Student comments from EPID600 Summer 2011

(in random order - click here for date order)

(See note about student comments)

______________________________

51: “This class was very disappointing. I hated the format of learning from a group that was mostly "certificate" program people. Receiving the "group case studies" so far after the turn in date was unacceptable- as is the webform. The arrogance of the instructor in this class did not go unnoticed. The MHA/MPH students are very accustomed to turning in spreadsheet exams- the webforms are very outdated and waste student's time transcribing. I will do well in this class despite the "hostile learning " environment. Not allowing students to choose their work group is beyond obnoxious, condescending and paternalistic.

Time to update this class- its no longer 1990.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

39: “The professor is clearly skilled and dedicated, and has invested a huge amount of time and energy into this course. I respect his ability and his intentions.

However, as a student, I found the course ineffective. From an academic perspective, this appeared to be a typical "weed-out" course that you might find at the beginning of a poorly designed undergraduate curriculum. As far as I can tell, there was little if any discussion on where epidemiology fits into public health, healthcare administration, or any other topic outside algebra. There was a checklist of topics (the table of contents for the course text?) and the students simply went on a forced march through it. This was below expectations for a top-ranked school of public health.

From a practical or applied point of view, the course was marginal. I could discern no effort by the professor to emphasize any concept over any other concept, or to provide a sense of perspective. Every topic was given the same rote treatment -- a PowerPoint that was too long to remember and then mechanical question after mechanical question. This method might have some merit if the course was three times as long, but in the time allotted it became Kabuki theater.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone who did not already have a concept of epidemiology will retain the larger concepts more than a few hours after the last exam. I honestly believe that I could have learned as much -- probably more -- by reading the text and taking a few multiple choice exams. The bulk of this course was a math refresher, simply word problems that happened to be about epidemiology. Stunningly, however, the math section was not taught in class -- students were expected to pick this up outside of the course, as if time allowed.

This was a foundational error. The professor lost touch with core concepts in effective pedagogy and compromised the course. ***If the skill or topic is important enough to make 50%+ of the questions on it, then the professor should spend 50%+ of class time on it.***

This is not a gray area, or one on which reasonable people might differ. If significant digits, calculating ratios, etc. are important enough to determine a student's grade then these should get the class time. Instead students combed through 50-, 80-, 100- slide PowerPoint presentations / lectures on material that could have been condensed to a fraction of that.

An introduction to a field is different from a survey. Every field worth teaching has a long list of important concepts, techniques, and other touchstones. This does not mean that students must be exposed to them all in chronological order with roughly equal weight. Forcing a student to complete a word problem on a topic does not force the student to understand, appreciate nor certainly retain the subject matter. In fact, the professor might consider that forcing students who are not pursuing a career in epidemiology to endure hundreds of these problems might have the opposite effect he intends. I say this with respect and as someone who scored in the top quartile of Exam 1.

My hope is that the professor did not have much choice in his approach, and that leadership dictated a large amount of subject matter was to be drilled into a mix of students without regard to their background or educational objectives. This course seemed like the very skillful, determined execution of an outmoded, poorly conceived and irrelevant plan.

There is an old expression, "I asked him what time it was and he told me how to build a watch." I had hoped to learn what time it was: the most exciting, interesting concepts in epidemiology, how the field had evolved and what lies ahead. It would have been great to get a primer on the handful of key concepts and seminal literature, and come away with an appreciation and understanding of them. There are courses at UNC-CH and elsewhere that achieve this, even for technical subjects, even in short time periods � it can be done.

I would have settled for learning how to build a watch. That course would have covered perhaps half as much detail as the current course, with time spent teaching problems (not just grading them and letting students draw their own conclusions from comments that few students had time or inclination to read) and the math behind epidemiology.

But we got neither of these. Students didn't get the time or the plan for the watch. I have no idea what the pivotal challenges or nascent breakthroughs in Epidemiology are, but I am pretty sure that researchers 10 years ago had a tough time with autistic kids in New Jersey.

Instead, students spent our summer measuring the teeth on the gears of the watch. We were very careful to measure each gear - and only those gears - listed in the industry-standard plan available at any community college. Then we were graded on giving the answers in millimeters not micrometers.

Surely this course could be overhauled, and students matched to it better than they are now. Surely the professor could apply his considerable talents to identifying and highlighting the key elements of such an important field. Sometimes it's tough to walk away from an approach that has worked well in the past, especially when that approach may have been well received and even innovative at its conception. But isn't public health best served by measuring results and moving to what works, no matter previous results or researcher bias?

This course was not a failure on the part of the professor or even the program. For an effort to remain misguided as consistently and as long as this one, responsibility is with senior leadership.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

34: “The entire learning experience is great. Please increase the return of graded assignments if possible. The team work has been helpful.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

13: “EPID600 was a very challenging course, and one where the material covered was brand new to me. Because of this, I felt very overwhelmed at times by the subject material and how we had to apply what we were learning (for me, for the first time!) to analyzing different studies and journal articles. The Course Modules were very helpful, and I loved interacting with my peers during the newly formed "live-sessions" we had. I don't think the course would have gone as smoothly for me if I hadn't taken part in a "live-group." Despite all of that, though, the exams (and I presume the final paper, although we have not turned it in yet) were very, very challenging. This is the first course where I have not set my goal for an "H" or an "A". My goal is to pass the course, and I think VIC and the TAs have helped me realize that even if I *do* bomb the exams, passing the course is still a possibility. This is the first course I have not been overly concerned with grades. It's refreshing, to just focus on material... and know that a passing grade will suffice due to the hard nature of the material.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

8: “Professor Schoenbach is obviously an expert in the subject matter and models great enthusiasm for it. He responded quickly by email each time I attempted contact. Some of the course content was presented in a way that assumed more familiarity with operations, calculations or content prior to this course than I had.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

15: “Vic clearly has a passion for the material and an ability to present it in a clear and compellng way. The material was comprehensive and clear. The assignments were challenging yet doable. The assignments engaged me in the subject matter and increase my knowledge and interest. This was really the surprise positive course of my time in the program; I would look at the epid material for enjoyment when I got burned out with my other class.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

35: “The number of group assignments is a bit overwhelming. Some difficulty experienced with meeting group deadlines due to difference in time zones.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

1: “For the most part I thought that relationship between the coverage of concepts in class/lectures in relation to exam materials was fair. But, I don't think this was true for measures of association. Given the focus on this material in case studies, the lectures should have given more time to this topic. Also, while I worked very well with my group and I'm glad I had them and our TA was available via email, it would have been helpful to have her present for a lab sometimes to answer questions. The one thing that gets lost in an online class is the ability to ask those off-the-cuff questions, normally small clarifications that can increase understanding. We had little time for this. The live sessions were great (recommend doing this again, more frequently!) and afforded some opportunity for this but were normally too large to accommodate such questions. That being said, overall I did enjoy the class. Other public health classes use powerpoint presentations for lectures and after watching all of Vic's lectures, I firmly believe ALL online classes should utilize his videotaped format. It's much more effective and engaging when you're sitting in a room alone at a computer trying to learn. He's an excellent and personable instructor and I was glad to have him for this course, for which I was a little bit nervous! He is by far the best instructor I have had to date in this program.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

36: “was hoping this would be a more detailed course. and course was more correctly aimed at evaluation of medical literature than straight epidemiology”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

26: “This evaluation form should have a "don't know or NA" column answer choice and the choice designation for each column should be clearer”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

25: “This class is not well suited to online teaching as it is difficult material and there is no access to the teacher to ask questions. The Livemeeting technology is antiquated and cumbersome.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

16: “Dr S. is an outstanding professor! I am a mid career professional in public health and this course has strengthened my committment and passion to the cause.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

53: “I have never been challenged more in a course. Vic is a very knowledgable instructor that teach's so the student actually learns. It is not a class to be taken lightly, but a very rewarding and big accomplishment when completed.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

3: “For a student not majoring in epidemiology, I thought the amount of work for the class was a bit much in terms of reading, lectures, case studies, and meetings. I also thought the midterm length of ~12 hours to complete was a bit lengthy. However, I did get a lot out of the course and the instructor did an excellent job of explaining the material.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

17: “did not interact with the instructors much as the TAs were visibile during group work. When I did reach out to Vic, he was very responsive and professional.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

33: “Great instructor, great class. Just wish I had the luxury of more time to focus on the material. That's nothing to do with the quality of the course - just a personal issue.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

54: “One of the main challenges for many in the class was the level of complexity for an introductory class. Dr. Schoenbach is obviosuly an expert in this field and I think he just tries to do too much during the class and it overwhelms the students, especially those without an Epi background.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

47: “I have taken many other graduate classes before, including another Epidemiology class, but this has been one of the best run classes I have ever taken.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

55: “Overall the coursework was appropriate and relevant to my educational objectives. The instructor was quite haughty and this attitude was clearly present in the few online live sessions. Rarely were students' questions answered. This arrogant attitude was also prevalent among the TAs with a few exceptions. I've done well in this course in spite of the foregoing challenges.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

14: “I would describe the pace of this course in the summer term as relentless. I felt very challenged and would have enjoyed having a bit more downtime to let concept marinate in my brain before moving on.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

19: “I was actually afraid of this class before I took it, but I ended up really enjoying it. It was a lot of work, but I enjoyed the class!”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

4: “The first exam was very challenging for me, however I learned the most so far from working hard and completing it. I also appreciated the leniency on the deadline and the ability to earn extra points. The exam was ironically the best part of the course so far, in terms of really learning and studying the material. While I didn't get the greatest grade, I really felt challenged and proud of myself for pushing myself to learn.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

28: “The course has been great. The switching of dates has been another layer of complication for the course, but I think the changes definitely helped my ability to do the work and the timing. I feel pretty confident taking the tests, and I have learned so much.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

31: “I am the type of person who learns best from lectures and seeing examples and I felt that this class lacked that. I would have liked that the lectures be more helpful in explaining some of the more in depth concepts - of which there are many in this course! Epidemiology is not my strong suit I learned :)”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

21: “The asynchronous learning opportunity EPID600 Internet version provided some much needed work-life balance; I was able to work full-time, look after my family and "go to school".”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

2: “I feel like this class could have afforded me a better understanding of epidemiology by making the lecture and readings more engaging and palatable. While the material was challenging, the format of case studies and online lectures was not dynamic enough to encourage greater understanding beyond the basic concepts. If the goal of the class is to present only the basic concepts, I also feel that this could have been done in a more straightforward manner and achieved the same results.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

22: “I was put off by the "cost" of hints on exams, which made my hesitant to ask questions when I could not tell if the answer would be considered a "free" clarification or a hint that would cost points.

In general, I did not have trouble with the online submission form, but several members of my small group did. There are other options for submitting work through blackboard, it would be much appreciated if the instructors considered these options.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

10: “First, many thanks to Vic and TAs for their hard work.

1. I would shorten the length of the recorded lectures

2. i would have loved to finish with a very solid understanding of some core concepts (odds ratio, RR, etc), which I don't feel is the case. Many of the case study questions do not seem to be directly related to these concepts (ie, a lot of work, very little learning).”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

44: “I am upset at the University that I had to take this class to begin with. I had already taken an equivalent course through another university that I thought was equivalent to this course; however, my request to opt out of this class was denied. I did not read the book, I did not listen to the lectures, and I did not do any of the optional readings, and I still made 90's and above on all my assignments. Being forced to take this class was a waste of my time, and it did not challenge me in the slightest. I feel like the only reason I was forced to take this class is because UNC wanted to squeeze more money out of me. I took a similar course taught by an instructor who use to teach this exact same course at UNC, and I also worked for the EPI department for a whole year. I felt like my experiences were adequate to be excused from this course, but I was denied. I am extremely upset at the University for wasting my time and money in forcing me to take this course. Next time, listen to your students instead of nickel and dimming them for all they are worth. With that being said, I think that the way this class is organized is great. The instructor is fantastic! I would suggest that the groups might be smaller. It's difficult to hold a conversation about groups answers with 8 - 9 people all chiming in at once.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

11: “Great course!”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

50: “This course requires more instructor led learning. It is too technical in nature to rely on self-study.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

29: “Exceptionally well organized.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

12: “I think the course and instructor focuses too much time and effort explaining and asking too many things from his distance learning students. Irrespective of the expectations as a student regardless of what program, I think it should be duly noted and acknowledged that I've never felt so pressured in my life to read PARAGRAPHS after PARAGRAPHS after PARAGRAPHS about instructions on how to do things, on what to do, and when last minute changes occur. Furthermore, asking students to sign MULTIPLE honor code pledges shows me that 1. you are too lazy to create new exams and questions 2. You are too paranoid about people copying you and do not have ANY trust in your students.

Both of this coupled with the crazy amounts of instructions creates a classroom environment not suitable for distance learners or those that are in executive programs who have LIVES outside of graduate work. I felt like that was NOT taken into consideration and I was amazed at the busy work that was thrown at us. We working adults have the capabilities to apply our knowledge in so many ways other than just busy work (ie. take home exams that takes 10 hours!? COME ON!).

I think he tries to treat all his students equally, but not wanting to overcome, improvise, and adapt to his student types and needs is a huge downfall for this class.

I liked the material, but just did not like how we working adults were viewed as untrustworthy and as if we are an undergrad. I've had enough instructors throughout my time to know those professors that are willing to work with their students in that sense and have some sympathy.

I beg someone in the department to seriously re-evaluate the way he makes the older students feel about these long instructions with mulitple honor code pledges.... [Note from Vic: all graded work at UNC is supposed to be accompanied by an Honor Pledge; Honor Code violations in EPID600 have involved undergraduate students, graduate students, and executive students.]

p.s.--> we dont need half points. whoever created that is ridiculous. Just give partial credit , based on the work the student provided.

lets not complicate things and make it simple. that is all.

thanks for a great semester nevertheless.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

6: “this course would be more effective if there were live class meetings. I would recommend a live meeting at the beginning of the semester on campus. although time is an issue I think live weekly on-line lectures by Vic would be helpful for learning the material”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

5: “I appreciated the lectures in both video and powerpoint format. It helps me to learn in multiple formats. Like the light-hearted jokes/stories in the lecture. Exams were long and hard, but really appreciate the partial credit. Learned a lot about reading and analyzing articles and research studies that will be helpful to me in my career. Thanks!”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

52: “I felt the exams were too close together. I understand grading the types of exams that are given takes some time but would have liked getting the first exam back with more time to review it prior to exam 2. Overall I think the case studies and exams really stimulate learning better than other approaches. I especially like learning how to critique studies. I always wanted to be able to look at a study and determine whether or not the information was reliable and now I feel that I can. This is a great introduction to epidemiology.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

40: “I'm disappointed with this class. I was really excited to begin this class but it has been a big let down. I like the recorded lectures but there is a disconnect between the lecture, readings, and the case studies. I know that the professor mentioned that the course is designed that way to teach us to become analytic thinkers however it is hard to do that if you can't connect the pieces. I would have liked to learn about how to analyze the articles for the cases and connect them back to the text and the lectures.

I am thankful for the exam reviews and I think that they were helpful. I believe that the the instructor does not respect our time and assigns exams and case studies that take hours to complete. Exam 1 took over 20 hours to complete. I spend 10 or more hours on the case answers.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

56: “The instructor was not available, the TA was, and she was helpful. THe instructor did not actually teach this class; any lectures were useless, I was better off spending my time teaching myself, which is how I made it through the class. I have never seen such a poor grading structure, I got a very low grade on exam 1 partly because I did not know the material, but also because I did not get partial credit for what I did complete. I cannot wait for this class to be over. It seems more like a rite of passage than anything educational.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

45: “This is my last semester of grad school and I have never had an exam in grad school take as long as Exam 1 (avg 8-10 hours expected). It would be fine to have 2 exams total in the class (midterm and final) but having a third exam in addition to the very high quantity of individual case study q's (for extra credit) weekly as well as the group case study q's (required) weekly was too much busy work for the course for very little learning benefit. I devoted more time to this course than almost any other class in 3 years of grad school. The amount of work did not seem equitable with the high quantity and time expectation of 3 exams.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

7: “This course is really difficult for a basic epidemiology class. The tests are really hard and take a lot more time then I believe they should. The number of questions on the tests and the amount of time that is given don't seem to be very well thought out.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

27: “I am in the HPM MPH exec. program and this was a frustrating class because it was hard to relate this information to real life situations. The material in the lectures and the book did not correspond to what we were expected to know for the exams. There was too much missing information. For example log problems, complex math set ups, and termonology that was not made clear in lectures but showed up on the exams. The articles were germane to the broad subject headings but the nitty gritty nature of the exam questions and biostatistic mathematical gymnastics left me wondering what I was to learn from the course material relative to the articles and more important, the practical take home of the article's findings. Our group spent needless hours on the homework problems initially until we were directed to the TA's. The question for me was "How and where do I use this knowledge in my working life that will improve what I do?" The course website was well organized and the material easy to find.

Suggestions: 1. Combine Epi, HBHE, and Envir. for Exec MPH/MHA into one course or a course and a half. I understand the SPH requirement to have these but I have found them to be the least practical of all the courses in the Exec. HPM Program. 2. Cluster people of like programs together in small groups. On campus and off-campus students have different agendas and time commitments making it harder to coordinate schedules.

3. For Epi, get the TA's involved directly in the small sessions from the start so we can dialogue about the problems. Emails don't work for all concepts.

4. Have more instructor visibility besides just the recorded lectures.

5. Smaller classes. Impossible to ask questions with monster size classes like we had.

6. Illuninate was terrible. Could not see other's questions and no voice connection to talk.

7. Find out class member's job description (at least those in the Exec program) so that the article selection just might apply to their area of interest or expertise. It brings the articles closer to reality for them and the opportunity to offer some practical insight to the rest of the class. I hope these help in some way to improve the program.

I had no significant interaction with Ms. Alexander therefore used N/A for her evaluation

Joe Stavas Cohort 59”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

18: “Dr. Schoenbach was very well-organized and presented this difficult material in a clear manner. My only difficulty in the class was that some of the case study questions were unclear and therefore difficult to interpret. Overall I really enjoyed this class, and I appreciated our work with real journal articles. I have already started to directly apply the knowledge that I have gained from this course in my work. Lastly, I didn't have any contact with Professor Alexander and didn't hear from her much during the course so I didn't rate her in my evaluation.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

23: “I had no comment for Lorraine, because I'm not really sure what her role in the course was, nor do I have any recollection of interacting with her. I think she facilitated online discussions. Anyway, I heard some negative comments from others about Vic's lectures, but I thoroughly enjoyed them. My biggest complaint is that for the shortened schedule of a summer course, this seemed very packed with things to do, and the lectures in particular were long. Also, there were a few points in the lectures where students present at the recording asked questions, which were inaudible. Usually Vic repeated the questions, but sometimes did not, making his answer inexplicable. Also, occasionally in the lecture, Vic would say things like "here and here", referring to something on a slide, but whatever he was pointing at with a mouse wasn't apparent to "the players at home."”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

43: “Please make this evaluation later in the term - it does not seem like a fair evaluation before I have finished my term (before Exam 2 of 3). Also, questions like these need to be tailored for online students”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

46: “Very promt in responding to students and gratious with time contraints for turning in work.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

41: “I had heard that EPID 600 was demanding but the professor's taped lectures made it worth the effort”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

24: “The answer submission webform is a fairly miserable medium for manipulating the lengthy calculations and spreadsheets that are frequently the easiest and clearest way to answer a particular question.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

38: “I thoroughly enjoyed this class. It was evident that the professor gave us numerous opportunities to learn the concepts. I would recommend it without reservation! (The only reason I didn't rate Professor Alexander is because I didn't have any contact. I have nothing negative to say about her work.)”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

9: “This course was very disorganized and difficult to keep up with. The amount of valuable learning inherent in the course was not sufficient to account for the amount of work involved.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

42: “Vic, I really appreciated how responsive you were to emails. I felt that the recorded lectures, paired with the live meetings, were very effective. I also liked that we went over exam questions during a live meeting. This allowed me to thoroughly understand the questions that I got wrong. It was a good learning exercise. Exam one was very long, however I thought it was a fair assessment of what we had learned. Practice through the case study questions prepared us for success on the exam. I have enjoyed having live meetings with my group members. While it is time-consuming, I believe that having interactive time with my group mates through skype and live meeting was key in understanding case study material.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

48: “The tests were entire too long and took us past the bonds of understanding the 'basics' of the field of Epid. Often felt like a statistician or math major. I feel having to decipher calculations is more biostats than epid. work. Overall professor and TAs were extremely helpful, knowledgealbe and professional. This course was was alittle more advanced for my liking for a foundational course.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

32: “An excellent and extremely challenging course. Well done!!!”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

49: “While the professor of this class was very good, the organization of the class could use some work.The questions for each case study do not seem very consistent with the material presented in each lecture and the assigned book chapters, and often questions relate to material that is presented one week later in the lecture. It is really very frustrating and I don't feel as if I am continually learning new information in a consistent manner, rather I feel as though my learning of information is very scattered. I wish that the questions related more to the material presented in the lecture, whether that means changing the lectures or changing the questions I'm not sure. I am not suggesting to remove questions that involve critical thinking, but just to make the material and case studies more consistent. There are often many questions that seem to come out of left field and frustrate many students - and many of them also don't seem to have much learning benefit either.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

30: “The assignments were very good. Team approach to learning is also exceptional for this course.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

37: “Having the excel spreadsheets were nice for the exam and the some of the case studies that had them. It would be nice if the all had them with data tables from the articles. It makes calculations easier and less time consuming when they are available.

My TA (Zack), was very helpful. He was quick to respond to questions, inform us of changes in the class schedule, provided additional examples, and also brought to our attention questions a greater percentage of us had difficulty with on the case studies after we submitted them, and helped explain the rationale behind them.

The groups for the case studies need to be smaller, trying to communicate with, coordinate schedules, and come to a consensus answers with 10 people is difficulty.

The amount of time spent of the case studies each week is not worth what it attributes to your overall course grade (e.g., spending 15 hours a week on a case study should be worth more than 10% of your overall grade). I feel that the effort I have put into this course should be reflected in my grade, but since most of my effort went to only 10% of the overall grade, it probably won't which is very frustrating as a student.

Also, my understanding was this was an introductory course, and some of the expectation of the problems did not appear to be introductory in nature, as they were not discussed in the course lectures or readings. More straightforward examples are needed in order to better our understanding and help complete the case studies and exams. I think that professors that are very knowledgable about this material, like Vic is, forget what it is like to have no background in the subject being taught, and teach and assess way too far above and beyond the student's current level of understanding. I also think that "learning from your mistakes" as Vic said, is not the best way to learn from exams when they are worth 90% of your grade!!

The course is disorganized--I still do not understand why there is a separate website for the course and also material on Blackboard. This is way too confusing. I don't understand why all the course information cannot be placed on Blackboard like every other course I've ever taken at UNC. Also, it would be nice if the items on Blackboard were uploaded as word documents and not just links to a new webpage.

For the question above asking, "How well do you know where your stood in terms of performance in this course?" is difficult to answer as we have only gotten 1 exam grade (worth 30-35% of our grade), and grades of our case studies back (worth about 10% of the grade), we still have 2 exams and a peer evaluation that we will not know the results of until near the end of the course). I am not sure why we are filling out course evaluations when we still have 3 weeks of class left (approximately 25% of the semester), I think this is an issue that UNC needs to resolve.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.
______________________________

20: “At the beginning of the course, Vic said that this was not a math class but that is exactly what it was. We didn't discuss the concepts of Epi or the applications - we just did math. I don't think it matters in my career if I know how to calculate the crude birth rate of Tanzania. The School of Public Health needs to develop a section of this class strictly for Executive MHA/MPH students that is more relevant to modern applications of Epi that has a more reasonable workload and is not so focused on doing math. I spent the majority of my time in this class googling the answers to things which I could have done for free rather than paying $2000 for the privilege. In other courses that involved math, the professors explained how the math worked but had us apply the concepts to real life situations. I would have gotten a lot more out of this class if I didn't have to try to remember concepts from College Algebra I took 20 years ago.”
(UNCcourseeval, Internet course, 201107)
Order by date submitted.

Back to top Information for students EPID600 home page

2011b, compiled 08/14/2011