|
Science, Technology and Engineering |
 |
TeachingDepartment of BiochemistrySubject Review - Student Feedback - 2007Click on the unit title below to read how we have responded to your questionnaire responses. BCH2BMA BCH2BMB MED22IMM MED3MCG MED3NIC BCH31MMB BCH32MCB HONOURS ________________________________________________________________________________ Unit coordinator: Dr Liz Johnson Unit coordinator’s comments on the unit this year Introduction of tutorials was popular and was further refined in BCH2BMB where there appeared to be a significant shift in the A grades although not a shift in the pass rate. An alternative strategy is to identify “at-risk” students early and encourage them to work more effectively at an earlier stage. The calendar too in WebCT may be a strategy to assist students to manage workload and space out work for assessments better. Unit coordinator’s suggestions for improvements next year Update unit outline to include objectives and generic skills. Review assessment tasks to match learning objectives. Target tutorials to assessments (practice exams etc). Shift tutorial times to maximise attendance. Introduce calendar too on Web CT. Review minimum requirements for lecture notes.
Unit coordinator: Dr Liz Johnson Unit coordinator’s comments on the unit this year Response to outline questionnaire was poor (36) by comparison with surveys completed in class (2006, 117) which limits the value of the data. This may improve in 2008 as the students become more familiar with the system and release date for the survey is earlier. The quantitative data from the online questionnaire is quite strong with a mean response of 3.87. Student awareness of generic skills was reasonable but may be enhanced by increasing the emphasis on the development and assessment of skills. Introduction of tutorials was popular and was further refined in BCH2BMB where there appeared to be a significant shift in the A grades although not a shift in the pass rate. An alternative strategy is to identify “at-risk” students early and encourage them to work more effectively at an earlier stage. Provision of comprehensive lecture notes before the lectures continues to be an issue. Staff are reluctant to provide notes which might be seen as an adequate replacement for lecture attendance. Some students value the time taken to work through handouts in class and others prefer to concentrate on listening. Unit coordinator’s suggestions for improvements next year Update unit outline to include objectives and generic skills. Review assessment tasks to match learning objectives. Target tutorial times to assessments (practice exams etc). Shift tutorial times to maximise attendance. Introduce calendar too on Web CT. Review minimum requirements for lecture notes. Include lab skill and data analysis practicals at the start of semester.
MED221MM: Summary from student evaluations - 2006 Students recorded strongly positive comments about MED22IMM. They found the content very interesting and relevant to their study. Students felt the subject was well-taught and the lecturers were clear although they would have preferred lecture notes available before the lectures. Students felt staff were enthusiastic and helpful and particularly praised the demonstrators (thankyou Kelly for an excellent job). Students found the workload too high and some suggested the pace of the lectures was too fast particularly towards the end of the semester. Students also commented that the practical notes needed to be clearer. Results for this questionnaire must be interpreted with caution as the sample size was small with only half the class completing questionnaires. Action for 2007
Unit coordinator: Dr Liz Johnson/Professor Don Phillips Unit coordinator’s comments on the unit this year In 2007 the case study program was expanded to four case studies in semester 1 and a single case study in semester 2. Students strongly supported this teaching mode (and reported a high score on development of written communication) but the associated workload was too high. Students are appreciative of the efforts of the teaching staff but still have difficulty with complex organisation. A number of timetabling changes were made to accommodate absent staff or other staff commitments. Unit coordinator’s suggestions for improvements next year Three case studies/semester. Space out due dates for assessment with a reduced load at the end of the semester. This may be facilitated using the Calendar tool in WebCT. Review organisation and delivery of haematology prac (EDJ). Aim to improve QA responses to 4.0 average. Increase consistency of delivery between lecture blocks.
Unit coordinator: Dr Liz Johnson/Professor Don Phillips Unit coordinator’s comments on the unit this year The introduction of the new cancer biology prac has increased the time spent in wet lab classes and appeared to be successful with students. One case study was successfully introduced into semester 2. There are still issues with the assessment timetable although assessment deadlines for the final unit were all negotiated with students. Unit coordinator’s suggestions for improvements next year Introduce case study program to all major blocks in semester 2. Review due dates for assessments and possibly introduce the Calendar tool in WebCT to help student planning. Increase consistency in requirements for prac (assessment, hrs bench work).
_______________________________________________________________________________ Honours Responses from all students were received. More than half of the Students thought that the combination of lab work, supervisor discussions and talking to other members of the department had helped their learning. All students appreciated the independent learning environment and half thought that the support within the department was excellent. The students thought there were too many assignments, that they started too late and that some were not organised early enough in advance and were disruptive to their lab work. Many students also wanted to have some sort of formal mid year break. Many students felt isolated from others Hons students and not informed about the "natural course" of the Hons year, eg when could they expect to get some results. They also were not clear about whether some students started earlier than others and were afraid of any unfair advantage gained this way.
Changes made for 2007 1. A three day break introduced in the middle of the year 2. Assignments started from the third day of the Hons Year three. 3. Introductory Pizza after two weeks of Hons course to;
4. 2/3 Pizza meetings to alert and inform students about their final challenges and future directions. 5. Rather than assigments based exclusively on special Hons seminars, some assignments based on seminars that are integral to the Biochemistry department and which students are expected to attend. 6. Early checking and feedback about Literature review which forms backbone of final literature review in thesis.
Content Approved by: Head of School
Page maintained by: Web Administrator Last Updated: 14 January, 2009
|
