Student comments from EPID600 Fall 2010
(in random order -
click here for date order)
(About student comments)
|
______________________________
|
124:
“Overall, the course is interesting. However, if the materials
were introduced in a different format, the concepts may be clearer
(i.e. one whole section of rates, rate ratios, association,etc...,
one section of study designs, etc..) It felt as if these concepts
interupted the module as they were dispersed throughout the
modules. If one could get a solid understanding of how these
calculations work and are deciphered first then the rest of
the course could be utilized in their application. Regardless,
I feel I have learned a significant amount from this class
and understand that I have so much more to learn. It has been
helpful already in my work and I understand how to decipher
journals a little better now. Glad for the opportunity.”
|
Stewart,
CERT student,
FEPI,
TA: Hao
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/10)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
238:
“Instructor: Course was online format and feedback was
given by the TA.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
93:
“Yes, I would like for the instructor to note that the amount
of homework for this class is definitely hard to balance when
the other class for the Executive MHA track is Capstone.
There needs to be better communication between the EPI department
and the Executive program to avoid scheduling Capstone and
Epi together. As for us who are stuck in this situation, there
should be more extra credit than 1 point for the individual
responses to modules - maybe just for executive students.
Try balancing family, kids activities, work, school - Capstone
and EPI and then tell me that this course with Capstone is
a balanced workload for a semester!”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
108:
“It was really evident how much both Vic and Brad cared about
teaching and making sure that students understood the material,
which is particularly impressive with such a large class. I
really appreciate the time and energy that they devoted to
teaching.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/13)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
136:
“While this course is difficult to organize because every public
health student is required to take it, class lectures were
often boring and irrelevant to the assignments (case studies).
Vic was a dedicated professor and his effort to help us learn
epidemiology was clear. However, I often felt that he went
overboard with providing too much instruction and clarity that
he was (ironically) often unclear. Also, please make the lectures
shorter (and include only 1-2 interesting facts, as they take
up a lot of time!). That being said, he was probably one of
the most intelligent professors I have ever had. He was very
accessible through email and in person. Genee was an excellent
TA and helped voice our concerns to Vic and address our questions.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
202:
“Instructor: I did not really interact with him much.
I talked more with TAs.
TA: She was great one-on-one
and teaching break out sessions to numerous other students.
How contribute to career: This course has helped me think
more critically about data that I'm presented.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/08/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
205:
“Instructor: I feel that the course was excellent from
a public health perspective, but not specifically made relevant
or applied to the hospital setting.
TA: I felt
that there was almost no proactive feedback or guidance, particularly
at the beginning of the course.
I wish the content
would have been made more applicable for a non-public health-specific
role. I realize that public health is relevant to anyone in
the field of healthcare, but I would have preferred more specific
applications or even one or two case stu
I felt
the course was completely dependent on my own work. I got very
little out of the group-work and received very little proactive
feedback or guidance from the TA.
How contribute
to career: I'm not sure that a lot of the content will translate
directly into by career field.
Will use new tools:
Again, not sure that a lot of these tools are specifically
relevant or that I will use many of them. It was valuable to
understand high level concepts (for example, the difference
between prevalence/incidence), and to think critically.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/08/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
127:
“This course had great variety of content, with interesting
and challenging learning opportunities. The case studies required
a level of statistical manipulation that wasn't covered in
the lectures. It was tough, but ultimately propelled you much
farther forward in a "working" knowledge of epidemiology.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
226:
“Instructor: I loved the integration of humor into the
material!
Excellent - wish it were 2 semesters
Just wish I had the ability to give it the time I deserved”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
117:
“Great group overall. I appreciated the fact that we all took
on extra work at different times in order to support each other
as workloads for school and work fluctuated during the semester.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/10)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
105:
“Thanks Brad, I thought you were a great TA. I always enjoyed
your lab sessions and thought you did a nice job of explaining
things. Thanks again!!”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/01)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
76:
“Interesting and challenging”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
99:
“It has been fun so far.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
214:
“Instructor: I think the amount of communication for the
course was very poor overall. I never knew what my grades were
as they were not promptly updated on "my grades" area just
the extra credit. I also believe that the grading was very
harsh for the course considering the dependency on cooperation
from other students and this being on online class. I have
taken 4 other classes in the school of Public Health and this
by far has been the most disappointing one. The professor's
lectures were very poor and not informative. He added jokes
but when the time came to actually teach he failed.
TA: She was mediocre as far as help was concerned. She
always returned my e-mails promptly, but did gave out grades
with not much explanation.
The content was okay
but the method of teaching that content was extremely poor.
I have never had such poor lectures given to me in any course
I have taken in my post-high school education. The grading
was severely harsh in relation to the distance nature
The delivery of the course was all over the place. Rules
and dates changed with no consistent updates on the message
boards to let us know what was going on. I didn't know what
was due when half the time.
How contribute to
career: It won't”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
17:
“I am really enjoying the class and the group discussions each
week. I feel that just about everyone is putting in the appropriate
amount of effort and some us go above and beyond. Each person
has strengths and they are using them to help the rest of us
and that is wonderful.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
135:
“In general, the course has the expected content, but the organization
of the content needs to be redone. Most of the time, there
seemed to be too much information, whichleads to sifting through
extranneous materials to get to the point of presented material,
which in turn, makes it harder to grasp the basic concepts
of epidemiology, which I assumed was the purpose of the course.,
More
emphasis should be placed on mastery of the basic concepts.
I foudn the TA lectures to be the most helpful in pinpointing
what students were supposed to learn.
The text book was mediocre,
and I found it somewhat difficult to navigate, so I didn't
reference it much.
Overall, I think the issue in the course
is an oversaturation of materials (from blackboard, to general
lecture slides and so on). Paring down the blackboard site
would be a good way to start making changes.
There may also
be a better course book student may find helpful as a reference
tool.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
230:
“Online learning is still difficult, especially group
work. I am not sure that online group learning worked well
for my learning style.
How contribute to career:
I will focus on nutrition intervention and policy design, and
evaluation and impact assessment are critical (as is my ability
to read and interpret epidemiological data and information
related to my fields of interest). I believe”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
177:
“The course could be revised for the MHA cohorts to be more
healthsystem centric; while applicable, the work load process
is a bit outdated and time consuming.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
1:
“I think we have a really good group.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
24:
“This is an intense learning experience - the only thing missing
is the time and opportunity to really dig into things you miss
or don't get on the first round.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
149:
“This was interesting, but it needs to make the connection between
what we are learning and why it will be important as health
care senior leaders because I felt like it was getting too
far into the weeds.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
32:
“This class is challenging and I've really enjoyed it thus far.
Also, our TA, Julie, has gone above and beyond - she responds
well and I know everyone has appreciated her assistance and
support of our learning.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
78:
“This is a very difficult class. So far, the TA has not been as involved as i would like. This may be the way the class is structured. However, given the complexity of the assignments and lack of clear examples, I believe the TA should be more hands on than what she currently is.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
223:
“Instructor: Limited interactions with professor (I was
enrolled in the online course). I do wish the lecture materials
were a little more clear or that there was a separate space
in Blackboard for how to perform certain calculations. At times
it was difficult to condense the basic format of a calculation
from an example with numbers already included from ppt.
TA: Did not have many interactions with the TA, but she
seemed friendly and encouraging.
Difficult to
understand and implement some of the calculations from the
format in which they existed in powerpoint and from lecture
notes. It would have been helpful to have separate documents
that discussed how to calculate certain measures (RR v. OR
fo
Online discussion groups were ultimately helpful
in understanding topics, but often left errors and confusion
about content unaddressed. It would have been helpful to have
more TA involvement in Blackboard discussions to help clear
up confusion or resolve a misunderstanding from the course
materials. The lack of corrections (on individual submissions
and in blackboard discussions) made it difficult to improve
understanding until assignments were submitted and the course
had already moved on. Feedback from Exams was helpful, but
again, maybe too late to improve submissions.
Advance
info wanted: I would say.. take the residential class. The
online discussion group is convenient, but as mentioned, it
was difficult for me to translate material online without the
opportunity to discuss it with people. Residential groups seem
t
How contribute to career: This will be important
for the study of disease as a result of environmental contamination.
The knowledge of how to perform and interpret the risk of adverse
health effects as a result of exposure to contaminants.
Will use new tools: A much more refined ability to interpret
research findings, graphs, and statistical analyses. I will
be prepared to read and write reports using data and appropriate
calculations and epidemiological terminology.
Topics
to add: Environmental agents and their relevance to epidemiology”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
196:
“Instructor: Tries hard to be a comedian, but fails; probably
a respected epidemiologist, as he participated in development
of the ACPH competency document. Perhaps if he spent time as
an instructor rather than figurehead he could earn a bit more
respect; I suppose he thinks he has better things to do.
The final module about Epidemiology in Public Health
should be at the beginning of the course, to provide an overview
of why we should take the course seriously. The course is pitched
to Public Health majors, so either a module about how it will
be useful
The schedule of deliverables was confusing;
the dates in the modules were listed for components of each
module and the due dates often seemed to bounce to and fro
from module to module, as parts of the next module seemed to
be occurring before the current module. A better means would
be to have an additional chronologic calendar, so it would
be clear what the next deliverable would be.
How
contribute to career: Not sure
Will use new tools:
What new tools?
Topics to add: Epidemiology as
a tool for health care administrators”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/09/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
146:
“This was a difficult course for me, but I learned a tremendous
amount. I almost feel like I need to take it again to really
absorb all the information. In fact I plan to do that, to go
through all the lectures and readings again to more fully understand.,
I
am grateful for the availability of online classes. As a working
adult it would be impossible for me to attend traditional classes.
My
plan had been to apply for entry into the MPH program. However
the tuition increase means I will have to wait at least a year
before applying.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
111:
“Students in my discussion group often complained about the
format of the lecture slides; stating that they were essentially
too esoteric in nature. I would argue that the slides were
appropriate, but the high yield material provided during next
week's discussion should be available much earlier. The high
yield discussion slides would make comprehension of homework
material more plausible; waiting to them prevented earlier
comprehension of material.”
|
Mandrill,
MPH student,
PHLP,
TA: Genee
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/10)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
18:
“I'm not sure we all realized how much we should be contributing
to the forums. Should see more participation (at least from
me) during the rest of the semester.”
|
Deb,
MHA student,
HPAX,
TA: Beth
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/26)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
121:
“I have learned a lot this semester! Thank you for everything!”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
20:
“It was a bit hard to do these evaluations simply because I
have never met any of the people in my group and we do not
meet on a weekly basis. I'm not exactly sure how much preparation
people put into their work but it seems that our case studies
always get turned in on time and that everybody understands
the problems so, at least for now, I would say things are going
well and everybody is participating.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/28)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
204:
“How contribute to career: It is part of my degree requirement.
I can use epi/stat for having a better understanding of the
clinical studies.
Will use new tools: Yes, in
better understanding of studies/trials.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/08/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
125:
“A very interesting and challenging class”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/11/30)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
171:
“I think the hint idea for exam question is a great idea but
the explanations were a little vague: I felt like this esp
for homework questions even when I submitted my work and needed
more direction. I felt Kate responded timely considering she
is living in Africa and seemed genuinely concerned about me
as a student”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
159:
“Julie was very nice, supportive and helpful. Deadlines & due
dates changed so often in this course, it would have been more
helpful if she reinforced the changes more than once. Also,
understanding that she could not be available online in real
time, if she answered emails in <24 hrs it would have been
MUCH MORE helpful since the on-line group was often working
on deadline.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
174:
“I think this course can be better organized. I did not like
the grading for exams in this course. For example, in the short
answer questions of the exams, the TA mentioned that answers
were compared among students so whoever had the best answer
would get full credit, while the other would receive partial
credit. This mean that I could have answered all the questions
correctly, but because another student went beyond what they
asked for, my answers would be worth less points and I would
not get full credit.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
50:
“The way of operating the course should be changed. It makes
me stick to problem sets, not the whole picture.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
199:
“Instructor: I would recommend connecting lecture material
with weekly assignments. Often, I found myself "digging around"
or could not find where the information for the group assignments
was in the lecture material. Given the fact that many of us
have never had Epi, it became frustrating and time consuming
to locate and sometimes understand what was being asked.
this course was so front loaded. Please take more time
time on the fundamental principles that are central to Epi
and please take more time to word carefully your case and exam
questions. At times it was difficult to understand what you
were asking, the
Tests actually take more time
than I believe the instructor thinks. These tests took 12-15
hours to complete, which is more time than professional board
exams! Please remember that most of us in the Executive program
are juggling professional careers and families as well. In
addition, the first two tests should not be weighted so heavily;
there is much effort and time given to the weekly group assignments
but they carry very little weight towards the final grade.
It was discouraging to spend that much time weekly, working
hard and getting an 80% on a test which is the majority of
the grade. This then is not an accurate representation of work
effort, nullifying the importance of the learning experience
with the weekly assignments.
How contribute to
career: It will allow for a more critical assessment of clinical
trials conducted that test dental materials, since my field
is continually advancing with many products coming to market.
Topics to add: I enjoyed the module on infectious disease/outbreaks
and trying to figure out the cause of disease.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/08/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
109:
“Genee is a great TA. She was very helpful and I learned a lot
from her lectures.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
102:
“TA sessions were very helpful. These powerpoints were very
useful.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
180:
“The content is excellent for someone devoted to Public
Health Epidemiology. It is too detailed for someone who chooses
the business and management aspects of Healthcare.
Suggestion:
can students have more time to study their modules (even two
modules delivered every other week)? Students need the 1st
week to read and become familiar with materials (book, articles
and lectures). Then they can formulate well thought out questions
to the TAs. Finally, they will excel in their homeworks after
the TAs explain to them the most salient points and elucidate
their confusion. This very information-rich course is designed
to impart long-lasting knowledge to students (both undergrad
and grad students). This course is not designed to just only
gauge students' reading and comprehension skills. When students
have thorough understanding of the teaching materials, then
they could apply their knowledge onto their homeworks and they
will retain their knowledge much better and much longer. Students
learn best after they correctly apply the difficult concepts
and teachings! EPID information is very precise, detailed and
technical, so jamming will allow only for a very superficial
short-term memor
Advance info wanted: Please warn
students that EPID is very labor intensive and they must choose
to combine this class with another very "easy" class that does
not require any reading or homework! In any case, students
must neglect their other classes to
How contribute
to career: EPID is fantastic for a career in Public Health;
I am in Public Health! Maybe I will sign up for the Field EPID
certificate..
Will use new tools: Read articles
and process information with improved accuracy...”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/14/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
48:
“This course has been as challenging as I had heard and expected
it to be, but I have been learning a lot. Working in an entry-level
research position, I have found it exciting to learn material
that helps to clarify and reinforce the work I am doing. Also,
seeing these concepts being utilized in current studies helps
me to view their direct application in the"real world".”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
165:
“The organization of this class is overwhelming. It is difficult
to follow and becomes a constant burden instead of an opportunity
to engage with the material and really learn. It was more of
a weekly battle to just get things submitted, I found that
I did not take the time to really focus on learning the material.,
While
I do feel that I learned some key part of EPID, I do not feel
that I have a good grasp of concepts still. I feel like what
the third exam paper assignment is gear twds addressing should
be the point of this class, but instead it was very bogged
down in submissions instead of understanding the big picture
of epidemiological studies. As a class required by many departments
it should be structured not to consume so much time.
I also
felt the grading policy was overly complicated. I have no idea
what my grade in the class will be because I am unsure how
the final formula for grading will effect my tests. This mkaes
it difficult to feel like you can really work harder to improve
your grade throughout the semester.
Overall course was complicated
to navigate and disengaged me from learning.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
217:
“Instructor: Less is more, less slides with more detailed
instruction. Less problems, more focused on key topics. 6 hour
exams are reasonable, 12 hours are not additive to instructive
ability.
Volume at the expense of detail is less
helpful. Greater detail or repetition on key items would have
been beneficial. This course is not for Epid Majors.
How contribute to career: Need to understand the clinical
outcomes of key epid issues
Will use new tools:
Interpretation of key outcome measures is extremely useful
such as odds ratios in explaining pharmacogenomic testing.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
120:
“Thank you! Lots of hard work but really learned from the materials
and assignments. I very much appreciate your modifications
to the expectations of the program due to the Capstone conflict.
Probably enabled me to stay enrolled through the semester”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/03)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
200:
“Advance info wanted: I would advise the extra help sessions
to be more consistant.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/08/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
2:
“The readings for the class are too much and confusing; I wish
the reading were more organized and more helpful with the case
studies.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/25)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
144:
“Brad Wheeler was my TA. He was a great TA. I learned a tremendous
amount from his lectures. He was always very quick and thorough
in response to any questions.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
41:
“This course is not only invaluable in setting a public health
foundation, but also thoroughly enjoyable. The supportive and
flexible environment makes a big difference in ease of learning
new material. I really like the structure of the course, and
have found that the small group work has been really helpful
(and fun).”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
64:
“Epidemiology 600 is a strong and fundamental course for any
person or persons interested in the field of medicine or public
health.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
193:
“I recommend to have summary at the end of each lesson
summerizing the main epi concepts like sensitivity, specificity,
confounding ---etc
The course delivery was perfect
How contribute to career: Improved my reading to article
and researches and will help me to structure new researches.
Will use new tools: Will help with research”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/10/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
38:
“Brad does a great job of clarifying concepts during our lab
session and is very helpful.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
46:
“1) The homework problems are not worded clearly - the emphasis
seems to be on deciphering logic problems rather than learning
the terms & methods of epidemiology. Also, one specific suggestion:
often the case studies will refer to articles by saying for
example,"Page 225, Column 1". The articles usually open as
a web document without page numbers and it can be very hard
to find the information you are referring to! / 2) I like the
group structure of the course, but I think peer evaluations
are not a good use of our time. We have a lot of work, and
a lot of other classes, and I just don't think the peer evaluations
are necessary.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
188:
“The number of case studies and the quick turnaround time
were very difficult to keep up with.
How contribute
to career: This course will not contribute to my current career
in public health.
Will use new tools: I will not
be using these tools in my current career in public health.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/10/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
25:
“dynamic in the group is generally good. some more gung ho than
others.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/30)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
104:
“Brad was awesome. He answered questions by email in a matter
of minutes most of the time.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/08)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
210:
“TA: A lecture summary or review or something like that
would have been helpful throughout the semester. The "live"
classes usually did this with their TA.
There
were a couple of instances where we had questions on the case
study that were not actually addressed in lecture or reading.
A review session with TA for each lecture/case study
would be helpful.
How contribute to career: I
want to go into epidemiology. I thought this was a good introduction.
Will use new tools: See 18”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
169:
“Would probably have been useful to be able to work problems
and submit them in excel since we're using that in other classes
and at work.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
221:
“How contribute to career: I am a PA and review literature
often.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
45:
“I wish the readings for the class were less and more organized,
it gets really confusing with the large amount of reading.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
161:
“This course was great. My main problem was that I already knew
everything - I either underestimated my own mastery of epidemiology
or else I was misled by the course description, which may merit
revision. The quality of the course was excellent, but I felt
like a cog in a wheel due to the large student volume, despite
excellent TAs and class structure. I would consider a placement
test for credit as a solution to reduce experiences like mine
- spending over $1000 for a course I have already mastered
- and as a way to reduce the class size.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
8:
“Great TA, very helpful!”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
186:
“Instructor: The lectures were clear and easy to follow
in this web-based format. More examples, especially in applying
different metrics, would have been great. Interaction w/ professor
and TAs is difficult when in different timezones etc
TA: Beth responded quickly to emails
The
material was interesting and having to pick apart articles
did help with the understanding of the concept However I question
the value recalculating article tables to find errors; often
the task was more frustrating than anything else.
The
timeline for completing assignments became confusing. There
did not seem to be enough time to complete all work (consensus
due clos to individual assignment). I appreciate the shift
in deadlines
How contribute to career: helpful
in understanding and critiquing proposals that come across
my desk
Will use new tools: developing analytic
plans and study protocols”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/11/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
162:
“The spacing of the exams seemed very cramped. It would have
been helpful to spread them throughout the semester more. The
second exam caught me off guard and I did much worse than on
the first and than I should have because I just didn't know
what to study for it. The word limits on the exams also got
in the way for me a lot, especially on exam 3. In exam 3, I
couldn't really address anything in the depth I wanted to,
and I had to shallowly address several points in order to try
and encompass the scope of the questions in my responses. I
understand that exam grading takes time, having taught myself,
but I felt intellectually limited in my performance because
of the word limits. A better design would be to have students
answer four questions with no word limit or (since we should
have covered everything in exams 1 and 2 and in recitation)
one question in great depth. I felt like I could have written
an essay of at least 1000 words length about each of the questions
asked.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
175:
“This class, as an intro Epi class for non-Epi majors, was not
that at all. I believe that Vic made the material more confusing
than it needed to be and that key themes, models, etc were
not clearly presented to the class. The overwhelming amount
of work that had to go into weekly case studies that bear such
an insignificant amount on one's grade was discouraging. I
believe that group work is a good thing and necessary, but
due to the unnecessary complexities of this course, it became
tedious and uninteresting. As a side note, as a first year
MCH grad student, Epid was the class I was looking the most
forward to. Unfortunately, after taking this class, I no longer
have a desire to continue with any other epid classes at UNC
or elsewhere. Vic, you're an intelligent man, and a fun lecturer,
but I would have rather learned something in your class and
not liked you, than vise versa.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
96:
“The course has been insightful. I have loved the articles and
in particular the discussion we have in our small groups. The
groups really make up the essence and learning in the course.
I have learned so much from my group members.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
115:
“This course was a bear, much too time consuming, but Genee
Smith was a FABULOUS teaching assistant, who summarized all
the material in a clear and cogent manner and was helpful to all
of us. She deserves to be recognized.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/08)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
112:
“Group 2 was great! I was very impressed with how well we all
worked together and was grateful to have such a motivated group!
I also really enjoyed working with graduate students.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/12)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
88:
“I am enjoying the class but I feel like I'm always answering
some question. I think I would absorb and be able to put more
into each case study if they were spread out more instead of
every week.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
73:
“not sure that was or is much consideration for those in the
executive track that work FT and attend school.
TA's seem
overburdened by sheer numbers.
the postings (perhaps due
to group size or nature of course design) can be overhwhelming
and a difficult manage which may impact true learning, impact
and assimilation of material.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
179:
“Would have been helpful to make better use of excel and
reproduce results in a case study.
How contribute
to career: It will help to reinforce and apply statistics knowledge.
However, it was geared toward the researcher. This is good
but it will not translate directly to hospital administration.
Topics to add: Apply similar principles to actuarial
studies for a given population. Need to know how to determine
market need for a particular specialty.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/14/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
185:
“TA: Beth was really very good at supporting our group
and responding to our questions in a timely manner especially
considering the number of students taking the course.
Course content was very good. I would not change a thing.
I would have really preferred to take this course by
itself so I would have had more time to dedicate to it. There
was alot of work which I think was necessary and helpful but
I needed more time to dedicate to it.
How contribute
to career: Helped clarify and solidify concepts I use everyday.
Also made me realize what I really did not understand but thought
I did.
Will use new tools: Definitely has helped
me be able to better synthesize and analyze scientific papers.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/11/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
143:
“I felt that the exams did not provide the opportunity for me
to accurately demonstrate my knowledge and understanding of
the subject matter. Wording was confusing, and even though
I felt I had a good understanding of lecture and reading concepts,
I struggled with the exams. This was disheartening for a subject
that was new to me.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
216:
“I did not care for the group work. I became very frustrated
trying to explain a basic algebraic manipulation to my group
at the outset. It might be helpful to provide a math refresher
or require BIOS 600 as a prerequisite to teh course.
Advance info wanted: I would like to have known for the
first couple of case studies tha,t for answers where calculations
were required, we were also supposed to provide a verbal explanation
of our answer.
How contribute to career: I am
a communicable disease nurse. This content is directly applicable
to what I do on a daily basis.
Will use new tools:
The outbreak investigation information and corresponding epi
terminology is information that I will use on a regular basis
in carrying out my job duties. I have taken many research methods
courses over the years, but this course provi”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
213:
“Instructor: It was a very difficult class to complete
given the fact that we also had to take Capstone.
TA:
I think she was fine.
There was a lot there, and
it was somewhat overwhelming. I think having smaller, more
focused assignments would have been helpful.
It
seemed that the material was not organized in a user friendly
manner - especially given the amount of material and the number
of assignments required.
Advance info wanted:
I would have liked to have some breaks between some of the
assignments. It felt like a 16 week sprint. Also, the means
for communicating was very long winded. Emails from the professor
would be pages long. As a working professional
How
contribute to career: I'm not sure. But I'm glad to have the
background.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
167:
“Genee did an amazing job as a TA for this course. She was able
to present all the material in a concise yet understandable
manner. She is a very effective teacher.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
212:
“Instructor: He must be a great professor! Wish I could
have taken the course "in class" rather than online
TA: Beth, you were very helpful! Being a TA for so many
students must be a lot of work. Thanks for your input!
Well constructed course, challenging but enjoyable!
well paced!
Advance info wanted: How much
work it entailed!
How contribute to career: I
would like to teach introductory epidemiology to my undergrad
college students - it will help me a better frame work!
Will use new tools: Not sure yet!
Topics
to add: More local (NC) epi problems or concerns.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
5:
“It is very strange to have lecture for the NEXT week before
recitation for the CURRENT week! We go to lecture and begin
thinking about a new subject, but then have to go back to the
old topic - class should be designed so that case study groups
meet before the next week's lecture.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/29)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
157:
“The TA evaluation is for Brad Wheeler.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
155:
“Ridiculous class -- 120 slide PPT -- every week. Would prefer
an outline with info provided -- not just reams and reams of
details. I'm not planning to be an epidemiologist -- just wanted
an intro to it.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
176:
“I thought the lectures were on the boring side and I didn't
find them as interesting as the group sessions with Genee.
I really did like the group aspect of the class though an found
collaboration to be a useful teaching method”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
84:
“This course delivery setup is AWFUL. I have learned absolutely
nothing about epidemiology from this class. The lectures have
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the homeworks. The homeworks
are graded very archaicly. Last, we get NO FEEDBACK. We're
trying to teach ourselves and we don't know if we're right
or not.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
82:
“It would be extremely useful to have more examples of the the
types of questions used in the Case Study submittals, especially
for students whose background is not in math or statistics
(or for whom those classes have been in the distant past, worked
through in either the lecture or in other posted materials
(Additional Study Materials/Sample Questions).”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
19:
“This is a very well planned course, and a good over view of
the theoretical and practical/real world applications of Epidemiology.
The course is intense and a lot of work but a good learning
experience - even if it is online! Thanks Vic for adding a
touch of humor to the lectures.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
90:
“Structurally the discussion board on Bb is cumbersome and unwieldy
when trying to collaborate over detailed, iterative material.
Perhaps more guidance at the beginning of the term would help
make the discussion process more efficient and fluid. I feel
a great deal of time is spent just trying to keep track of
what's been and being said which detracts from focusing on
substance.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
231:
“How contribute to career: fulfills my major requirement
for undergrate environmental health siciences”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
147:
“I understand that exams are very lengthy and take considerable
time to grade; however, it is difficult for students to know
if they understand the material to answer questions for exam
3 (final paper) when they do not receive feedback from exam
2 within a few days of the deadline for exam 3 to be submitted.
This time line makes it difficult to go back to ask questions,
review materials, etc., because the student's focus is on submitting
exam 3 in a timely manner. Again, I understand that there may
not be anything that can be done about this and that this may
just the nature of the course, but I wanted to provide the
feedback. I did enjoy the course and know I will take away
information that I will use in the future. Thanks for the course!”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
139:
“Time requirement of the class, particularly the exams, was
extreme for an MHA student. I didn't feel the content was particularly
applicable for me. I can understand that the course would be
outstanding for someone entering the public health field, but
I wish the course could provide more cases studies or application
for someone in a leadership role within a healthcare organization.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
138:
“Julie has been fantastic!!!! However, I think that Vic, as
knowledgeable as he is about the subject, often times was quite
confusing in his explanations. This may be due to not being
in the class in person but I thought that his lectures are
fairly confusing, extremely long-winded, and not specific and
succinct enough. However, he does seem to care for his students
overall and wants them to grasp the material and do well.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
100:
“Thank you, Vic and Brad, for fostering our wonderful "group
3" experience in epidemiology. Working together in small groups
was a wonderful way to learn.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/02)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
152:
“Epid 600 needs a new curriculum and a new professor. Professor
Schoenbach may be well-suited to a high level Epi course, but
was not an effective instructor for an entry level course.
The structure of this course is bizarre. While I enjoyed working
with my group, the strange and complicated organization of
the individual/group assignments was confusing and unhelpful.
I understand the online submission form assists the TAs with
grading, but it seemed like a lot of unnecessary extra steps.
The instructor needs to work on making everything much more
concise. As students in SPH, we would never be allowed to use
so many excess words! Often the instructions on an exam or
assignment would be two or three times as long as the word
limit for the answer itself. The structure of the course is
not conducive to learning, and I felt when questions were asked,
the response was to encourage us to figure out the answer in
our groups. This might work as a learning tactic in a higher
level course, but we don't know the basics - we can't figure
it out on our own. We need more guidance. I really feel like
I did not learn or retain much at all from this course. Since
this is a course almost everyone in SPH has to take, I feel
strongly that it should be improved so we can actually learn
the basics of Epi well. Bios 600 should be a required pre-req
for this course. I was taking it simultaneously but my friends
who weren't were baffled by the mention of confidence intervals,
etc. You can't assume people are familiar with those concepts
unless statistics is a required pre-req. I felt the exams focused
on complicated calculations instead of conceptual understanding.
Overall, I do think that Professor Schoenbach has a lot of
enthusiasm for the subject and tries his best to be responsive
and make this a good course, but I and almost everyone else
I knew in this class were very disappointed with it. Please
make some changes!”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
220:
“Instructor: In the 3 1/4 years I have spent at UNC in
the MHA program. This was the worst. Awful- and I would not
wish it on my worst enemy. However, the presentations/ videos
were well done, the slides on prevalence very helpful with
all the people and circles, etc. It would have been nice to
have had an hour and a half lecture once a week to review the
material rather than having to watch them on line. More interaction
would have been helpful. I did listen to the TA lectures and
while they were helpful- they were not the same has having
the professor lecture and have open discussion. And, the TA's
could never give us examples to apply the math- only lecture
on the concepts. Why was this the worst class- even for an
RN? The amount of work was unbelievable and I would never use
most of the material working in health adminstration. MHA is
totally different that the MPH and this course could be modified
for the MHA's. I was so excited to take this class having a
clinical background too but... I would also recom
Start
over and reinvent especially for the MHA program.
face
to face on line lectures as we had at the beginning of the
class.
Advance info wanted: Simple definitions
and concepts. One or two module on overall Epi- types of cohorts,
etc and then dive into each.
How contribute to
career: None- I am afraid to read another clinical article
Will use new tools: Can't say that I will - it was the
most frustrating course.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
173:
“The course material is very interesting and the instructors
are very good and very responsive. At times there were too
many things going on all at once with the required readings,
homework, group work, exams, etc. Having the TA present slides
of the material that was presented the week previously made
it frustrating to apply information when doing the homework,
which was due before, the TA presented material in the lab
session. I feel students would grasp the concepts better and
apply the information with more confidence if the TA presented
the material that was just lectured on for the week rather
than the following week.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
87:
“Having been through almost the entire MHA program on-line,
I still feel the group discussion boards are time consuming
to the point they would be much better in a wiki format. Let
the moderator post the answers, then the group can shape the
deliverable. It is extremely frustrating taking a day to address
other coursework or a job to come back to 75 forum posts to
weed through (most are just a reiteration of the same theme).
Please consider this if the course continues to be offered
on-line.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
74:
“I am enjoying the class greatly and learning so much!”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
118:
“I am leaving EPID 600 as an avid fan. I thoroughly enjoyed
my learning experience, and I am definitely not the kind of
student who typically says things like that. This was one of
the more challenging, yet interesting courses I have taken.
I appreciated the subject content, the TA encouragement, and
the instructor teaching style. I felt like help was always
available when needed, and that Beth and Vic both cared a lot
about my learning. I became more critical and analytical through
the mode of thinking that EPID 600 encourages, traits that
help one be successful regardless of the field in which they
work.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
218:
“Instructor: Dr. Schoenbach kindly made himself available
to answer student questions, something I relied on during the
semester. His degree of accessibility is unique and appreciated!
TA: Irina was always quick to answer thoroughly questions
submitted via email.
How contribute to career:
As a vaccine specialist, I often read scientific articles.
Due to this course, I now have a much better understanding
of the information and the derivation of data in said articles.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
77:
“The course is quite interesting and I am happy to be taking
it. Some weeks I do feel that the case studies are quite long
and especially since I am in an online group, I don't get the
opportunity to talk about what we are learning or have a true
discussion. Most of the online group discussion is directed
to submitting the case study, so I do wish there was more fluid
conversation about the topic. Otherwise, the class is going
well and I'd add that the textbook is a good resource.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
28:
“I have worked with some of group more than others so have a
better perception of their contributions.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/24)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
26:
“The group discussion forum is helpful, but it is also very
limited. When it comes to working on consensus answers...it
seems redundant to post the same answers (if we have a similar
answer)that others who had an opportunity to post earlier in
the week had. Therefore, it could seems as if a member does
not contribute, when they are simply trying not to be redundant.”
|
Stewart,
CERT student,
FEPI,
TA: Hao
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
235:
“Instructor: One of the best online instructors I have
ever had (out of 6 classes taken to date) and it is obvious
how much he cares about his students learning. His lectures
are organized logically and manages to present at times "thick"
material in ways that are entertaining.
TA: I
was in frequent contact with Beth and she always gave me a
timely and very helpful response. I believe she graded very
fairly and sincerely hoped for our success in this course.
I found it very interesting, useful, and conducive to
a mode of critical thinking that I have not experienced in
quite some time. I really don't know how the content could
be better, however I did really enjoy the most recent interactive
assignment where
At times it seemed as though
the text, lectures, and case studies were all addressing slightly
different topics and it was a lot to take in, however I would
expect this from a UNC graduate level course.
Advance
info wanted: I think the syllabus did a good job of preparing
me for the course. It may have been helpful to emphasize the
"Evolving Text" a little more, as it took me a few lessons
to begin using it (once I found it), but found it to be a very
va
How contribute to career: It has allowed me
to think more critically and organize studies to improve existing
processes.
Will use new tools: I will be able
to avoid drawing false causal inference when I notice an event
before thoroughly investigating it. I have gained valuable
tools that will allow me to organize pertinent studies.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
164:
“Sometimes he was a little confusing when it came to explaining
something or answering questions. Otherwise, he seemed very
knowledgeable and eager to help.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
55:
“The course is difficult but I am finding that now that some
time has passed, I am getting more acquainted with the type
of material and I am beginning to grasp the concepts better.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
172:
“The class and lab/recitation should be offered in the morning.
Also, I think the course should be revised each time it is
taught with new examples and current cases. The amount of material
is tremendous, with little detail given to very complex concepts.
I am not sure how much I actually learned.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
166:
“Genee's slides were very helpful. Thank you for preparing and
posting those.
The lecture did NOT prepare us to complete
the case study questions and there were not adequate resources
given to answer the questions. I had to rely on Google searches
far too often than I feel I should have due to the inadequacy
of course materials. I was very disappointed with this required
course. Since this is a required course for SPH I think it
should be revamped, particularly the group consensus case studies
with groups of 10 students. That size group is far too large.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
7:
“Prof. Vic is really nice!, but I don't understand some jokes
he attached to our lecture :) Brad is also very nice TA. He
is flexible and supportive of student discussion. However, this
class take me more time than I thought. I'll try better to
catch up the class.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/30)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
160:
“I think the course would be better if Statistics was required
before taking this course.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
52:
“Course's reliance on the website is sometimes frustrating (there
is so much posted content that it is sometimes hard to find
the resources described in the lessons).”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
62:
“I am really enjoying the course. The content is presented in
a way that is interesting and challenging. I enjoy Dr Shoenbach's
injections of humor throughout the lectures!”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
133:
“I think the TAs should be the one keeping track of who is posting
and making contributions. It's too much of a popularity contest
this way. Also, slackers give everyone high points because
they know they haven't carried their weight. The slackers giving
each other high scores protects them from the consequences
of their actions. There should be some rating by your peers but
the objective stuff should come from the TA.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
168:
“Although I understand that the course was laid out for both
in class and internet instruction, I think the instruction
was not stimulating. For a non-major course, there was a lot
of material covered in great detail and I think the most important
points about the basics of epidemiology were lost.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
60:
“Since I know very little about the grading, it is often difficult
to even guess how my group did on the case study.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
203:
“Instructor: Very human, easy to correspond with. Very
knowledgeable of the subject matter.
TA: TA was
very compassionate when asked for an extention due to personal
circumstances.
The content was good, sometimes
a bit over my head as I had no background in epidemiology
More examples starting simple and progressing to more
complex for practice for those that need it. I often found
the cases studies complex and was not sure what was being asked
or did not fully understand what was asked.
Advance
info wanted: A glossary of terms and basic formulas
How contribute to career: At present the course does
not contribute to my job. It does contribute to my career goal
of working in public health.
Will use new tools:
I can now better evaluate journal articles and understand more
the strength of evidence they provide”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/11/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
163:
“This course had a lot of material! As a non-epi major, it was
hard to devote all the time to this course that it requires.
I had focus the majority of my time to my major courses and
as such, EPI 600 often took a back seat. Perhaps it would be
better if this course didn't require so much time. I evaluated
Brad Wheeler (my TA) above under Jennifer Wheeler as I didn't
see Brad's name.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
170:
“Genee was wonderful! She made everything much clearer and was
always extremely helpful during lab and outside of it.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
9:
“Peer evaluations for our group (and groups like ours) may be
difficult to access because our section splits into teams and
divides the work load during our recitation period.”
|
Mandrill,
MPH student,
PHLP,
TA: Genee
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
11:
“I think that the schedule is very confusing especially with
learning a lesson then working in recitation on the lesson
from last week. It dissuades people from going to lecture and
it's hard to pay attention because I am trying to remember
the stuff from last week while learning something new.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/25)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
137:
“I really appreciated that Vic made his lectures available online.
I have a young son, and it made my life so much easier to be
able to watch the lecture online on days when I couldn't make
it to class so that I could pick up my son from daycare. Also,
it helped to have access to the lecture while doing the homework
assignments. I hope that my lack of attendance was not construed
in any way as a reflection on my opinion of his lectures, which
were great. Instead, it was a reflection of how much I appreciated
being able to watch them at home.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
42:
“I don't like the schedule so far. It's awkward to have a lecture
on one topic and group work/TA discussion on another topic
in the same week.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
134:
“Overall, I was very happy with this course”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
23:
“Overall my group peers are well prepared and quick to contribute.
I follow along with all the postings on the discussion board
even if I don't contribute as often. Mostly I'm trying to understand
the source of the responses or calculations others have arrived
at before I have. The group discussions have really helped
me understand the course material in a way I may not have otherwise.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
219:
“Instructor: This was by far the worst class I have taken
here at UNC. There was never any constructive feedback provided;
points were simply taken off of assignments for no rhyme or
reason. The lectures absolutely did not stimulate learning
in any function. I've actually recommended that this course
be adjusted for a departmental-specific course through my home
department. The manner in which Dr. Schoenbach taught this
course was counterproductive to any form of learning epidemiology.
How contribute to career: I thought it would help me
better identify new markets for growth as a healthcare administrator
but unfortunately this course did not provide any necessary
information for this necessary skill.
Will use
new tools: What tools? I learned more about epidemiology in
my previous career as a clinical researcher than I did through
this course.
Topics to add: Where to identify
incidence/prevalence data and how to use these databases. THose
of us taking this class aren't going to be epidemiologists;
we need to understand how to assimilate the Epidemiology and
how to use it in our own careers. Mor”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
68:
“I am very stressed taking this course with capstone which of
course wasn't the original plan. The humor is greatly appreciated!”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
14:
“I am really enjoying your class, both the section and the lectures.
Good work!”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/29)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
209:
“Instructor: By far the most engaging professor so far.
This is an intimidating subject but I felt really excited about
taking it. Dr. Schoenbach eased my fears by validating the
difficulty of the subject and offering his insights in a clear
and relevant manner.
I got the sense that the
team of instructors were actively adapting the coordination
of the class to continue improve how things were done.
Advance info wanted: Group projects are tough. Especially
when we don't actually meet together in person. Despite this,
I really enjoyed my group projects and learned quite a bit.
How contribute to career: I intend to continue on with
an advanced practice degree in nursing. I will no doubt use
the skills developed in this course to better understand the
published literature and how to critically apply it to my practice
in primary c
Will use new tools: As mentioned
above, the skills I learned in this class will help me better
inform my practice in providing primary care to patients.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
47:
“Working group session is better than what I thought at the
beginning. However, this class takes me more time than what
I thought as well.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
183:
“How contribute to career: This course applies to the
work I am currently doing since I am in involved in clinical
trials that fit the various study designs discussed.
Will use new tools: Learning about health screenings,
designing studies, and analyzing data will all contribute to
my future career in implementing and evaluating health education
programs.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/12/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
6:
“Epidemiology covers a lot of concepts. The chance to discuss
the concepts taught in lecture during recitation is very helpful
in understanding the material. Slowly but surely, Epidemiology
is starting to make sense. The willingness and availability
of the professor and TAs to answer questions, even with the
silliest of analogies, is great and makes me feel more comfortable
asking questions.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
12:
“The course is wonderfully insightful and brilliantly orchestrated.”
|
Chima,
BSPH student,
BIOS,
TA: Genee
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/25)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
154:
“This course was an example of absolute hubris. The once a week
lecture was not enough. This should be taught like biostatistics.
They have much in common. If it were not for the TA's summary,
we would not have had a clue what was going on. The homework
load was overwhelming, and giving 3 exams that take 12-20 hours
each represents a complete disregard for the burdensome course
load of any serious graduate student. I HATED this course,
and it reduced my estimation of the quality of education one
gets at UNC.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
192:
“Instructor: I think this class needs to be on campus,
not online. I think that would help with the understanding
of the material.
Should never have to take with
Capstone. I also think we should have to sign an honor pledge
only once to cover the course. This was to the point of ridiculous.
How contribute to career: I haven't figured that out
yet
Will use new tools: not sure that I can”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/10/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
71:
“I haven't been able to take advantage of the Monday evening
sessions and those may help my understanding but I feel as
if I'm on a freight train trying to grab ideas as we roll along
- not really time to digest and learn them thoroughly before
moving on to more concepts and calculations. The content is
interesting, the audio tutorials very helpful and it's obvious
the faculty have passion for the subject. The structure and
timing of group work is very challenging, however - I'm always
amazed that some of my group members appear to be on the Discussion
board every day multiple times a day - I can't fit that into
my schedule, and feel a bit guilty for not contributing at
that level -”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
110:
“This is one of the best group dynamics I have experienced at
UNC. Everyone worked well with and was very respectful of each
other. I find that the group experience in EPID 600 can really
make or break the experience due to the high level of group
work.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/08)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
33:
“Our group is AWESOME. I have learned so much from each individual
member. And our group has prided itself on being thorough,
and being very clear and communicative. We are open to ask
each other questions, and I have to reiterate that I have learned
so much from my team members.”
|
Emily,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Kate
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/25)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
103:
“Thank you!”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/05)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
191:
“Instructor: I am so happy I got to have Dr. S, even from
our distance learning. He was prompt if there were questions
directed for him, and he always created an environment that
stimulated us intellectually, but also gave us an environment
where we enjoyed learning.
TA: Kate was excellent!
I am so happy we had her as our TA. She was always supportive,
timely, and helpful.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/10/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
222:
“The course content was made overly dense given the students
most likely enrolled. The emphasis on computation rather than
concepts and applications made the course work burdensome and
detracted form the overall themes that should have been emphasized.
Fe
The discussion group work needs to re-designed
to actually approximate a discussion as verses a group quiz.
While collaboration is indispensable to learning and working
effectively, it is inappropriate, especially in a virtual forum,
to have student's evaluated on the basis of group performance
or lack thereof.
Advance info wanted: The TA should
be an integral and active member of discussion and participation
in the group forum providing contemporaneous feedback and direction.
How contribute to career: Background and awareness
Will use new tools: To some extent, statistical concepts
and applications.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
151:
“I really struggled with this course. Though intellectually,
I gained a lot from this course, the vast majority of what
I learned was self-taught through completion of the case studies/exams,
rather than through instruction provided in lecture/recitation.
While my TA (Genee) was excellent at highlighting and presenting
the important material/formulas from the lectures/readings,
general lecture often felt disorganized, rambling, and hard-to-follow.
Many times it felt that the point of the lecture was impossible
to determine, or was buried within so much superfluous, only
tangentially related material, that it was hard to understand.
Similarly, there seemed to be little concordance between material
in the lectures, material in the case studies, and material
in the reading. Often I found myself relying on Wikipedia and
other outside sources when completing assignments. Regarding
the model of the course, it was somewhat jarring that the case-studies
emphasized a group model, whereas the exams required an individual
approach, a disconnect that I found particularly jarring when
completing the exams. I appreciate Professor Schoenbach's enthusiasm
and clear experience in the field, and I expect to do quite
well in the course, yet in the end, I found myself predominantly
disappointed with my EPID 600 experience.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
198:
“Instructor: I really enjoyed the course. It was a lot
of work but I feel like I have a much better grasp of Epidemiology.
This was my first distance learning course and I am looking
forward to taking more.
I liked the articles for
the case study questions, but maybe some that were more recent
or ones that dealt with current public health problems so we
can see how it relates to right now. Also to include some more
specific examples in the lectures or have
I liked
being able to listen to the lectures and I loved the live meetings
for extra help.
How contribute to career: I am
hoping to get a Masters in Public Health and this course will
help me do that and also help me advance at work.
Will
use new tools: I have to read articles at work and now I have
a better understanding of how to analyze them so I can get
the most from the information.
Topics to add:
Current public health issues”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/09/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
16:
“I have enjoyed this group and appreciate the comraderie and
support we have provided each other.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/10/01)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
178:
“Instructor: I thought Dr. Schoenbach was great and kept
the presentations interesting. Given the amount of material
needed to be covered, it was sometime difficult to take it
all in through one presentation.
TA: Julie was
great! Responsive and understanding.
The course
is extremely time consuming for a 3 hour course. The amount
of content needs to be decreased for an iintroductory course.
How contribute to career: Very little. Being as it is
a core requirement, I took the course. Given the amount of
work and little relevance to my job, I would not recommend
the course.
Will use new tools: In some articles,
epi terminology is used. I now have a better understanding
of those study statistics.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/15/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
182:
“Instructor: Yes the material is organized, however, several
topic areas could have been introduced as one topic (i.e. rates,
ratios, etc...and how to measure association with them) instead
of introducing those concepts right in the middle of learning
about cohort design or case-control designs... If possible
keep the topics to one subject area.
Questions
(tests & case studies) were often asked so generally, it
was difficult to determine exactly what was being asked.
Advance info wanted: Text book readings would be helpful
to get started on this way in advance.
How contribute
to career: Reviewing research articles. Evaluating data.
Will use new tools: Looking for associations between
causes of injury and injury prevalance/incidence. Determining
study design and evaluation methods.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/13/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
79:
“This course is sold as an innovative online class. It feels
like a traditional class that has been put online and not directed
by the newest pedagogy on distance learning.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
40:
“In general I greatly enjoy the content of the course and the
conceptual concepts. I greatly do not appreciate however the
lag in between the class lecture and my recitation section.
It's greatly confusing and not helpful to have the recitation
for the specific weeks correspoding lecture a week later. By
the time my recitation meets I've already had to start working
on the questions for the week prior, thus I get the concepts
from the two lectures mixed up.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
150:
“This class has been mass-produced and has become so formulaic
that has made a really interesting subject boring. I also did
not like how in the case studies there would be questions on
topics that we had not covered in class or in the readings;
this is not conducive to learning.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
237:
“Instructor: I felt that the material was presented in
a confusing way at times. I do think Dr. Schoenbach is extremely
knowledgable about the field, I just had trouble following
him sometimes.
TA: Julie was absolutely fantastic.
Knowledgable, always responsive, and willing to help!
Advance info wanted: how many hrs per week are expected,
not sure i knew quite how much time this course would take!!”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
195:
“Instructor: Excellent presentations. I liked the humor.
TA: Your quick and responsive answers were very helpful.
Our group seems to have lost enthusiasm towards the end and
after the exams. Perhaps a little "kick" might have been needed.
The content covers the subject extensively.
At
several points I felt like there were too many things going
on at once - group discussions, advanced readings, individuals
assignments, etc. These need to be coordinated.
Advance
info wanted: I feel there were just to many internet discussions
and I felt that our group lost enthusiasm towards the end.
Also the group exercises do not really promote discussion,
more a search for "the" answer. I'd like to have more free
flowi
How contribute to career: I do consulting
for community health centers and understanding these principles
is invaluable. While taking this course, I was working on a
major funding proposal. The concepts gave me a lot of confidence
in my discussions.
Will use new tools: I study
the health of vulnerable, underserved populations; course has
given many good tools. Used the RR in my proposal to discuss
minority health disparities.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/09/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
57:
“It would be EXTREMELY helpful if a reference sheet (with detailed
vocabulary) of the mathmatical formulas used in this were available
prior to the start of the semester. There isn't one posted
on the website or in the back of the text.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
232:
“How contribute to career: I would like to participate
in a study on the genetic risk factors for eye disease”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
148:
“I think this would have been an excellent class, I was very
interested in the material, but the course load was astronomical-
it was impossible to keep up and digest all of the information.
Also, taking it with our capstone class was completely unfair-
and unreasonable. I hope the school of public health feels
shame for what they did to all of us, and never does this to
anyone again”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
113:
“I really thought the class could have provided a clearer overview
of introductory Epi topics. We seemed to race through material
that I didn't understand and have an increased number of power
point slides during lecture that we less helpful. I think cutting
down on the lecture slides would draw more people to actually
attend lecture especially if they were focused on topics and
specifics about those topics (instead of huge broad overviews).
I appreciate that there was a lot of information to get to,
but it could have been presented in a more helpful format.
I appreciated the TAs power point slides, but would like to
have had them before the individual case studies were due in
order to properly prepare for recitation. Furthermore, I thought
the case study questions were sometimes worded in a less-than-straight-forward
manner; clearer questions would be great.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
119:
“It was a well designed course, and especially the group discussions
were well organized!”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/07)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
106:
“The study materials from Prof. and TA are really supportive
for learning epidemiological concepts. However, international
student like me has to take more time to cover all stuffs.
Sometime I don't understand the questions in case-studies when
I work on myself. But, I'm clarified when do discuss in the
lab session. Postponing individual due date and reducing submitted
questions were effective policy to decrease workload in this
class. However, they also reduced the degree of discussion
too. On exam3, slides from TA seem not be useful as always
do. They helped me point out where the information is, but
didn't guide me on critique as much as the reference book.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/06)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
10:
“I am really impressed with Group 2's working dynamic. Everyone
has contributed to group discussion and comes prepared to the
weekly recitations.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/26)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
142:
“The class was very difficult in terms of the workload. I felt
it was unfair to give students taking a required course not
their specified field of study take-home exams that were 10
or more hours long. Either the course should be a 4 hour course,
or the workload should change. The lecture slides were old,
ponderous and extremely long, full of minute details and mathematical
equations that most of the students in the class will never
use on a regular basis again. Finally, I felt that courses
in my field of training suffered because of the enormous amount
of time this class consumed: reading case studies and answering
questions every week; hours of lab every week; lecture every
week, and exams that required more time to complete than the
total hours in an average work day. My feeling is that this
course needs a complete overhaul. I would not recommend this
course to other students.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
215:
“Instructor: Thank you for being a professor who embraces
diversity as reflected in your enthisiasm for foreign languages.
The content has been very challenging
How
contribute to career: being able to measure disease”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/07/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
132:
“I am sure I have written this tons of times before. But I wanted
to let the instructor know that our TA, Kate, is excellent.
I felt like she got us through the course and gave us a lot
of support and encouragement. I hope that I can have her again,
maybe as an instructor soon.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
158:
“I enjoyed the class and how it was organized to meet objectives.
My only suggestion would be to spend more time on individual
case studies (less case studies) arriving at calculations within
those case studies (duplicating calculations) to help with
learning key concepts.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
140:
“The course does not apply principles of distance learning”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
49:
“The course is interesting so far, but the fact that it is lecture-based
really inhibits active learning.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
91:
“Volume and clarity of voice on Monday discussion is not great
desite even downloading Adobe audio. It would also be helpful
to students to work through a whole sample problem on the material
presented-the summaries are nice but not what is really needed.
/ Maybe there is a way for TAs to present this in slide format-I
think this would help solidify concepts to EPI students.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
239:
“Instructor: this was essentially a self taught course.
TA: he seemed very genuine in wanting to help, guide,
and re-direct.
Too much content in the time frame.
Therefore, assimilation and integration of course content was
compromised. This is a course that does not lend itself well
to self-learning in its current format. Evidence of this can
be seen in the exam scores. Ther
Too much overall
> information, course work/assignments, blackboard site, and
deliverables. Total information overload. Expectations did
not align with course content, delivery and course methodology.
Advance info wanted: I felt completely disadvantaged
taking this course with MHA Capstone. Not wise, nor conducive
to a positive learning experience. Recommendation: consider
the value of this course for MHA students. If it remains a
requirement, re-va
How contribute to career: I
may be able to converse with scientists that I come in contact
with based on terminology taught as well as overall role of
epidemiology in public health/population health. I will also
likely be able to more critically evaluate
Will
use new tools: Will not use these tools, as a hospital adminstrator.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
81:
“The weekly assignments are tough to keep up with, especially
having group and individual assignments due back to back.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
21:
“Would like a better means for file collaboration. The discussion
board is somewhat unwieldy. Haven't used the file exchange
but I think the wiki board would probably be best if we can
figure out how to use it. We have used google docs and that
worked well but I think some people were uncomfortable with
it.”
|
Suzanne,
MPH student,
PHPX,
TA: Beth
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/25)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
101:
“I enjoyed working with this group. Everyone was very supportive and worked well together.”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/12/08)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
131:
“Vic's enthusiasm is "infectious". He clearly wants his students
to learn and be able to use the material. Kate was a very effective,
responsive and helpful instructor. During the exam, I appreciate
her efforts to steer me in the right direction without being
overly directive.”
|
Edward,
CERT student,
PHCP,
TA: Kate
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
234:
“Sometimes the assignments are very close esp when doing
both the indvidual and group reading and it is stressful sometimes
The delivery of the course was very good.
Advance
info wanted: I recommend to give more highlights about the
important issues ( 1 page summary at end of each lesson)
How contribute to career: I will be involved in clinical
research regarding kidney and this will improve my research
experience
Will use new tools: Very useful in
research”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/06/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
184:
“Instructor: This course was too far "in the weeds" of
the technical epidemiological skills. I would have greatly
appreciated learning how this will impact me as a non-epidemiology
public health worker. This was not provided in the slightest,
and, from the best I can tell, never considered to be included.
TA: THe grading of exams was terrible. "See Answer Key"
does not really foster learning after the exam is returned.
Include practical applications for the rest of the students
in SPH since this is a survey course geared toward non-EPI
students.
How contribute to career: Apparently
Epidemiology will never impact my life. This class showed ABSOLUTELY
NO interaction with other career paths in public health. This
is a MAJOR concern that should be addressed.
Will
use new tools: Again, see above. There was never any discussion
about other careers -- just extremely technical epidemiology
that will not be applicable to other public health careers.
Topics to add: How does Epi pertain to BIOS, HPM, Nutrition,
HBHE, etc. Make this applicable to everyone else, not a prerequisite
for other EPI classes.”
|
(NCIPH,
Internet course,
12/11/2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
3:
“I don't really remember who these people are - most have done
nothing to warrant being remembered. They show up, i guess
they do some work and we move on without much from them. Some
are much better than others few are memorable.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Classroom course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
61:
“I feel that it would be more helpful to have the recitation
before the next class because starting a new topic while still
having to work on a previous topic is difficult.”
|
(TAeval1,
Classroom course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
30:
“Many of the case study questions ask for biostats computations
that have not been covered in the course. If you have not yet
taken biostats, as is my case, the weekly estimate of time
required for the course is far greater.”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/27)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
156:
“This course needs to be designed differently for Exceutive
MHA students , as we did not get a overall Executive Management
view as it relates to effective budgeting, operations, modeling
etc.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Internet course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
145:
“I felt like I had to teach myself this material. Dr. Schoenbach
is a wonderfully personable man and has immense knowledge and
vast experience in epidemiology, yet he is unable to hone that
in to teach a basic foundation of epid. I would suggest that
he teach upper level courses only. Epid is a very important
foundation for all of public health and it is disappointing
that I don't feel confident about any of the material. The
entire class is a swirl of confusion, from the scheduling to
the assignments. It really is a disservice to incoming students
wanting to build a strong foundation in epid.”
|
(UNCcourseeval,
Classroom course,
)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
128:
“Overall the group worked well. Please make this form work correctly
with google chrome!”
|
(2nd peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/12/09)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
75:
“Challenging, seems extremely fast paced when attepting to juggle
a full time job. The time necessary to fully understand and
digest the information has been eye opening. However, the material
is extremely interesting. Lectures notes are somewhat wordy
and difficult to follow without reading them several times.
(might be my own issue, no offence). The text has been an incredible
help in understanding the material though. I am enjoying the
course.”
|
(TAeval1,
Internet course,
2010)
Order by date submitted.
|
|
______________________________
|
27:
“I am enjoying this course and learning a lot about Epidemology.
Irina is very prompt about responding to my quesions and well
as Dr. Vic!”
|
(1st peer evaluation,
Internet course,
2010/09/29)
Order by date submitted.
|
(An additional 65 comments were received but the students did not
authorize their dissemination.)
2010cd,
compiled 1/23/2011 |