| Access Grid Tutorials |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 2 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
 |
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
50% |
|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
50% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
50% |
|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
1 |
50% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No |
1 |
50% |
|
| Yes |
1 |
50% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No |
1 |
50% |
|
| Yes |
1 |
50% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| It is very convenient. |
| I don't have any other course |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| I don't know. It is new for me |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| I don't know. It is new for me |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| Under acknowledgements, you need Kevin's last name. For monitoring yourself (when no one is available to get in a room with you), it was actually helpful when the Sandiego Supercomputing Center left their node in the test room with echo cancellation turned off. That way you could verify you were receiving audio fine and you could also get an idea of the quality of your audio as heard by others. |
| It is good but it don't see my answers |
| |
|
| How to Build an AG Node
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 13 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Good |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Very Good |
5 |
38.5% |
|
| Excellent |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Poor |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Good |
2 |
15.4% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Excellent |
6 |
46.2% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
2 |
15.4% |
|
| Good |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Very Good |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Excellent |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Good |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Very Good |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Excellent |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
9 |
69.2% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Good |
2 |
15.4% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Fair |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Good |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Very Good |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Excellent |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
2 |
15.4% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Fair |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Good |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
23.1% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
6 |
46.2% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
6 |
46.2% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
9 |
69.2% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
4 |
30.8% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| No |
1 |
7.7% |
|
| Yes |
11 |
84.6% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
2 |
15.4% |
|
| Yes |
11 |
84.6% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| Covenience. I'm at home with a laptop. No driving, parking etc. |
| It was GREAT !! |
| Web courses allow me to learn at my own pace. (skip the things I know and focus on the things that I don't) |
| I have to master collaboration and I have very little time to do it in. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| Covered tecnical information with specific step-by-step instructions including components with links to manufacturers' web sites. |
| Easy and self paced |
| The attention to detail |
| It arranged everything I needed to know about the basic setup of the AccessGrid. |
| The small windows with basic concepts the URLs |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| Can't thing of anything annoying. |
| Most of the links to outside resources need to be updated because they are broken. |
| There was nothign to dislike. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| Now I have to build this Access Grid system for ICC. |
| It makes this project look disorganized to have so many broken links in the tutorial. |
| The link to MuralGeom is broken |
| |
|
| Introduction to AG Toolkit 2.x
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 11 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Good |
5 |
45.5% |
|
| Very Good |
5 |
45.5% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Good |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Excellent |
4 |
36.4% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Good |
6 |
54.5% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| Good |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Very Good |
6 |
54.5% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Fair |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Good |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Fair |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Good |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Very Good |
4 |
36.4% |
|
| No response |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
9 |
81.8% |
|
| Good |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
6 |
54.5% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
3 |
27.3% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
7 |
63.6% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
1 |
9.1% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No |
4 |
36.4% |
|
| Yes |
7 |
63.6% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
2 |
18.2% |
|
| Yes |
9 |
81.8% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| convenience, easy to use/schedule |
| To reinforce what Iv'e already learned, and increase my level of computer skills and knowledge even further. |
| I am interested in Access Grid and online courses are good tutorials to start to get the knowledge enough to understand the features of the system. |
| Yes, whenever it helps to improve my work by self studying. |
| It's online when you need it and cost-effective. Con is the preference for IE. It should work on standard (X)HTML browser if possible. Mozilla on Linux at least if not Opera. |
| I live in hope that I can actually find some useful documentation somewhere |
| Because it is often the only available option. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| this course will be used as a reference when working with people interested in acquiring the AG software to establish a node and/or people using the AG for meeting. |
| The small addition of graphics helped. |
| It is easy to understand. That is a very good point. |
| It was easy to follow. |
| Compact and hands-on approach |
| Compact |
| It assumed that you knew almost nothing |
| It is easy to access and always available. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| The lack of graphic representation. |
| Room based seems to assume multinode and personal single node even though that may not be the case. No answer for what the other types of certificates besides personal are used for. And is there a difference between personal and room based except perhaps in the fact the other might have better EC and more cameras covering a whole room? No mention on data and application setup, maybe that's not for a novice? |
| Not enough pictures giving a good view of the whole display area to get a feeling what it really looks like... |
| It didn't teach me anything I wanted to know |
| It describes what the Access Grid is, but not how to use it. I took this with the intention of learning how to use the AG software because I can learn about what it is from their own web page. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| Once again I wasn't given the self test, and I've been left with a very weak mental picture of a grid system. |
| Or, if you prefer to work from the command line, it is also possible to use a small program, certmgr.py. WHERE does this parenthesis end? (This program is included in AG 2.1.2 and higher; if you need to export a certificate from an installation of an earlier version you can download it. If you are using Windows, save this file into the directory: /Program Files/Access Grid Toolkit/bin on the machine on which you have a certificate already installed; on linux you may save it to any convenient directory. |
| Keep up the good work |
| |
|
| Installing AG Toolkit 2.1.2
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 2 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
50% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
100% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Poor |
1 |
50% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
50% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
50% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
2 |
100% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Intermediate knowledge |
2 |
100% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
2 |
100% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
2 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| They are available whenever I want them. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| It's ease of use because I am pressed for time. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| The images used to explain various steps did not match those on my software. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| |
|
| Collaborating over the Access Grid |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 3 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Very Good |
3 |
100% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Poor |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
66.7% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
66.7% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
66.7% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
2 |
66.7% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
33.3% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
2 |
66.7% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
3 |
100% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
3 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| convenience, easy to use |
| I need to know more about what AG can support,and how I can use some of its functions to support my job! |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| why AG need collabortion |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| if it can privde more cases,it 's better |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| I want to use AG to develop new collaboration through portal,but I don't know what to do. I need more technical details about how to develop collaboration apllication using by portal |
| |
|
| AG Overview for Decision Makers |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 33 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
13 |
39.4% |
|
| Very Good |
12 |
36.4% |
|
| Excellent |
6 |
18.2% |
|
| No response |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Good |
9 |
27.3% |
|
| Very Good |
15 |
45.5% |
|
| Excellent |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| No response |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| Good |
9 |
27.3% |
|
| Very Good |
10 |
30.3% |
|
| Excellent |
8 |
24.2% |
|
| No response |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
3% |
|
| Good |
11 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
11 |
33.3% |
|
| Excellent |
7 |
21.2% |
|
| No response |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
18 |
54.5% |
|
| Good |
6 |
18.2% |
|
| Very Good |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
3% |
|
| No response |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
5 |
15.2% |
|
| Poor |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
3% |
|
| Good |
9 |
27.3% |
|
| Very Good |
10 |
30.3% |
|
| Excellent |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| No response |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
13 |
39.4% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
3% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
3% |
|
| Fair |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Good |
7 |
21.2% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Excellent |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| No response |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
15 |
45.5% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
9 |
27.3% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| No response |
5 |
15.2% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
15 |
45.5% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
10 |
30.3% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| No response |
5 |
15.2% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
4 |
12.1% |
|
| No |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| Yes |
26 |
78.8% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
3 |
9.1% |
|
| No |
2 |
6.1% |
|
| Yes |
28 |
84.8% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| Allow the access of educational material from different locations |
| Yes because of the convenience involved. |
| Because I need the information. |
| Found the first course easy to assimilate, and I believe taking further courses will enhance my knowledge even more; giving me the ability to build, debug, and operate grid systems at the speed and quality I expect from myself and improve my skills the way employers also appreciate. |
| I would take another course - because, though slow, it covers the topic well. |
| I think it is a very good to share information |
| They are fairly useful |
| Another way to learn |
| because i want and need to be updated with the national centre for supercomputing applications. |
| To continue learning about Access Grid |
| I would like to get more information about the subject to apply to my work. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| The course highlights the potential of the AG technology |
| Short and to the point |
| It was fairly well organized. |
| The information is formatted in portions just the right size for the subject matter at hand, and it's organized in a way that makes it easy to remember. Also including vocbulary links makes it much faster to read through and understand. |
| The way it builds up from the basics |
| The content. It was of easy understanding |
| My interest in the topic was piqued by an inquiry for services which I received. I appreciate very much that this information
is made available, open, as it is to the educational community. The WebCT format, in this my first user experience,
is effective in content delivery. |
| Topic I am interested in |
| ACCESS GRID is a supercomputing development technolgy and i think developing it is a need . |
| the course provided the basics understanding of the technology and how it would be implemented |
| It provide useful information. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| Links to audio and video presentations as well agoo number of images. |
| No obvious dislikes |
| Very clean design and writing |
| A little sparse. I could deduce most of the functions from the basic structure of the system. |
| The photos of people working on a grid system are atractive. They give your eyes and brain a break, allowing you time to absorb the material. However, graphic presentations of the subject matter would be far more valuble when it comes time to recall usefull information. |
| It could have one practical example |
| Slowness and not describing the overview of the systm (such as venues and nodes) and their relationships |
| It could use sounds. |
| The link to Community resources did not work and that was my most important question. |
| nothing leats just por sound audio. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| The course should differentite the AG technology from other technologies and try to introduce advnatages over real time video streaming and video conferencing. |
| There may not be a better way of presenting the material. |
| I know I learned something from this course but I'm not certain how much, as I wasn't offered the self-test. Plus, because my computer is really slow I skipped the Video, fearing it wouldn't run properly. As a teacher I realize the importance of graphic reinforcement. Hopefully you will too. |
| No comments |
| thanks to NCSA.
IFEANYI-CHUKWU MARK-JESUS [ugbor}
is my name |
| |
|
| How to Operate an AG Node
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 7 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Excellent |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Excellent |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
6 |
85.7% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Good |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
7 |
100% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
7 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| Access grid being deployed into new campuses. Further training will be required for support personnel to successfully assist non-technical customers using AG.
|
| I would like to learn the whole process involved in the Access Grid environment |
| I want to learn more. It would be helpful if abreviations such as moo would be defined. |
| This format is very convenient |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| Simple lay out and quick and easy access to glossary and AG terms. |
| It was my first.
It was quite informative. |
| It was pointed to the right questions, and it had areas that one could get more information if they wish. Of particular interest were the "definitions". |
| AG Nodes seem to be the future in communications. |
| Format and organization was good, and easy to follow. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| Pages are rather busy. |
| no sound option.
|
| I cant think of anything |
| Not enough examples |
| Technical level was extremely low. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| It was good.
I will visit again.
I am learning this technology to increase my desirable criteria count to qualify for a position as staff at a University. |
| Maybe later |
| |
|
| How to Produce an AG Event
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 1 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
1 |
100% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
100% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
1 |
100% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
1 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
100% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
100% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
100% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
1 |
100% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
1 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| only soure of this material |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| |
|
| AG Audio Troubleshooting
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 2 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Poor |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
100% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Very Poor |
1 |
50% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
50% |
|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
2 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
50% |
|
| Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
1 |
50% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No |
1 |
50% |
|
| Yes |
1 |
50% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
2 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| problem unsolved |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| diagnosis was mostly obvious things. where is the detail? |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| |
|
| Intermediate MPI |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 7 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Good |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Good |
4 |
57.1% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Good |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
3 |
42.9% |
|
| Fair |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| No response |
2 |
28.6% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
5 |
71.4% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
5 |
71.4% |
|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| No |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Yes |
5 |
71.4% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
1 |
14.3% |
|
| Yes |
6 |
85.7% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| it is time efficient |
| It's a nice way to study at my own pace, and I can make the "book" [browser] look the way I prefer. |
| I've been programming for 40 years, originally mainly in Fortran. I have little experience with MPI, PVM, etc. |
| In this way one can study anytime any day. |
| I needed to use many statements with mpi, so I worked with the material called "introduction to mpi", and I thought too much interesting, but I think I'm not prepared to learn "Intermediate MPI". I will use this material, but in the future. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| Examples presented in C |
| color coding the source examples is a great use of color--good job! |
| I didn't take enough time to read every screen-- I used the self-tests as a study guide. |
| The course provides easy to understand (albeit somewhat contrived) examples of how to use somewhat esoteric MPI calls. |
| I did not read all the material. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| - |
| C++ and mpi seems like a great idea from a computer-science/theory point of view. But for applications developers, and scientists, I'm afraid it will yield code that's quite difficult to understand [though very compact and pretty] six months after the last developer quits working on it. |
| Clear examples, lots of materials. |
| Fragmented codes. Completed working codes should be given. That way we donīt waste time trying to figure out why something does not work. |
| These comments are based on my impressions from the 1st three chapters, which are all I had the chance to complete by Oct. 18th. I'll try to get through more sections in the next few days. First of all, the course lacks a "mission statement". There needs to be a "Chapter 0" that lays out the reason for creating an intermediate level course and why the topics covered were chosen and structured the way they were. Give examples whose coding is simplified by making use of these calls. Second, the English (grammar and spelling) is not as polished as I would have expected for a draft for which you are seeking comments. (I'll send a hard copy to Leslie with suggested corrections.) Third, your discussions and/or examples you chose give the impression that while you may understand MPI programming, you do not understand the underlying theory behind the algorithms being employed. For example, in the Monte Carlo example of Chapter 3, you use a random number generator to generate the NUMBER of points to be sampled. Why would anyone do this? Certainly not based on anything from the theory of Monte Carlo integration. The relative accuracy of a typical Monte Carlo code (not employing variance reduction techniques) varies as the number of points sampled, N, to the -1/2 power. To get 3 digit accuracy you would want to sample about 10**6 points. Hence, there is no rational reason for making N random. If the convergence is so slow, why do Monte Carlo? In addition to odd volumes, another more common reason for using the method is simply the dimensionality of the integration to be performed. If the dimension of space is larger than about 4-6, then doing the integrations as iterated 1-D integrals becomes prohibitively expensive as the number of operations grows as M**d where M is the typical number of sample points in each dimension. Similarly, the discussion of "norms" in section 1.2 was confusing. For example, I was confused by the notion of the norm of a vector being a vector. This is not correct. The norm of a vector is scalar (as a norm is essentially the generalization of the concept of the length of a vector). The norm of a set of vectors might be a vector. (This might be applicable if you are generating multiple solutions in parallel.) Finally, a few opportunities for useful comments were missed. E.g., you never explained why the parallel implementation of the 1-norm needed to be coded as abs(a)+abs(b). Granted the reason is pretty obvious, but at least you should have left it as a problem to the reader. In section 2.4 on message probing, some comment on the necessity that messages be received in order is needed. Section 2.4.3 seems to implement a really weird method for handling messages of different datatypes. The more natural and flexible method would be to encode the datatype in a tag (say in its low order bits) and then extract the information via some sort of cheap mod operat! ion. I apologize if I sound too negative here. I think this can be a very good course with a little more work. |
| It's necessary many examples to help us to understand the statements. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| - |
| C++ is an abomination of C. Real programmers avoid it. [my 1 free flame] |
| One of the best MPI resources when used with the Intro MPI WebCT course. Lucy Carruthers U of Arizona |
| In section 2.1, what about MPI_Irecv, etc? In 2.4.1, can something other than calloc be used? Some might get the impression that calloc is the only method that can be used. |
| Thanks to the material. |
| |
|
| Debugging Serial and Parallel Codes |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 2 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Very Good |
1 |
50% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Excellent |
2 |
100% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Advanced knowledge |
1 |
50% |
|
| No response |
1 |
50% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
2 |
100% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Yes |
2 |
100% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| sure and should be this is super computing and i need to be a super somputer uer for my career and goals as a CEO and corporate president of MOTTO-95 CORPORATE AMERICA ORGANIZATION. |
| Well i have taken the course DEBUGGING SERIAL AND PARALLEL CODE earlier befor and i still reregisterd beacuse i opened my student web CT and found out that the course has been removed , How ever the course have been attached to my CURRICULM VITAE which is an upgrade. i am so glad with the University of Illinois and the National centre for super computing applications. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| it is very explanative. |
| Its is very exceptional and advancing , it has made my CV a good one and my technolgy super comuted. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| no certificates is what i disgust as a certifiate will upgrade and give value of time and academy. |
| The course i difficult and conprehensibly articulated ,but need a lot of attention no distractions. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| i need a certificate to prove i have done this work. |
| the course have been attached and listed in My CV so the University of Illinois and NCSA if contacted should be able to defend me as i have taken the ocurse earlier last year and expected to stil have it on my web CT but foud that is is out and still reregisterd for the course. |
| |
|
| Display Wall-in-a-Box
|
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 6 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Excellent |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Fair |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Good |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Very Good |
3 |
50% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Excellent |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Excellent |
4 |
66.7% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
6 |
100% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Good |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Very Good |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Excellent |
3 |
50% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
4 |
66.7% |
|
| Fair |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Excellent |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
4 |
66.7% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Basic knowledge |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
4 |
66.7% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No |
2 |
33.3% |
|
| Yes |
4 |
66.7% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
1 |
16.7% |
|
| Yes |
5 |
83.3% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| this was quick and easy to do from home. |
| I found the ability to learn online at home at a time and pace of my own choosing to increase my desire to learn. It doesn't require as much comittment to start a course and makes it more likely that one will try something new. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| It explained the settup of the wall in logical path so I could understand why it was designed the way it was. |
| This course was logically laid out: it was easy to navigate. |
| |
|
| What did you like least about this course and why? |
| I might like info on failings while trying to build the wall although some of this was covered. |
| Some of the links to other institutions pointed to unreachable pages and although they might be found by searching outside this course it breaks up the easy flow of the course. The point being that the course is there to provide all the relevant information so that it is easily at hand. |
| |
|
| Additional Comments: |
| This information will save me time on a project. |
| I came across this course on my search for a program or at least more knowledge on blending crt projectors for a personal home theatre. Prior to this AVS's (www.avsforum.com) forum on crt projectors had the best practical information for doing this on the cheap. For me the commercial solutions are prohibitively expensive and it is heartening to see programming effort on this being released into the public domain. A day may come when I get to see my two Marquee 8500's blended. |
| |
|
| Introduction to MPI |
| Total number of evaluations submitted for this course is: 170 |
| This web-based course as a whole was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Poor |
2 |
1.2% |
|
| Fair |
3 |
1.8% |
|
| Good |
20 |
11.8% |
|
| Very Good |
55 |
32.4% |
|
| Excellent |
63 |
37.1% |
|
| No response |
25 |
14.7% |
|
| The effectiveness of the web-based format was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Fair |
7 |
4.1% |
|
| Good |
26 |
15.3% |
|
| Very Good |
61 |
35.9% |
|
| Excellent |
48 |
28.2% |
|
| No response |
25 |
14.7% |
|
| The quality of the course content was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Fair |
5 |
2.9% |
|
| Good |
26 |
15.3% |
|
| Very Good |
59 |
34.7% |
|
| Excellent |
51 |
30% |
|
| No response |
26 |
15.3% |
|
| The organization of the course was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Poor |
2 |
1.2% |
|
| Fair |
4 |
2.4% |
|
| Good |
29 |
17.1% |
|
| Very Good |
60 |
35.3% |
|
| Excellent |
48 |
28.2% |
|
| No response |
26 |
15.3% |
|
| Usefulness of self-tests was |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
12 |
7.1% |
|
| Very Poor |
2 |
1.2% |
|
| Poor |
2 |
1.2% |
|
| Fair |
17 |
10% |
|
| Good |
39 |
22.9% |
|
| Very Good |
36 |
21.2% |
|
| Excellent |
34 |
20% |
|
| No response |
28 |
16.5% |
|
| Usefulness of references provided was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
22 |
12.9% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Fair |
12 |
7.1% |
|
| Good |
37 |
21.8% |
|
| Very Good |
43 |
25.3% |
|
| Excellent |
22 |
12.9% |
|
| No response |
33 |
19.4% |
|
| Usefulness of audio/video resources was: |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| Not Applicable |
84 |
49.4% |
|
| Very Poor |
1 |
0.6% |
|
| Poor |
6 |
3.5% |
|
| Fair |
11 |
6.5% |
|
| Good |
12 |
7.1% |
|
| Very Good |
9 |
5.3% |
|
| Excellent |
6 |
3.5% |
|
| No response |
41 |
24.1% |
|
| What was your knowledge of this topic before this course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
69 |
40.6% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
69 |
40.6% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
5 |
2.9% |
|
| No response |
27 |
15.9% |
|
| What is your knowledge of this topic now? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No knowledge at all |
5 |
2.9% |
|
| Basic knowledge |
46 |
27.1% |
|
| Intermediate knowledge |
85 |
50% |
|
| Advanced knowledge |
7 |
4.1% |
|
| No response |
27 |
15.9% |
|
| Do you think the knowledge you gained will improve the quality of your work? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
30 |
17.6% |
|
| No |
2 |
1.2% |
|
| Yes |
138 |
81.2% |
|
| Would you take another web-based course? |
| Response | Count | Percent |
|---|
| No response |
31 |
18.2% |
|
| No |
3 |
1.8% |
|
| Yes |
136 |
80% |
|
| Why or why not? |
| I want to learn more about high performance computing. |
| was well worth 30 minutes to pick up a bit of basic background on the topic. |
| It is so good. :-) |
| Ease of use |
| If you would be kind enough to provide C samples of the programs this course would be VERY beneficial. I can pace myself and can print out what I want to. |
| its an efficient method for learning. |
| This is a good form of education. |
| Cause it rocks :) |
| It's a time saver |
| I will take another course. its convenient, I can take from anywhere anytime. Instead of reading the whole book, the course is faster and to the point. |
| Self paced and was easy to follow. |
| Such courses are great for further education and satisfying curiousity. |
| boring |
| They have been quite usefull to reach my goals at the moment. |
| Yes I would. I was seraching the web for information on MPI as I am doing a dissertation on Parallel computations and my programs are in Fortran. This has been theonly place where i got the info I needed to proceed with my programming. I am very pleased. |
| to get more Information |
| Very efficient way to learn at user's pace. |
| Because I can access it anywhere and more effective. |
| Because 1. It allows me to search information faster; 2. The same piece of information can be observed faster than for the writtten version; 3. The study of web-based course is more active |
| The web-based format is convenient & easily accessible. Your interface is very smoothly designed, with minimal obstacles. |
| Easy way to pick up information I need. |
| The self-paced format is excellent. |
| It saves lots of my precious time. |
| I'm now taking the course ('Introduction to OpenMP and its very good too ... |
| its effective and easy to do while at work. I like how you can stop the course at any time and automatically return to that bookmarked location later. |
| I found it useful. Like talking about MPI step by step which i think is not present any where else. There are papers which discuss some things in details and there are books which would my whole life to read, but this one just tells what you need to know. Thats why to save my timne and learn more i would love to take some other coursese on this site. |
| easy to see what is interesting for me or not |
| I did gain knowledge and the course fit into my schedule. I was only able to work on this an hour or two a week. |
| This course was not boring and was very useful in my real life programming, I expect another one will be the same |
| I found this course extremely useful both as an initial learning tool, but also as a reference. Thank you very much. |
| Sure, because I can read the outline and print up to read just what I need. |
| Because in a week time I start a work in which parallel programming (MPI, OpenMP, HPF etc.) is involved. But even if I hadn't been given this work and if I simply discovered the courses, I would probably take some of them in order to learn something new. |
| fast, convenient |
| Convenience |
| This course provides me very helpful knowledge, I am longing for some advanced cources more. |
| This has been a very efficient method of instruction. The wall-clock time spent on any major section (e.g., all of Section 4) was an appropriate amount (i.e., it didn't take 5 hours to complete). In other words, I could comfortably fit in various chapters for study throughout my day and complete them to my satisfaction. |
| yes i will the tutorial was more useful since it contained source code too. |
| To get more information about parallel algorithms. |
| Well I am at the first class of the course, but I think it will be very usefull for me in the near future. |
| because I can study when i have time, and can go back if i need to review something |
| Because these courses are designed to give the
computational scientist exactly what he needs,
while also providing some references for more
in-depth explorations |
| convenience |
| Though the course structure was desgined very well but there are only few examples. With out examples it is very difficult for any beginers to learn such advanced topic like MPI. |
| Easy access and easily scheduled.
It is good for practice programming, because of the source code available. |
| it will help me |
| I benefit a lot from the course And I want to go forward, then I choice Intermediate MPI. |
| its interesting, useful, and very easy and clear explaining of ideas. |
| Yes, it is quite comfortable and useful. |
| - own scheduling
- quick copying of relevant paragraphs / pictuers
(compared with reading a book) |
| AS it gives me more information and can immediatly if any thing donot know check the links on the net |
| I thought the information presented was to the point and effectivly established directness at presenting the material. |
| Good introduction to topics. |
| tytryttrtrhhhtr |
| I think that it is very useful for the following reasons:
1) presents the course-taker with methodically organized information,
2) allows skipping some chapters that are less needed at the start, although these are not numerous,
3) self-tests and course problems are good for establishing a better knowledge base, and make the course more interesting. |
| The web-course was free, and well-written. It provided a more structured learning approach than a HOWTO or text-based introduction.
It is convenient to do the course at one's own pace.
The self-tests are very useful. |
| You can do the course at your own speed, when you have the time. It is very useful to do it online, since every reference and suggested link can immidiately be checked. |
| I will take intermediate MPI |
| It provides the greatest support for self-based learning. This is the first place I would check for learning something new. |
| self paced |
| Convenience (scheduling) and ease of review of the on-line material.
|
| lots of coding examples-> great! |
| It went well. Perhaps I took longer that I should have to finish everything though. |
| Allows me to study the topic as I have time. |
| They're an effective introduction to a topic. |
| More advanced is needed. |
| It was very insightful and was flexible in time needed to take it. |
| self study, spare time |
| I want know more about this topic |
| It was free, and available to me at times when I could spend time on it. |
| I enjoyed the way in which the content was presented and especially enjoyed the feedback on the self tests. The content is also good. |
| The other courses available here seem interesting and useful. |
| Much effort was put into this (unlike other web resources) and this shows. |
| |
|
| What did you like most about this course and why? |
| New ideas were presented in a logcial manner. |
| Very well structured and organized |
| very clear exposition. Examples. |
| The material is very clear and well organised. The examples are very helpful. |
| Study at own pace |
| Good explanations |
| Examples and clear explanations of relevant topics. |
| Quality of the material |
| It was easy to read and understand. I found the stuff, that I was looking for. |
| The organization was good. |
| Explained all topics concisely, what is needed at the ('Introductory level. That way it is fast to learn the topic. |
| Very in depth chapters explaining the material |
| Self-contained material and readability. |
| Lots of realistic examples problems were provided. |
| Detailed explanations, even a beginner can understand it. The acces to complete programmas are a good help to beginners implementation of new software. |
| Simplicity and relevance of the contents including the exercises and tests. |
| its organization |
| Organization went from basic to more detailed.This provided a good base to expand understanding. |
| repetition of the important things |
| The implementation's examples. |
| Good depth and breadth of topics, without requiring too much background knowledge. Well thought-out examples, excellent explanation for the reasoning behind various approaches. |
| Size of the modules was good. It was relatively easy to stop and then pick up the thread of the class again later. |
| The course problems were relevant to the material and to real programming situations. I also liked how they built on each other. |
| I have no comment on this one. |
| its very easy to understand the topics ... The text is very clear ... |
| The pacing was just right. I did not feel like I was being spoon-fed little bits of information, nor did I get lost in the middle of advanced topics. |
| Concentrated on teh most useful, basic topics, explained well. |
| The most important this is defintely, being comprehensive and informative. It doesnt take much of a time to parse throuhg and course and simple practical exmaples make it even more cool. |
| The examples were good. |
| Self tests and course problems help you not to forget material just after reading :) |
| Well organised, very clear explanations, good examples and useful tests. |
| I donīt have a good access to books on MPI. So, this course is very usefull for me. The topics are very well organized. |
| See above. |
| Its existence;) - I didn't expect such a course can be available for everyone and for free - and that it can be prepared with such care. |
| The content is easy to read and understand |
| detailed self-tests |
| The way the topics were laid out made it very easy to learn. |
| I like every parts of the cource, I think you have done a unvaluable thing. |
| The convenience of the web based teaching approach, the self tests and the various sample codes. |
| the contents were informative with references |
| Brief, but enough detailed curse focussing on the most important topics. |
| I didn't begin it yet... |
| it's very detailed, excellent for begginers |
| organization and quality of content |
| See above: I attended SDSC's 5-day workshop on
introduction to parallel computing and I really
gained nothing out of it. This WebCT course gave
me exactly what I needed to develop a solid understanding
of MPI and apply it to my Computational Fluid Dynamics
code. |
| The simplicity and organization of the course. |
| chapter "projects". Very useful. |
| Theory was good. |
| Practical examples plus source code |
| it was a great eye opener |
| It describes the communication in detail which is what I like most. |
| sample codes and diagrams |
| simlesity |
| It is always stright to the important concepts |
| - it exactly fits my needs (themes and level)
|
| its smiple and organized way of explaining |
| I liked the examples of actual code. I liked the self tests. I like the step by step format (its much easier for me to learn like this than sitting down and reading a book). |
| about learning more on MPI programming.very sraight forward and easy to grasp. |
| Getting to the point, available. |
| Neat and well-organized.
|
| tytttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt |
| The good methodical approach that allowed me (a total beginner in MPI) to grasp the basic concep |