Scenario/DTP and NERC Training Courses

Overall Feedback for 6 courses with 65 respondents.

Refer to individual courses below for comments, strong points, recommendations and suggestions.

Feedback in categories: 1-Poor 2-Below Average 3-Satisfactory 4-Good 5-Excellent

	Average
You
Your interest in the session	4.58
Your goals were met	4.48
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.65
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.45
Class time is used efficiently	4.41
Quality of reference materials	4.60
Group atmosphere	4.75
Content met expectations	4.55
Content was clear	4.60
Instructor
Teaching method	4.72
Instructor is helpful	4.91
Instructor is well prepared	4.80
Quality of answers to questions	4.88
Knowledge of topic	4.97
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.42
Content is current	4.73
Task lists met expectations	4.57
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.35
Facilities	4.32
Catering (55 respondents)	4.04

Feedback quote of the day!

Not to give you a big head, but this has been by far the most useful computer/python/software related course I have done at this university. I can see the applicability of everything we have covered and fully intend to implement this knowledge in my own work, starting on Monday. Thank you!

 

Scenario/DTP Training Courses

Software Development for Environmental Scientists

Level 2 Feedback and Comments (9th, 28-29th Mar 2017)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 12 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.44	• Goal was to gain an introductory level at OO design • will use github in pycharm, it is good to learn how object orientation works but I won't use it in my PhD • git refresher/working collab. v. useful, OO methodologies useful •
Your goals were met	4.44
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.44
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.56	• Hard material but done very well! • some content I found difficult to understand reflecting my lack of knowledge of OO before the course • day 2 seemed lecture heavy (unavoidable I'm afraid given how much info to get across - ed), really good set of notes • friendly jovial atmosphere •
Class time is used efficiently	4.13
Quality of reference materials	4.75
Group atmosphere	4.78
Content met expectations	4.56
Content was clear	4.22
Instructor
Teaching method	4.67	• Instructors were very informative and helpful • good and engaging - between Jane & Guy dealt with Qs •
Instructor is helpful	4.67
Instructor is well prepared	4.67
Quality of answers to questions	4.67
Knowledge of topic	4.67
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.44	• Would have been better to build s/w more relevant to our work (data access/analysis) •
Content is current	4.56
Task lists met expectations	4.44
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.44	• Coffee and biscuits were great! • fine •
Facilities	4.44
Catering	4.22

Strong points

• Focus on teamwork • notes and practical with group • hands on approach to designing and working on a 'real' OO application • learning about OO, was taught well and will be useful to me, Jane is great! • the course has a good structure & it was easy to follow • group collab using Git - awesome to see all pieces of s/w coming together • good intro to OO • really helpful advisor and a good learning speed (but feedback was 'too fast' - ed) •

Would you recommend this course?

• YES! • yes, get to grips with the fundamentals • every environmental scientist should take this course, the version control alone has been hugely beneficial • yes, some useful skills that if not relevant now will be in the future • yes, to encourage use of Pycharm & Git • yes, with the proviso that it's more relevant for larger (enterprise) projects (or CV) • yes good intro to good programming practices • yes, very good as a start into OO in general •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 8
• professional 7
• brilliant 5
• ok 0
• dull 0
• time well spent 6
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 5
• very interesting 5
• recommend this course 5
• time was just right 3
• too short 1
• too long 0
• too fast 1
• too slow 1
• exceeded my expectations 1
• enjoyable 7

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
More days would be good, 3 is fairly short	• Agreed, but we're limited by various issues; we'll look into extending it. •
More days to cover the material
Longer time to learn stuff
Maybe a cheat sheet for git	This is already provided in the level1 course
Introduce very simple OO example at beginning then work into example	Tricky - simple examples don't allow full exploration of OO features
More enthusiasm about Python	Knowing 20+ languages, it's one of the worst for encouraging lazy design so it's hard to be keen on it!
More relevant group project	Limits feature examples since data analysis tends to be rather boring design-wise

 

Level 1 Feedback and Comments (15-16th Dec 2016, 25-26th Jan 2017)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 12 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.50	• Didn't know what to expect but lots of relevant stuff • would have liked there to have been a few more easy examples of where I could go back to my desk and use something there and then which would benefit otherwise I am unlikely to use the things I learned again (ed: but this person will now think before they code... that's all I ask!) •
Your goals were met	4.33
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.50
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.36	• Occasionally got a bit lost in tasks when we had to do stuff on our own but normally it made more sense at the end when Jane explained it • lots of useful things to think about, good to see examples of how good practice helps • good materials • sometimes louder people would take over with comments that weren't really relevant •
Class time is used efficiently	4.17
Quality of reference materials	4.55
Group atmosphere	4.75
Content met expectations	4.50
Content was clear	4.50
Instructor
Teaching method	4.67	• Your energy made the sessions more fun • Jane's enthusiasm and helpfulness really made the course. Someone boring/less helpful would have made the course tedious. Thanks Jane! Very knowledgeable as well. • Jane is a really clear and enthusiastic teacher & uses really helpful analogies to help understanding •
Instructor is helpful	5.00
Instructor is well prepared	4.92
Quality of answers to questions	5.00
Knowledge of topic	5.00
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.67	• everything in this course was relevant, thanks! • having a knowledge of concepts is good for general understanding - I'll know where to look when I need things, I will think before I code • I needed this 4 years ago! •
Content is current	4.83
Task lists met expectations	4.67
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.00	• The second venue was better, first was a bit cramped • First room in Agri was quite cramped. Everyone likes a free lunch! But the tea was good :) and thanks for the biscuits! • Biscuits definitely necessary as it's quite a long day •
Facilities	4.17
Catering	3.92

Strong points

• Jane is very helpful & is happy to spend time explaining things • clear & pitched at the right level for my skills and abilities • good content and well structured • raised lots of interesting points, hands on experience • assumes little/no prior knowledge - useful for lots of different knowledge levels • introduction to using the command line, something that is otherwise 'expected' knowledge • learnt lots & very useful course • coding standards & good practice, relaxed atmosphere • got to learn a lot of stuff that I think I will use in the future, especially with regards to organising and structuring code. Jane was fantastic! Great enthusiasm and very helpful. • good amount of practical tasks • lots of useful info. •

Would you recommend this course?

• Yes - people who do coding but not from a computer science/IT background, ESPECIALLY if working in a team • yes because it is really relevant for environmental scientists working with data • yes, should be compulsory for all first year Met PhDs • yes • yes, lots of resources & ideas to refer back to when needed • I have learnt a lot - of course I would • yes • yes, good introduction to programming to act as a good base, confidence to extend skills • yes • Yes, it's things I'll use every day, should be compulsory for all new PhDs • yes! v. helpful guidance for coding, not otherwise available to me, wish I'd been able to do it in my first year. •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 10
• professional 3
• brilliant 3
• ok 2
• dull 0
• time well spent 9
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 8
• very interesting 7
• recommend this course 11
• time was just right 3
• too short 1
• too long 0
• too fast 0
• too slow 0
• exceeded my expectations 1
• enjoyable 7

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
Time between 2 sessions?	It was too long - see below, but in general it worked better than a full week.
delicious lunch	We will pass this on to the budget holder.
The task for homework wasn't that clear	Had one query via email in which I clarified a misunderstanding about having to implement a solution - the task did state that only requirements analysis and design was required. I will highlight these words in future.
having some solid examples for testing etc.	These were on a HDD which had failed in the previous week - sorry!
a gap to consolidate was useful but over the holidays ~month gap was too long	Dividing the course was an experiment after previous feedback, the gap was due to the paucity of suitable teaching space.
some 'programmer' info not relevant	Unsure what this might be?
at times, esp week 1, there was lots of jumping around	There is a lot to get through in the first 2 days and much is unrelated. The exercises have been written to try to provide a common thread.
maybe have a pre-class drop-in to ensure everyone has functional s/w & data files to save time in sessions	All participants are asked to ensure their laptops are in full working order prior to the course and to raise any issues before we start. Likewise data download is also required. Anyone with particular problems is free to get in touch and I'll gladly help. Many people leave the setup to the last minute though :(
2 sections were too spread out - I forgot a lot of things (especially Git) over the Xmas hols. Maybe spread over 2 weeks and do half days instead of full?	Dividing the course was an experiment after previous feedback, the gap was due to the paucity of suitable teaching space.
tea & coffee in first half of course	We will pass this on to the budget holder.
lots of different coding levels: exercises may be useful to send out example code so that people can experiment with code if they aren't able to understand/code quickly enough to understand concepts	This is tricky: we aim to get people to do as much of their own work as possible since this is the route to learning. Example code is provided if people fall behind but they have to have a go first.

 

Level 1 Feedback and Comments (11th-15th July 2016)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 13 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.64	• already using • certainly exceeded expectations and I've learnt a lot quickly •
Your goals were met	4.45
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.73
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.80	• Content really covered what most scientists are missing in their s/w development •
Class time is used efficiently	4.73
Quality of reference materials	4.73
Group atmosphere	5.00
Content met expectations	4.64
Content was clear	4.73
Instructor
Teaching method	4.82	• Absolutely brilliant and explained things so well • very helpful :) •
Instructor is helpful	5.09
Instructor is well prepared	4.91
Quality of answers to questions	5.09
Knowledge of topic	5.09
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.82	• I can't go back to pre-course programming now :) •
Content is current	4.91
Task lists met expectations	4.73
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.45	• would like access to uni. computers • provide course leader with funds for catering • food not provided • no catering •
Facilities	4.64
Catering	0.27

Strong points

• accessible, exercises make application clear • good range of topics • notes thorough, exercises useful • practice, version control, instructor's commitment • addresses common issues and really helps to fix them • exercises to support learning and teacher's knowledge • good course and structure • clarity and depth, very knowledgeable course leader, open to all and any questions • priority given to the practice • git commands, debugging, testing all v helpful • practical sessions •

Would you recommend this course?

• definitely • knowing conventions and using IDE • help programming hugely • yes, it was useful • absolutely because scientists would never learn about this stuff otherwise • very beneficial in general s/w knowledge • every PhD student should attend as it teaches you how to code • absolutely most useful course I've been on! • yes if they want to develop their skills and want to learn how to split big problems in steps • yes, very useful • definitely •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 8
• professional 4
• brilliant 4
• ok 0
• dull 0
• time well spent 6
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 5
• very interesting 7
• recommend this course 8
• time was just right 1
• too short 0
• too long 0
• too fast 0
• too slow 0
• exceeded my expectations 2
• enjoyable 7

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
run over a few weeks to work on larger projects	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
run at start of academic year	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
spend more time explaining procedures before practice	I try to make sure people understand the tasks and give time for Q's before starting, thereafter providing individual support.
breaks in between sessions (1/2 day a week) to practice at home	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
timing: better at start of term	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
the knowledge of how to install on Met clusters	this is really something for IT support and I can only provide my own workaround for some issues, they are not recommendations from ITS
put course on a few months earlier	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
maybe too much information, I would focus on fewer topics	It's difficult to cater for everyone's starting point and it's true that those with less knowledge will find it more challenging. This supports the idea of making the course run over a longer time.
would have been helpful to have this course earlier in academic year (i.e. December)	To be discussed at wash-up meeting
more examples of real cases and codes just to show best practice	I have provided sample code for the course exercises and some of my own project work.

 

NERC Training Courses

Software Development for Environmental Scientists

Level 2 Feedback and Comments (23rd - 26th Mar)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 8 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.75	• really good working through examples and code with everyone • the git information will be used, hopefully OO use will increase too. •
Your goals were met	4.63
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.75
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.38	• all good, nice size of group, mostly similar starting knowledge. •
Class time is used efficiently	4.25
Quality of reference materials	4.63
Group atmosphere	4.75
Content met expectations	4.63
Content was clear	4.88
Instructor
Teaching method	4.75	• group discussions and role-play worked very well to help me understand OO concepts • all very good, lead everyone through examples very well • my grumpy OO questions were answered in a non-grumpy manner!! •
Instructor is helpful	4.88
Instructor is well prepared	4.88
Quality of answers to questions	4.88
Knowledge of topic	5.00
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	3.75	• will definitely make some use of what I've learned in my job but there will be a limit to what is applicable, all very useful thinking about career in general. •
Content is current	4.50
Task lists met expectations	4.63
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.25	• all good. •
Facilities	3.75
Catering	3.88

Strong points

• Gives a really good introduction for working in teams on git and of OO principles • well organised and the topics were relevant and interesting, user projects interesting and help understand the theory • group project on OO system was very useful • working in groups to overcome problems • good balance of theory and practice, clear example on whiteboards • running through library scenario was very useful, helped with understanding objects and classes • useful as a counter to someone from a string procedural background. •

Would you recommend this course?

• Given how much coding scientists are expected to do, it is of key importance to have good skills in this area • yes • useful concepts which scientists generally do not learn about but are important, and well run • yes, people need to practice better coding • yes it's a completely different perspective on s/w • yes but only if adequate at level 1 stuff • yes •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 8
• professional 3
• brilliant 2
• ok 0
• dull 0
• time well spent 5
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 4
• very interesting 6
• recommend this course 7
• time was just right 2
• too short 0
• too long 0
• too fast 0
• too slow 0
• exceeded my expectations 1
• enjoyable 6

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
expanded to cover OOs in more depth	certainly, with more time!
another 30 mins per day	I was rather ill at the time - if done again I'll happily make the days longer
more examples to code individually although there was enough to do!	no action
a lot of time in discussions: good but often irrelevant	this is tricky - often topics raised by some participants will be very relevant to them and not others, will attempt to take things offline
more focus on OO examples to work through	the OO exercises are for participants to work through, simple examples are provided already

Level 1 Feedback and Comments (16th - 20th Feb)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 12 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.42	• Not everything particularly relevant but picked up things very useful for PhD • came in last minute, course exceeded expectations, changed how I think about development • the diagramming skills will be very useful for improving my coding • genuinely one of the best courses I've done, highly recommend. •
Your goals were met	4.50
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.75
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.42	• I would have liked to have done more shell scripting and version control • had experience of most of concepts but it built on that, great references, understood all of the material • perhaps a few more examples of testing as it was quite difficult to apply to our own code • maybe less paper instead using web pages. •
Class time is used efficiently	4.50
Quality of reference materials	4.58
Group atmosphere	4.58
Content met expectations	4.50
Content was clear	4.67
Instructor
Teaching method	4.75	• Excellent overall, good to know that instructor knows several languages - good for making comparisons • can't find any fault. •
Instructor is helpful	4.83
Instructor is well prepared	4.67
Quality of answers to questions	4.67
Knowledge of topic	5.00
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.17	• I will use some of this • really useful as a transferable skill • I knew a lot of the content but it filled in gaps and gave me important new skills • some pre-canned scripts would have been helpful. •
Content is current	4.73
Task lists met expectations	4.42
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.42	• Using own laptops was a slight limitation for me, less (sic) vouchers esp. for Reading people • not enough coffee for the day but vouchers very much appreciated • Reading was great, not so keen on the hotel! • fewer vouchers - eaten far too much! •
Facilities	4.25
Catering	4.33

Strong points

• Encourages people to think about what to do before coding • very practical so knowledge actually went into my head • very friendly atmosphere, demonstration of the efficacy of the content, pitched at a very good level so everyone could take something from it • diagramming • modularity, version control • cohesiveness, framework built on each stage • very well organised, time management and free lunch • the instructor and helpers were extremely knowledgeable on the subject matter and were able to teach/demonstrate the course material very effectively • annotated slides, good topics • well structured, covered important topics, gave good pointers to go and explore more areas • value for money, course length. •

Would you recommend this course?

• Content is well explained, instructors very helpful, good range of topics • yes, good basis to s/w design • yes, very good for changing the way one thinks about developing programs • yes, great introduction to s/w development and its concepts • yes, gives a brilliant insight into s/w design • definitely • yes it would be very helpful • absolutely, clears a lot of ambiguity with design • yes, I've already done so to a few people • yes, it would be good if everyone would follow what was taught in the course • good for self-taught beginner programmers to learn best practices and good habits • it offers an insight into s/w development for non ComSci trained people. •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 11
• professional 4
• brilliant 6
• ok 0
• dull 0
• time well spent 8
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 7
• very interesting 6
• recommend this course 9
• time was just right 2
• too short 0
• too long 0
• too fast 0
• too slow 0
• exceeded my expectations 5
• enjoyable 7

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
getting examples to work	all are checked but some individual laptops seem to play up!
more time on testing and shell scripting, and use of classes/structures	time is limited - testing practice is encouraged for several exercises; classes are covered in level2
guest talk a little long	an hour including questions is standard, not planning to shorten this
some code examples and possibly example diagrams to go with them would be useful (esp. testing)	will be developed for future course
people should spend more time on Python before they attend	it's strongly advised but can't be enforced!
debugging	some individual setups have problems - moving to PyCharm as IDE should prevent this
introduce coding standards at the start then do the review	I like that idea - will see if it's possible to rejig course running order
bit too Python specific at times?	this is a difficult one - concrete examples have to be in some language but all concepts are generic
example scripts to use at key places e.g. testing to find known errors.	will be developed for future course

Level 1 Feedback and Comments (29th Sep - 3rd Oct 2014)

Feedback in categories (1 (poor), 3 (satisfactory) to 5 (excellent) averaged for 11 respondents)

	Average	Comments
You
Your interest in the session	4.73	• well designed • excellent content - reinforced what I knew & learnt a lot of new approaches to definitely try to adopt • few things not directly needed but will in future but most helpful now • very good :) • could've used a bit more shell practice • had no previous s/w education so this has been an eye opener! •
Your goals were met	4.45
Likelihood to use what you've learned	4.64
Training session
Relevance of course content	4.64	• great to spend most of the time on exercises • highly informative & enjoyable • more code snippets would have helped, not the solution but something similar • v good training sessions with dedicated attention to help with catching up during the course. •
Class time is used efficiently	4.55
Quality of reference materials	4.45
Group atmosphere	4.64
Content met expectations	4.55
Content was clear	4.64
Instructor
Teaching method	4.64	• very energetic, inspiring & motivating lessons • excellent all round • all instructors very helpful & knowledgeable • mostly hands-on was great, can do things now that I couldn't before, would've liked more on the slides but we do have all the reference material anyway • very interactive, flexible & attentive to specific needs. •
Instructor is helpful	4.91
Instructor is well prepared	4.73
Quality of answers to questions	4.91
Knowledge of topic	5.00
Software Content
Usefulness in my job	4.36	• well judged especially given that this is the first run of the course. •
Content is current	4.73
Task lists met expectations	4.45
Miscellaneous
Adequacy of venue	4.64	• generous food allowance, thanks • it was nice to go out for a walk and have flexibility for lunch. •
Facilities	4.64
Catering	4.64

Strong points

• widely applicable, covers all important fields of s/w development • relevance, integration of many parallel components, excellent knowledge • instructors • simple and clear for beginners • caters for all levels • range of concepts - many familiar terms but never learned or used • very well organised & very knowledgeable instructors/helpers • learning how to test properly & how important it is to test • enthusiasm of instructors, hands-on-ness, interactivity, relevance • general intro. to useful principles, introduction to new language. •

Would you recommend this course?

• yes - covers all important fields of s/w development, shows how to write clean tidy code fast • yes - good foundation for anyone who needs to code efficiently • very useful • useful for new developers • yes! • important skills not usually taught to scientists but integral part of work • yes - not enough scientists know about the topics covered • yes - will save them a lot of time by getting code to work well quicker • yes - fun, useful, & help with your own specific stuff • definitely yes - basic knowledge of methodology to do efficient coding. •

Free choice descriptors:

• interactive 11
• professional 7
• brilliant 6
• ok 0
• dull 0
• time well spent 6
• not useful 0
• thought provoking 6
• very interesting 7
• recommend this course 8
• time was just right 3
• too short 0
• too long 0
• too fast 0
• too slow 0
• exceeded my expectations 3
• enjoyable 10

Suggestions

Item	Planned action
A little brave to claim language neutral • more code guidance for the less experienced	Provide more Python specific information for those not familiar with it in addition to language guides on instructions web page.
Use of python may be barrier though good chunks of content avoided specific knowledge	Another comment re language: a more comprehensive crib sheet will be developed.
Course dinner earlier in the week	Noted!
Timetable before course would have been helpful	Noted - will be provided in future.
More invited speakers	Given the amount of material to cover in the week, this may be a challenge; it's also not easy to source speakers at the right level for a scientific researcher audience but efforts will be made to see if it's possible.
Maybe use one example exercise rather than several	This is hard to do in order to illustrate many different aspects and give people practice at task repetition but I'll certainly see if it can be improved upon.
Force people to work together more explicitly	Interestingly, those reporting a lower group atmosphere were the quieter participants! Point noted and future courses will require more group co-operation.
A little more tailored around own problems	The risk is that specificity may exclude members of the group. Perhaps a better approach is to have one-to-one sessions after class to discuss an individual's project issues.