I. Goals of the course

You can look back for a detailed list but in brief:

• Make progress towards independence
• Distinguish observations from mere assertions
• Grasp the basics of molecular biology as a useful tool

Do you now have an understanding of these goals? Do you consider them worthy?

Your thoughts on independence? Including ability to gain value from a research article?

Your thoughts on observations/assertions (and paying attention to the experiments behind observations)?

Your thoughts on molecular biology?

II. The Means of the Course

These goals were to be achieved through means you can review in detail.
Please consider whether they helped you achieve the stated goals of the course:

1. The classroom experience
   Look back on the on-line notes (example), companions (example), experiment simulations (example) -- all done (in theory) outside of class, followed by discussions in class driven by responses to questionnaires (example). Consider:
   • While I'm convinced that in theory this experience offers a far better strategy to attain the goals of the class than lecturing, in practice... well, it wasn't often put in practice. After the early October exam, class attendance was about one-fourth of the total enrolled and the number of questionnaires submitted averaged a trifle over 1 per class.
      
   • Evidently, most people judged that going to class was not the best use of their time, which, of course, is their legitimate choice to make. I could take the view that catering to the perceived needs of a third of the class is good enough and the remainder can live with the outcome of their decision. Part of that outcome is a very low rate of P's. Or I can take the view that something ought to be done to attract a larger fraction of the class, while keeping faithful to what I feel is worthwhile. It's easy to find ways to attract a large fraction (compulsary attendance is the easiest, but there are others)... but at the same time guide the class to something that's valuable in the long term? That's tough.
      
   • I would very much like a theory that is put into practice, class activities that are so worthwhile that class is worthy of your time, and discovery simulations that actually promote discovery, because people actually engage in them and discover (or, failing that, some other route that achieves the course's goals). I wonder how to get there. Attempt to compel these activities? Can you instill free will and independence by compelling it (whatever that means)? Besides, you should know better than I what is the best use of your time.
      
   • It may be that there is no single theory that can accommodate the inclinations of the diverse approaches of people enrolled this year and in past years. Perhaps we need two separate courses, one for one self-selected group and one for another. What do you think about this?

   Your thoughts?
   
    

2. Results vs conclusions
   The focus on primary research articles throughout the semester, supplemented by exercises in class, the summary of an experiment, the semester project, and constant harping throughout the semester, were all attempts to help you see the difference between results and conclusions and the importance of understanding the experiment that led to a result. There were also many guides to help you develop strategies to cope with confusion, an inescapable part of science. ...And not only science. What other defense is there against fake news except to demand the evidence?

   The semester project will be considered separately in a moment, but besides that, your thoughts? Did it work?
   
    

3. The semester project
   I saw this as an opportunity to view research as something more than science fairs, to see how questions are raised by prior experimental results, and -- most important -- to engage in a scientific dialogue with a mentor who sees science not as a classroom lecture but rather a lifelong calling. I tried to spread the activity over the semester, but for many this didn't appear to happen.
   • What did you gain from writing a research proposal or translating an article?
      
   • What did you gain from the panel discussion of your work?
      
   • Did your ability to give a presentation improve?
      
   • (Translators) Creating a website added another layer of complexity. Was learning how to do that worthwhile?
      
   • Are you better able to put yourself in the shoes of your target audience and communicate with them in mind?
      
   • Few people mounted a sustained effort starting from the beginning to the end of the semester (see the time line). Many relied on a burst of creative activity during the last week or two.
      
   • Some mentors commented on the scarcity of meetings suggested by their mentees.

   Your thoughts?
   
    

4. Exams
   • The first was a straightforward attempt to make sure you knew what the course was about. The other two concerned matters we had covered the weeks preceding the exam. These exams were designed to be not too taxing if you had kept up with problem sets, study questions, and simulations. If you had not, I can see that they could be very arduous affairs.
      
   • They were also supposed to be interesting, offering you an occasional glimpse into present day molecular biology (e.g. sensor bacteria).
      
   • And they were intended to be realistic simulations as to how you might approach problems years from now: no restrictions on outside resources, no short-term time limits.
      
   • Were they worthwhile?
      
   • (I don't know where to put this,... so here) Honesty is the bedrock of science (see Feynmann quote). A relatively small issue... in the second exam, 8 people wrote that they had submitted the post-exam questionnaire, 9 said they would soon, 2 said they would try, and 1 said not yet (total 20 responses). In fact, only 12 people submitted responses. In the third exam, 9 said they did, 13 said they would, and 1 said he planned to (total 23 responses). In fact, again only 12 people did. The discrepancy disturbs me.
         A relatively large issue. Approximately 30% of the class actively collaborated on the second exam and yet asserted, without comment, that they "...had neither received nor given aid...." This happens every year, and I doubt that students in this class are so much different from other students at VCU. I am more concerned with the false assertion than the collaboration itself.

   Your thoughts?
   
    

5. Help and feedback
   The idea was for problem sets you turn in to result in extensive feedback from either Shahzeb or Cove. They also had regular help sessions. I met with you individually during each of the last two exams and had additional individual meetings with many of you. There was also written feedback for the first two exams (but not the last), your summary of an experiment, and feedback related to your proposals and presentations. Some feedback came from your peers. There was also feedback during class. Add it up... How did this work for you? Did you feel you had adequate opportunity to get the help and feedback you needed?

   Your thoughts?
   

III. Bottom line

1. What advice would you give someone entering the class?
   
    
2. Three things you'd advise that this class never to do again?
   
    
3. Three things you'd advise that this class keep doing at all costs?
   
    
4. Three ideas that would make the course better for those that come after you? (I know... make shorter questionnaires)
   
    
5. Did you get what you wanted out of the course? If so, what? If not, what did you miss?
   Do you feel more proficient in some way? If so, how?
   What if anything do you think will still be with you from the course in five years?

A LONG questionnaire... Thanks!

  REMEMBER TO CLICK SUBMIT!