a grade. I do not know how you can grade team work, feedback from discussions, courtesy, open and logical disagreement on questions. There is no way that grades capture these, but I understand there needs to be a grade even if exams will never be an adequate measurement of ones understanding of the course material. A lot of credit to the TA's, especially ours: Atu. With English as a second language, her deliberate way of speaking kept pace with allowing concepts to be absorbed. Maybe because I am local, I enjoyed her willingness to give me her time. And I hope others will take advantage of on campus meetings with TA's if their time allows.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/21)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

98: “This class was very, very time consuming. The assignments were helpful learning tools, and the case studies were interesting, but I spent more time on this class than any of my other classes. The tests took an obscene amount of time. I do feel like I learned a lot, though, and it has really made me question what I hear about "study results" in the media (I'd rather read the actual study and crunch the numbers myself). The mini-lectures in lab were really helpful. I liked that they are a week after the actual lectures, but on the other hand they would be helpful to have before doing the case study relevant to that topic.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

32: “So far I have been really impressed with how well the online group seems to work - it was a logistical challenge at first but all members have been contributing and submitting answers/comments as necessary. Having a "facilitator" assigned by the TA for each week was helpful.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

73: “I did not find the course to be intellectually stimulating. Also the format used on the internet to turn in our test and assignments was poorly designed and frustrating to use. Some of the questions are graded automatically by the computer which leaves little room for mistakes and only allows for answers by the book. A more personal grading system or another approach to turning in our assignments would be more helpful.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

107: “Vic is very obviously an expert in epidemiology--this is evident in every one of his lectures and all of his examples. He is an excellent speaker and handled questions from students well. However, the course could have benefited if the PowerPoint presentations were decreased in length. He was simply too constrained by time to treat each concept in each lecture thoroughly. I think this course would be improved by focusing on the concepts and theories that are most difficult for students to comprehend, with much less emphasis on the topics which can easily be self-taught by reading the textbook. Of course, it was part of the TA's job to highlight the important aspects of each of Vic's lectures and the explain the difficult concepts, but it just seemed like there was too much information that was condensed into each lecture. Vic needed to talk at a rapid pace at all times to even touch on every slide.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

91: “The lecture part of the course was not nearly as good as the recitation. I attended all the lectures even though it was not necessary to, and by attending I don't feel that it gave me any advantage as far as knowing the material any better because it was often presented in a confusing way. The recitation, however, presented the material overall in an easier to understand manner, and allowed for more questions and discussion. Overall, I enjoyed the course and would be interested in taking more epid classes.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

68: “I think that the class was interesting and it provided us with a good overview of epidemiology. The case studies were challenging but they were useful in explaining the matereial learned in class. For some of the case studies it felt as though we actually learned the material after we did the studies and I would have prefered that being the other way around. The instructor was extremely knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the subject. He was very respectful of others opinions. The instructor made himself available and was extremely supportive.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

38: “The recitation was very helpful!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

99: “This course was one of the most challenging one I've taken at UNC. The material was difficult sometimes and application of concepts wa challenging. Considering it was a graduate level course, the professor was fair and reasonable in configuring grades. He also presented the material in a structured and was presented in a form that was easier to understand given that undergraduates who were not EPID major were taking it. Overall I learned a lot from the course about public health and how certain factors affect populations. The work load was a lot at times, but I believe because of that I am a better work and a better critical thinker. I would recommend this course to others, but only if they have an interest in public health and don't mind a heavier work load.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

17: “This is a little more difficult than usual because some of the discussion goes on in smaller groups before posting.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/21)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

37: “Overall the class was outstanding, much more than I expected. The course is sometimes hard to follow with all the assignments and information posted on BB. If I would change something it would be the proportion of the grade assigned to the case studies. They required a lot of work.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/26)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

47: “Outstanding course.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/29)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

82: “I thoroughly enjoyed this course as an introduction to epidemiology. However, there were three areas I would like to comment upon:

1. The organization of the course on both blackboard and the couse website was extremely complicated and difficult to navigate.

2. There was also a disconnect between the lectures and the case studies. I found the recitations to be the most helpful. This course requires a solid investment of time both in the class and outside.

3. I found the exams to be extremely difficult and ill-prepared based on class and recitation time alone.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

88: “The course was extremely well organized. It was challenging for me because epidemiology is not my major, but help was accessible and I found the group completion of case studies to be a valuable learning experience. However, I did find the delivery of the lectures to be very confusing. I often did not really understand the concepts until the TA presented them the following week in lab. I found her powerpoints and explanations easier to understand. If I hadn't had the benefit of her presentations, I don't think I would have done as well in the course. That's probably because epidemiology is not my strength and Vic is clearly a genius at it, though.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

79: “I really liked the format of this course. One of the things that helped me learn the most was that the weekly groupwork continued to ask the same type of questions. For example, we were required to do risk ratios almost every week, not just the week that we learned about risk ratios. This repetition really helped enforce the lesson. However, i felt like some of the important topics from lectures weren't covered in the readings, which was unfortunate.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

45: “The best of the SPH core classes. The professor and TAs were outstanding. Their level of preparation and committment to learning was greatly appreciated.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/06)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

93: “The online class is structured very well and meets individual's schedule. It was definitely better for me since I am an introvert and don't like to speak out in front of people. So, the online discussion forum was a perfect way of learning in a group environment.

Vic was also very helpful and responsive to my questions and concerns, so I highly recommend this online class to those who need distance education or flexibility. [This evaluation apparently came from an online student who submitted the residential course evaluation form.]”
(courseeval, Internet course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

43: “The format for turning in assignments and test over the internet is extremely frustrating and cumbersome. Another way of approaching this task needs to be considered for future classes.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/01)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

28: “Sharon is always taking care of us, highly approachable and reachable. For one day, she did not have internet access and I was so impressed since she offered her cell phone in case we needed her. She is a great teacher and will not "just give you the answer", but actually give you tips to think about it and get it correctly or the most important detail: get the right way of analyzing and thinking about a problem/question. I am very happy with the course. I am sorry I cannot attend Vic classes due to my work, but the slides are definitely inspiring and I love the "global welcome" theme, with the greetings in several languages (well, being a foreigner myself, it feels nice). Thank you for this great opportunity!”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/15)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

23: “I have enjoyed both the teaching and TAing in this class, which seems to have a real culture of online presence and participation.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

103: “This course was, by far, the best of my first semester in the master's program. I was very impressed by how organized it was, the clear expectations for student learning, and the overall enthusiasm of the instructor. Vic is passionate about the field of epidemiology and is a masterful teacher. He stays focused on what is important and I got the feeling that he wants everyone in the class to succeed. The course seems structured to allow for different learning styles, as well. Overall it was a challenging introduction to epidemiology, and I appreciated the chance to gain new skills in a supportive environment.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

57: “I did the second evaluations based on the final set of discussions and not based on the overall set of discussions. Hope that was what was intended.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

34: “Ginger was a truly outstanding TA.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/25)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

49: “The class is effectively set up in order to convey the information. The information sessions before the recitation are also very beneficial to understanding epidemiology concepts.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/01)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

19: “The class content is very interesting and relevant to my job.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/21)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

87: “The course definitely gave me an opportunity to learn about important epidemiological issues and analytical tools. However, this class requires an inordinate amount of work and time. Since this class is taken primarily by non-Epid majors, it forces many of us to prioritize our departmental classes over this class since they are directly related to the job we will most likely take upon graduation. I think the information is very valuable, and it would be more effective if the workload was somewhat reduced, especially in the weekly cases.

The professor and the TAs for the class were really great and seemed to care a lot about our learning. Vic was great at making himself visible in the recitations and being available for the students.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

11: “This class is very challenging for me, but I'm also very impressed with the instructor, TAs and general format of the class. It is clear that the course has been "perfected" in terms of the use of online learning, yet you strike a good balance with the chance for in-person conversations during labs. I am working quite hard, but I genuinely feel like Vic and Leah want each of us to succeed in this course, without dumbing down the information. It's refreshing.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

70: “Enrolling in an introductory course, I expected the content in this class to be more of a comprehensive overview of epidemiological issues around the world and their implications on society. Instead, I had to sit through a semester where we were taught the tools that epidemiologist used to understand the spread of disease, but I came out with no practical understanding of what these tools could tell me. To clarify, most of our learning focused on calculating numbers, such as odds ratio, crude birth rate vs. age-specific birth rate, and incidence rate, as opposed to understanding what these numbers meant in the study, whether the study itself was set-up well, and whether the study's conclusions were valid or not. Out of the three exams, the third tested whether or not I could synthesize information a case study to determine whether the conclusions were appropriate and to understand the implications of the results, something I could see myself doing in a health policy-related career. The other two focused on mindless number crunching and topics too specific for me to care about.

Learning about epi through recent case studies seemed like a promising way of relate what we were learning to the real world. But these cases studies simply served the same purpose as word problems in a math class, giving me absolutely no insight on recent epidemiological topics in the world.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

63: “I did think that the class was very difficult - by far the most difficult of the five core online classes that I took. The amount of material was quite overwhelming, which didn't allow me to deepen my understanding of the more confusing concepts that were presented. I felt that the pace of the class was unrelenting, so that those of us who were struggling were being left in the dust. My TA (Sharon) was very willing to help, but there was very little time before the next item(s) were due.

It is discouraging to take a class that I feel is vital to the depth of understanding that I wish to have about my field (hopefully Health Behavior and Health Education, if I am accepted into the program), only to feel breathless at the end - as if I have finished some kind of marathon - not won it mind you, just finished. If the student isn't given enough time and attention to let the information contained in the class really sink in and become part of their public health practice, then in my opinion, the class has fallen short of its objectives.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

109: “all very relevent information. the slides could be more compact (as in not as many with pictures) & would have liked to have spent some tiome on study design. the TAs were very helpful & vic was always eager to assist.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

13: “Love the lectures. You've gotten the slides down to an art, I think. The beginning and ending slides are always entertaining, to boot.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

58: “In the first few weeks, I wondered what I had gotten myself in to, but over time, concepts and the math became a bit more easy. EPID-600 is not a course for sissies!! Make sure you leave yourself plenty of time to consider the questions in depth. Thanks to both Vic and Melinda for always returning emails quickly, and for the live discussions, too.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

29: “Sometimes after the 4th time of reading these notes/slides/tables my eyes become cross and I ask myself "Can I really read this again?" "I didn't get it the first four times..." It's been years since I challenged myself with a course like this.. but then I read again and behold (like what happened to me yesterday) sensitivity is different then specificity and I can explain it...”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/12)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

83: “I was pleased with the overall structure of this course. I believe it was effective in learning the principles of epidemiology. Meeting with other students also helped understand the material. When friends ask me whether or not to take the online course I inform [them of the] layout the course and give the advantages and disadvantages to both. The tests were challenging and time consuming.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

25: “Thanks to Melinda for responding to emails in a timely manner so we can go about our way studying. At first, understanding the time lines and details of using Bb created many questions which she was so patient in answering.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/21)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

9: “So far, the group has been working well together, and I don't have any specific feedback to give any one person.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

75: “I enjoyed tackling the case studies during our recitation times and my TA was outstanding. She was able to present the material in a clear and coherent way and was very good natured and helpful. Lectures did not add much to my understanding of epid. While the instructor is obviously energized and excited about the material and with out a doubt has an incredible understanding of the subject, this was not conveyed clearly and effectively to the students. If anything, lectures confused me more than helped my understanding.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

44: “Leah, you were wonderful! Thanks for being so patient and explaining things so thoroughly.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/12/02)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

26: “I don't see much interaction with the group from our TA which might helpful if we are going seriously in the wrong direction.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

69: “A minor point, but the format used on Blackboard to categorize course materials could be less complicated. As is, it caused confusion for some students. It would be helpful to use less subfolders. Also, it would be less confusing to have less links/subfolders to cycle through to submit case study answers each week. In addition, it would be useful to include dates along with the subtitles of the case modules.

Pertaining to the course content, at times I felt that Dr. Schoenbach knew too much about the topic and his enthusiasm for it overrode the intent to boil it down to the main points and need-to-knows for students first being introduced to the topic. The TAs were helpful in providing this link. The idea of the weekly group meetings is a good one but I think more learning could be achieved if we individually submitted answers and an answer key were provided. Often, during discussion as a group we were pressed for time and ran through answers to get out the door.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

41: “For me, the group discussions were the best part of this class. I would work on the case studies on my own ahead of time and then get to class where I would realize I was on the wrong track completely, but my classmates could explain it to me quickly and I understood. I almost wish there weren't any days when we didn't have class mini-lectures from Leah and group discussions, because I felt like I would've understood the material better!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/11/22)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

2: “I think all the facilitators up to this point have helped set the pace for our discussion, and group members have come prepared so that we are able to end on time, and more importantly, feel that we were able to discuss/learn new things. I don't think anyone has left feeling bad about their contributions that day.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/19)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

77: “I learned a lot from this course. It was a lot of work, and with other graduate classes, one case study per week was sometimes challenging to squeeze into my schedule. However the open-book, take-home exam format did help with the time management.

The group recitations were frustrating. In speaking with classmates, some groups were clearly more cohesive than others. I think, because the TA spends so much time sitting in on these sessions, that he/she should jump in and offer some structure or guidance when needed. I understand this may not be "real world", but for the purpose of this class and learning the material, it would really reduce some stress. Some group members obviously stopped caring and participating, making facilitation extremely challenging and uncomfortable. The TA should have stepped in and helped the sessions run more smoothly.

Vic is a great teacher who is extremely knowledgeable and has the ability to translate his knowledge into successful teaching - sometimes rare in graduate school. I enjoyed his lectures.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

74: “I don't agree with the grading system for class participation. I think you should be graded based on your median peer assessment multiplied by 100 not your group's average case grade. Also, I think groups should discuss as a group the participation grade for each group member - this should not be an anonymous process. This helps students better understand how they need to improve on participation.

I also think the number of cases in labs could be reduced. Other lab activities could be substituted for the cases. Or perhaps less questions for the cases.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

24: “I really enjoy the internet format and feel that it works well. On the submission form, it is very difficult to adequately show your work on a word document, without using tables or any special characters. This really puts a limitation on our ability to show our calculations.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

12: “It would be nice to have the Powerpoints for the lab sessions posted ahead of time for students who like to take notes in an electronic format as we go through the slides. Otherwise, no complaints, the class has been great. It's a pleasure to be in a class with an instructor who is so well prepared and seems to genuinely care about student learning.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

104: “Vic clearly knows epidemiology very well and enjoys his field. He also clearly wants his students to do well and to walk away having learned a lot from his class. This can be a downfall, though, because Vic has a tendency to teach the class as if it is the only course the students have to take.

I had a really difficult time following Vic's lectures. I think it would be helpful to have more discussion in class on questions similar to what we were asked on the case studies. Also, more time spent on how to actually calculate prevalence, OR, person-time, etc, would really be helpful. I feel as though Vic tried to pack too much information into his lectures and so just sped through the material and there was really not even any time to ask questions. Additionally, wording of questions on the case studies and exams is confusing. I spent a LOT of time just trying to figure out what he was asking. I don't know how confusing wording of questions would be beneficial.

Because this is an intro epi class I think I would have learned a lot more if the focus was on getting students to understand the very basic concepts. It would also be helpful for Vic or the TAs to go over the correct exam and case study questions in class.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

105: “Vic is an excellent professor, he is one of the only professors I have encountered so far in SPH that loves to teach, he is a teacher, not just a professor and that makes all the difference.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

80: “I started the course by attending all the lectures and recitations, but halfway through I stopped going to either and treated the course as if it were an on-line one. The lectures provided some background material, but they were not helpful in doing the case studies. I think that Vic is very knowledgeable, but transferring that knowledge to us is a bit of a challenge.

The recitations were a long waste of time, since you end up doing the questions 3 times - the first on my own, the second with the group, and the third when we get the answers back and I'd check my work. I'd much rather do the questions on my own and be able to check my work as I go along to see if I'm getting it. Mike Bowling, HBHE biostats professor, provides students with the answers and how to calculate them the same time he assigns homework. He trusts us that we will do the work, and if we don't, that's our problem. Adamson was not helpful at all as a TA. When he did try to explain something, it was not understood. When we were struggling with a question, he would often let us struggle with it and not offer to help us think through it.

Also, the organization of the course website could be much, much better. Almost every time I went to print something off, I printed the wrong materials because I was on the wrong date. The website should be much simpler and clearer.

Vic could also benefit from keeping his communication simpler. His lectures and emails are very long and long-winded - we don't need to know every little small detail, just communicate what we NEED to know. Then, if there is time for details, include them.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/04/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

86: “The class was great. I am not a full-time student and I was hoping to learn a lot, and I did. It was a tough class, but I felt that it was time well spent. I feel that I have a good understanding of epidemiology.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

27: “So far, I'm enjoying the work--if not the workload (lol). I thought I already knew a lot about epidemiology. This course is clearly teaching me that I still have a lot to learn, and I greatly appreciate the opportunity to improve my knowledge and that this course does not lower its standards to the lowest common denominator (which might be me, lol).”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/13)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

20: “I generally think our group has great dynamics. I enjoy the fact that we are able to bounce ideas off each other, and critique each others work. I have learned a great deal from everyone and will definitely continue to do so.”
(1st peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/09/17)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

67: “In hindsight, I would have participating in more of the interactive sections of the class, the online conference call, lectures, and on campus lectures. I attended some and found them particularly interesting. Dr. Weber's presentation was excellent - don't miss it!”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

7: “This course is going well. I really fell like I'm understanding and learning the material. The only downside to this course is the way lab is structured. By solving the questions independently and then coming together as a group to reach a consensus answer creates a inefficient use of time and learning opportunity. I say this because once people have decided upon their answer they create a mental block that hinders them from seeing another point of view. Eventually we can move past this, but I find the process tedious. I know the point of this exercise is to teach each other and learn from that experience, but I personally do not gain does not reflect the amount of time and effort put into this lab.”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

56: “I would very much have liked to have some discussion that was not so specific to the individual questions. In order for that to happen it would have had to have been encouraged as part of the grading (at least with the groups I was in). Also, it was clear that some of the students did the minimum because it did not count all that much towards the final grade. That was a shame.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

76: “I feel the case studies and group participation should be weighted more heavily for the final grade. I think the amount of time spent on these case studies as well as in the recitation isn't justified by the percentage it's worth for your grade.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

1: “The mini-lectures are really helpful, thanks!”
(1st peer evaluation, Classroom course, 2008/09/18)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

65: “This is a very challenging course. I enjoyed working with the group. It was interesting to see how people interpret articles and questions differently. I found Sharon's(TA) e mail help and course postings very helpful.”
Denis, CERT student, PHCP, TA: Sharon (2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

61: “This course gave me an excellent, well-rounded and thorough introduction to and exploration of epidemiology. Although it was really intense, I came away feeling the much better for it.”
(2nd peer evaluation, Internet course, 2008/11/29)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

78: “I like your jokes.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

94: “The organization of the course was a bit too complicated, and while I liked that there was no question of what was expected of us (everything was on the website), sometimes it was a bit complicated to figure out overlapping deadlines, independent submissions, group submissions, etc. The 3 tests were also spaced too close together in the second half of the semester, as well. Sometimes during lectures it seemed concepts were being repeated but being referred to differently, making it difficult to follow sometimes. Overall, a good course though.”
(courseeval, Classroom course, 2008/12/20)
Order by date submitted.

(An additional 17 comments were received but the students did not authorize their dissemination.)

Back to top Information for students EPID160 home page

2008cd, compiled 12/10/2008, 1/4/2010