Spelman College 1st Annual Q-BIO Workshop

Friday, March 11, 2016

Thank you for taking the time to participate in the q-bio workshop. Your comments will enable us to better plan and execute future workshops and tailor them to meet your needs.
If you have any questions about this survey, please contact the Office of Internal Evaluation Services at 404-270-5787.

Question Title

* 1. Please indicate your affiliation information:

Name of your institution:

Your position:

City/Town

State/Province

Email Address

Question Title

* 2. Please rate the quality of the content in the workshop sessions today.

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	NA
Length of Talks	Length of Talks Poor	Length of Talks Fair	Length of Talks OK. Average	Length of Talks Good	Length of Talks Excellent	Length of Talks NA
Speaker/Talk Quality	Speaker/Talk Quality Poor	Speaker/Talk Quality Fair	Speaker/Talk Quality OK. Average	Speaker/Talk Quality Good	Speaker/Talk Quality Excellent	Speaker/Talk Quality NA
Posters	Posters Poor	Posters Fair	Posters OK. Average	Posters Good	Posters Excellent	Posters NA
The workshop content and scope met my expectations	The workshop content and scope met my expectations Poor	The workshop content and scope met my expectations Fair	The workshop content and scope met my expectations OK. Average	The workshop content and scope met my expectations Good	The workshop content and scope met my expectations Excellent	The workshop content and scope met my expectations NA

Additional Comments

Question Title

* 3. What part(s) of the workshop did you find to be effective or helpful?

Ability to network/establish new contacts

Group discussion

Debriefing strategies

Workshop resources, such as poster, materials provided, etc.

Hearing different perspectives

Brainstorming ideas

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 4. Please evaluate the session presented by: Susanne von Bodman, NSF Program Officer
"Quantitative Biology Initiative"

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content OK. Average	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance OK. Average	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies OK. Average	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session

Do you have any additional comments about this specific presentation? Please be direct in your comments.

Question Title

* 5. Please evaluate the session presented by: Eberhard Voit, Georgia Tech
"Systems Biology: Excitement, Opportunities, Challenges"

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content OK. Average	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance OK. Average	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies OK. Average	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session

Do you have any additional comments about this specific presentation? Please be direct in your comments.

Question Title

* 6. Please evaluate the session presented by: Sanjukta Hota, Fisk University
"Development of Bio-Track Curriculum at Fisk University"

	Poor	Fair	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend this session

Do you have any additional comments about this specific presentation? Please be direct in your comments.

Question Title

* 7. Please evaluate the session presented by: Gregory Goins, North Carolina A&T State University
"A Few Words from the Front Lines on Blending Biomathematics Curricula and Research for Undergraduates"

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content OK. Average	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance OK. Average	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies OK. Average	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session

Do you have any additional comments about this specific presentation? Please be direct in your comments.

Question Title

* 8. Please evaluate the session presented by: Derrick Hylton, Spelman College

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content OK. Average	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance OK. Average	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies OK. Average	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session

Do you have any additional comments about this specific presentation? Please be direct in your comments.

Question Title

* 9. Please evaluate the Panel Discussion: “Broadening Participation in Quantitative Programs”

Presenters: Jessica Coates (Emory University), Regina Joice (Emory), Kinnari Matheson (Princeton), Talitha Washington (Howard), Lexi René (Emory), Shelby Wilson (Morehouse), Ixavier “Zae” Higgins (Emory)

	Poor	Fair	OK. Average	Good	Excellent	Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Overall content	Overall content Poor	Overall content Fair	Overall content OK. Average	Overall content Good	Overall content Excellent	Overall content Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Relevance	Relevance Poor	Relevance Fair	Relevance OK. Average	Relevance Good	Relevance Excellent	Relevance Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session
Identified strategies	Identified strategies Poor	Identified strategies Fair	Identified strategies OK. Average	Identified strategies Good	Identified strategies Excellent	Identified strategies Can't rate this/ or Did not attend session

Question Title

* 10. Please share if the experiences shared by any of the panelists broadened your understanding about participation in quantitative programs in anyway?

Question Title

* 11. Rate the overall quality and usefulness of the small group discussions.

	Poor	Fair	OK.Average	Good	Excellent	Cant' rate this/ or Did not attend session
a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research.	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. Poor	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. Fair	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. OK.Average	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. Good	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. Excellent	a. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting research. Cant' rate this/ or Did not attend session
Additional Comments
b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education Poor	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education Fair	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education OK.Average	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education Good	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education Excellent	b. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for promoting education Cant' rate this/ or Did not attend session
Additional Comments
c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration Poor	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration Fair	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration OK.Average	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration Good	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration Excellent	c. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for institutional / departmental collaboration Cant' rate this/ or Did not attend session
Additional Comments
d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building Poor	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building Fair	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building OK.Average	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building Good	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building Excellent	d. Institutional and programmatic mechanisms for community building Cant' rate this/ or Did not attend session
Additional Comments

Question Title

* 12. Were there any impacts of the workshop including interactions, collaborations, or potential scientific progress that would have been difficult to accomplish without this type of workshop environment?

Question Title

* 13. Want to provide a testimonial that QBIO organizers may use to raise awareness about future workshops? Please share it below!

Question Title

* 14. Additional Comments