Biochem 501 N =18
What, if anything, did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
The mentored project.
The lab experience.
Learning the basics.
All of 152.
Textbook was very good.
A general overview.
The lectures.
Learn wide range of topics.
Lectures were good and covered enough for future classes.
Cell cycles.
Each unit/module was valuable.
Gave general information on almost all topics in other courses.
Nothing special. Profs. seemed to take their anger for the University out on my class
(two profs. in particular).
Test preparation.
Exposure.
Lab.
The ability to understand concepts.
Mentored research.
Basic knowledge given.
The range of material covered.
That it is horrible to take at Madison.
I got me prepared for the difficult level of other science courses, and gave me a great base
of knowledge.
General overview of mammalian anatomy.
The lectures.
Scientific journal reading.
Genetics & Krebs & other cycles.
Just a general knowledge of bio.
The human biology was good.
Learning the basic biology information has helped in advanced biology classes.
The teachers were interesting. Physiology part was fun. 152 lab is lots better than 151.
Lecture material was informative and somewhat helpful in other biology classes.
The physiology section of 152—Tony Stretton! Also, the breadth of material was a great
survey of biology.
Lots of learning on a wide variety of topics.
Animal Physiology and the unit of Genetics. The lab was really good in Zoo. 151.
POSITIVE COMMENTS ABOUT:
LAB = 5/18 LECTURE = 5/18
What, if anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory training?
The ecology unit and the lab/discussion sessions.
I didn’t think the instructors I had were very good, so, the lectures weren’t as insightful to
me.
Genetics was covered too in depth for an intro. course. Having taken Zoo. 152, Genetics
466, and Biochem 501, I feel like I’ve learned the same material three times—redundant
and a waste of my time and tuition money.
A really sucky TA for 151—don’t you people screen these kids?
Lectures need more organization.
Not very in-depth.
151.
Lab section was a waste of time. Bio/Zoo 151-152.
Labs were simpler than those in my basic AP Bio Course—didn’t learn anything.
Too general, too much info. crammed in.
Zoo. 151 & 152 labs were a complete waste of time.
Labs & Discussion, writing assignments were not helpful, most of my papers I had to
dumb down because the TA’s knew nothing about stats.
Labs.
The labs were useless.
Some labs were unnecessary to do rather than if they were just taught.
The labs were pointless.
The exams did not show how much you knew.
The labs.
Biol. 152 Poster session.
Discussion.
N/A.
Labs where you had to look up prices for equipment & pretend to go searching for data
on an island. –( Note - JH specific to the Galapagos Bird lab)
Good basics in biology.
The labs exp. in 151.
The labs were not very useful, just time consuming.
Everything.
The lab experience was a waste of time, useless.
Some of the labs.
The lab that went with them.
The lab, there was no real hands on experience.
Study of plants. Labs were also questionable because they rarely applied to lecture.
The power discussions (1 hr. & 15 min.) were completely useless and a waste of time.
Half the time we just sat there.
It was very basic and general.
Learning about plants.
Some of the labs, especially in Zoo. 152, seemed like busy work.
Many of the professors cared more about getting a mess of facts into each lecture than
about their students seeing “where” their (?) fits into biology.
Nit-picky labs.
There is an extreme amount of busy work in the course and the labs aren’t very helpful at
all in solidifying topics especially in 151.
Labs.
NEGATIVE COMMENTS (LEAST VALUABLE) ABOUT:
LAB = 20/18? LECTURE = 6/18
IP.
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but that was not?
Better lectures. The exams should match the information from the lectures.
Not applicable.
More of the connection b/t different topics.
The library research paper.
No. (5 people)
More Genetics.
Maybe more thorough anat/physiology.
None.
How to study the material.
The labs were horrible. (Note = repeat of above JH)
How to teach students effectively.
Metabolism? (May have been addressed in Zoo. 151).
More in depth explanations, too many assumptions were made.
I can’t think of anything.
Labs didn’t help/train you to do anything. (Note = repeat of above JH)
I can’t remember.
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
They tried to smash too much stuff in very little time.
I did not receive a scantron for the survey.
Zoo. 152 was a really irritating class. So much of it seemed to be wasted time. None of
the labs were very interesting or informative and the discussions wasted our time by
having such a strict schedule that took away from our ability to just ask questions
regarding lecture and have some concepts explained. It seems that all were ever talked
about in discussion was the stuff everyone already understood.
Make labs not about writing. I learned nothing about academic writing. I already had
written journal articles. Their style was not accurate and they need to learn more
advanced statistics. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Can you please stop using powerpoints? No one utilizes them properly and teachers use
it as a scapegoat for actually having to teach.
No.
Nope.
None.
More biochem stuff (Glycolosis & enzymes, etc.)
I like Zoo. 151/152—I don’t like this class.
I didn’t like it.
Introductory biology did not prepare me for upper biology course.
Ecology 460 N = 22
What, if anything, did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
The powerpoint slides summing up what was in the huge book.
Lab was helpful.
Discussions were very important.
I liked that there was more than one professor.
The written report and presentation.
It gave me a broad taste of subjects and re-established my interest in Botany.
Getting the basics of Bio understood well.
Introduction to many topics.
Gave a strong over all base for future classes.
I took 152, but I thought it has a very good introduction to plants, human systems and
ecology.
The broad knowledge.
Bio 152 labs.
The laboratory research.
It refreshed my memory & specifics in biology.
Good background in save areas.
Wide background.
Investigative thinking.
Reinforcing of basic biology principles /concepts.
Genetics, physiology sections.
I was very satisfied with my education in Bot/Zoo 152—the course gave a nice overview
of the topics it covered.
Broad coverage & general background.
Broad overview of system instructors & general information to provide framework.
I don’t remember the course.
POSITIVE COMMENTS:
LAB = 4/22 LECTURE = 1/22
What, if anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory training?
A lot of the labs done all on the computers—birds.
Non cumulative exams.
I thought the labs for both 151 & 152 were horrible.
Spent a lot of time on human biology which doesn’t pertain to my major.
Excessive anal-retention in lab work a needless stress in any student’s life.
Went too fast, exams where poorly structured to ask specific questions about broad
topics.
Nothing.
I didn’t really like how we seemed to go into deep detail about random things.
Discussion—Bio 151.
The labs were not related enough to lecture & required too much busy work.
Kinda like High School.
Of course. It was impossible to take organization notes in lecture. Needed PDF, or
PowerPoint of all lectures so can get the info.
Too little information on any one subject.
151 was basically a recap of AP Bio I took in high school.
Don’t remember.
Zoo. 152 lab.
The lab wasted a lot of time—I didn’t like it at all.
Zoo. 151 labs were not effective & were time consuming.
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but was not?
More about DNA—RNA—MRNA.
I feel we should have been challenged a bit more—cumulative exams would have helped
me retain more. More lab quizzes, projects.
Can’t remember.
How really exciting biology can be.
The labs really were pointless. (Note = repeat of above JH)
No.
Lots, but not possible to hit it all.
Connectivity—How concepts are interrelated.
Can’t remember.
No.
More on plant/animal interactions, evolution/genetics.
More conceptual work and less facts.
More interesting, relevant lab experience. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Hormones (regulation)
NEGATIVE (LEAST VALUABLE) :
LAB = 7/22 LECTURE = 2/22
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
Multiple professors with different teaching styles made it difficult to have consistency in
lecture with note taking and expectations. But it was good to have profs. who specialized
in the areas.
Labs weren’t that useful. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Should offer tutorial program.
Changes need to be made. 300—level introduction courses than 400—level senior
courses.
I am very happy with my intro. biology training.
No.
Seemed appropriate.
Plant Physiology N = 282
What, if anything did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
Getting the basics of Bio. understood well.
The broad knowledge.
Bio. 152 labs.
I liked that there was more than one professor.
The written report and presentation.
The powerpoint slides summing up what was in the huge book.
It refreshed my memory & specifics in biology.
Good background in some areas.
Wide background.
Investigative thinking.
I don’t remember the course.
Broad overview of system interactions & general information to provide framework.
Reinforcing of basic biology principles/concepts.
Broad coverage & general background.
POSITIVE COMMENTS:
LAB = 2/282 LECTURE = 2/22
What, if anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory training?
Labs.
*Excessive anal-retention in lab work a needless stress in any student’s life.
Gave a strong over all base for future classes.
I didn’t really like how we seemed to go into deep detail about random things.
Discussion—Bio. 151.
I thought the labs for both 151 & 152 were horrible.
Spent a lot of time on human biology which doesn’t pertain to my major.
A lot of the labs done all on the computers—birds.
Kinda like High School.
Organization of course. It was impossible to take notes in lecture. Needed PDF or
Powerpoint of all lectures so can get the info.
Too little information on any one subject.
Zoo. 151 labs were not effective and were time consuming.
?
151 was basically a recap of AP Bio. I took in high school.
Don’t remember.
The lab wasted a lot of time—I didn’t like it at all.
NEGATIVE (LEAST VALUABLE):
LAB = 5/282 LECTURE = 1/282
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but that was not?
*How really exciting biology can be.
No. (2 people).
Labs, but not possible to hit it all. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Connectivity—How concepts are interrelated.
Can’t remember.
More about DNA-RNA-MRNA.
Can’t remember.
More on plant/animal interactions, evolution/genetics.
Hormones (regulation).
More conceptual work and less facts.
More interesting, relevant lab experience. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
Labs weren’t that useful. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Should offer tutorial program.
Changes need to be made. 300 level intro. courses, than 400 level senior courses.
Seemed appropriate.
No.
Evolutionary Biology 410 -- 54
What, if anything, did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
Introduction & comparison among general biology concepts.
How a general overview of everything was done.
Covered many aspects of biology.
Lab procedures.
Research paper in 152.
Touched on many different aspects of biology & zoology.
Writing a scientific paper.
Providing a family good base of knowledge on the subject.
Physiology section of 152.
More of the ecology information that was covered (for example speciation).
Intro. to a wide variety of subjects physiology section.
Gave background info. in many areas that prepares you for upper level courses.
The written research project.
Good overall very broad knowledge base.
A primer on genetics.
It covered the basis of most upper level classes—provided a background knowledge.
Zoo. 152 lab/research project.
The exams forced you to remember material and prepared you to do that intensity level in
the upper level courses.
Mentured Research & Stretton. Doing mammalian physiology.
Background.
Gave a good base of concepts, was taught well.
The labs.
I don’t know, I am now a chem. major who doesn’t really like biology anymore.
The basic concepts learned across many topics, good intro. to a lot of material.
General understanding of evolution & ecology.
Study skills.
Good variety of topics including organ system, molecule stuff & ecology.
POSITIVE COMMENTS:
LAB = 7/54 LECTURE = 0/54
What, if anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory training?
Some of the labs could have been more hands on.
Research Paper.
Covering topics indepth not related to my field: ie cell biology for an ecology major.
Lab work.
All the busy work.
Lab. (3 people)
Perhaps the labs. I don’t think too much of what I learned there has helped me.
Ecology section of 152.
Not adequate genetics knowledge.
Geared too much to pre-med students.
Some of the daily lab group activities.
The mechanical processes, as they were used little in this course.
Exams did not reflect material taught in class.
The labs were somewhat tedious and didn’t further knowledge that much.
Most of the rest of it.
Lap with the class was not very educational.
The amount of material covered was way too much.
The labs were worthless.
The labs seemed kind of worthless, like high school work, the group projects were
annoying.
The labs, ecology.
NEGATIVE (LEAST VALUABLE):
LAB = 13/54 LECTURE = 0/54
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but that was not?
No. (4 people)
Genetics background.
More hands-on work with 152 concepts in lab portion. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Yes. Taking Zoo. 151/152 puts you at a HUGE disadvantage to Biocore kids when
taking upper level course.
More on ecology, maybe more genetics, but overall pretty good.
More genetics, Professor (? …aham) for 151 did poor job preparing for course like Gen.
466!
More on fossil information, more hard evidence about evolution.
More ecology.
Evolution! I don’t have the greatest memory of the courses, but I felt it lacked in
evolution, especially in 151.
Maybe more intro. genetics.
More genetics.
Not really.
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
No. (3 people)
Way to difficult. They were harder than this class, Zoo. 410.
152 paper writing portion should be split off into it’s own writing course, and lab more
devoted to 152 topics from lecture. (Note = repeat of above JH)
“Required” study guide was waste of money.
Zoo. 152 paper helpful in learning scientific paper process!
Poorly written exams. Course somewhat unorganized.
Genetics 466 N = 172
What, if anything, did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
Nothing—Professors were at (?) to see that students would get something wrong. They
took pride in it.
The labs and write-ups.
The mentored research/lab exposure.
The physiology section.
Lab research.
Research for papers.
The labs especially Zoo. 151 with the fly lab.
Research & Physiology section.
Mendilian Genetics & population genetics.
The speed with which the information was presented.
Independent project.
Having three intro. courses is ridiculous! Biocore is difficult for the sake of being
difficult; Zoo. 101 is just a tiny step above high school; and Zoo. 151/152 is what’s left
over—yet quite unsatisfactory!
None.
The mentored research experience.
Basic genetics.
Physiology.
The overview of DNA transcription & translation.
Critical thinking. Physiology section.
The research paper.
They covered material that you will come across again in other science courses.
Thorough covering of a variety of topics.
Office hours.
Mentored research project.
The skills learned for writing scientific papers. The bread coverage of ecology, plants
and animal physiology was a nice base of knowledge for upper level courses.
The level of detail and amount of info. covered.
The genetics of animal physiology sections.
The Zoo. 151-152 was worthless, could have gotten the same information by just reading
a book.
Valuable? Nothing.
Mentored research.
Learning to write a scientific paper.
The information taught in the lectures.
The strong foundation in a broad range of biological topics. The ability to write scientific
papers.
Touched on every basic topic in my biology classes focused on in upper level courses.
Learning different learning styles from professors with the same class.
Wide perspective.
The different focuses taught.
The vast knowledge over many areas which upper level courses would elaborate on.
Nothing.
The DNA and ecology—that’s what I remember most.
Good level of introduction to a large number of topics.
Course was well organized.
Very useful base information. Set me up to have knowledge of topics in other classes.
POSITIVE COMMENTS:
LAB = 13/172 LECTURE = 4/172
What, if any anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory
training?
They made me take 151 & I did well on the AP bio test. They wasted 5 credits of my
college career.
Having three different professors a semester.
The material in Zoo. 152 really doesn’t relate to what I’m learning now at all. My AP
class was much more helpful.
Zoo. 151/152 lab.
Lab.
Poor labs except for research experience.
The lab.
Lab, research paper.
Other lab work.
Plant biology.
It was the only course I ever took that had Course Organizer staff, and yet it was one of
the most unorganized courses I have ever taken! Shame on them!
The paper we had to write was tedious and useless.
The coursework on ecology and the ecology labs.
Plant Biology.
Learning the evolutionary sequence of life.
The lab.
Many of the labs were pointless busywork.
The discussions, they did not help me really answer questions I had. It was more applied
knowledge.
The lab portion.
The labs were almost too simplistic. I dissected more orders of animals in high school
than in Bio 152.
All the ridiculous memorization of stuff during evolution.
The labs were very much useless when pertaining to the class.
The ecology and pieces of evolution segments.
The lab was a complete waste of my time!!!
Slow pace. Waste of time labs. Too long of discussions. Terribly written exams.
The labs were often irrelevant to the course material. Coordinate the labs better with the
course material.
Many of the labs I found to be irrelevant to lecture material.
The information wasn’t connected and integrated in a way that always allowed for best
understanding (152’s lab was pretty useless in this sense).
Feeling rushed and class felt unorganized.
Horrible labs. They were poorly organized, usually irrelevant, and wholly useless.
The excessive amount of tedious work that I was forced to do and aided no way in my
learning.
Some of the discussion & lab work was busy work and didn’t add to my learning.
The lab.
The labs, especially in Bio 151, were pointless busy work.
The ecology and plant bio labs were not useful or especially quantitative. These should
be redone to improve their content. Otherwise, everything was great!
Busywork, unfair exams, I did not like the way it was structured.
The plant/tree section never did anything for my future classes.
NEGATIVE (LEAST VALUABLE):
LAB = 21/172 LECTURE = 6/172
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but that was not?
Not applicable.
Nope.
The human fetal development.
Animal development.
No. (11 people)
I felt that there was an assumption that all students had taken biology before. Too much
prior knowledge was assumed.
The 151/152 labs were almost laughable! It was like a bad day in a high school lab—it
demands and deserves vast improvement! (Note = repeat of above JH)
Genetic recombination.
More genetics/bacteriology coverage.
More importance on biotechnology and applications.
Yes.
Apply the labs to information taught in the course. They often did not correlate. Labs
are essential to learning and understanding lecture material, but only if they correlate.
(Note = repeat of above JH)
Endocrinology.
Biology.
No, but I heard some teachers skip endocrinology and that’s important.
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
Waste of time and money.
Wasn’t useful.
Have professors teach what they do research on not something else.
TOO HARD, exams did NOT measure what I actually learned!
The course coordinator took himself a little too seriously.
Whoever, the hell came up with this three course plan and then designed the courses
should resign their positions immediately! They have done a great disservice to this
University!
No. (2 people)
Would be more valuable for the general courses to focus on either Botany or Zoology.
Much is in common (cell biology/genetics) but the Botany section was a waste of time
for me.
None.
Having all of the tests be all multiple choice didn’t make me learn stuff very thoroughly.
The class felt like way too much busy work—the constant homework, lab work, and
readings were way too much work to keep up with. And the speed was ridiculously fast.
More in depth. It felt like grade school and I hated it.
Lab projects could be more in depth and valuable. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Nope.
Spending three whole hours in lab every week was ludicrous when the TA’s weren’t
given enough information for us to be learning for that duration of time. Instead we
wasted our time giving presentations of playing games. (Note = repeat of above JH)
Multiple choice exams were a poor way of testing such in depth material.
It sucked.
Bio. 151/152 very impersonal, more so than other lectures of 300 people. They’re
obviously weed-out classes and I don’t feel like I retained much of the information that I
learned.
Physiology 335 – N = 30
What, if anything, did you consider to be the most valuable thing about your introductory
biology training?
The good lecturing and discussion was great …it really solidified a lot.
The dissection and hands-on experiences increased the learning in the lab and class.
Exams were very similar to physiology.
Lots of information learned.
The physiology section was excellent. I loved the plant systematics part, learned &
remember more from that section than any other.
The thorough coverage of neuronal function.
The depth of each concept covered was impressive.
Carlos, the coordinator, actually cares and was very helpful and supportive.
Human Physiology unit—emphasis on kidneys & immune system.
Mentored research. (2 people)
Physiology, cell bio.
Research paper.
The discussion was the best part of the course. The lectures were pretty complex. The
lab didn’t correlate with the class at all. It was it’s own class. More lecture lab
integration could have been good.
I took Zoo. 151-2 at UW Rock County. Our professor was excellent for lecture and lab.
He really helped prepare me for this Phys. Lab! Was able to comprehend lecture & lab
with little difficulty.
Good survey, a little of everything.
I did independent research prior to college on several marine ecosystems. I knew most of
it going into intro bio.
It taught me about physiology in 152. That’s it!
Lecture and reading the textbook.
That not college courses have student learning as their main goal—some courses eg. Zoo.
151/152 are soley a means of “weeding” students out.
Learning to work hard.
It covered basics of a lot of topics.
The fact that each exam was by a different professor prepared me for how physiology is
run.
The most valuable thing about the course is merr encouragement to participate and assist
in doing mentored research.
Prof. Stretton! The neuro unit was excellent.
Gained some familiarity with terms and concepts.
POSITIVE COMMENTS:
LAB = 4/30 LECTURE = 6/30
What, if anything, did you feel was the least valuable about your introductory training?
Lab, worthless.
The zoo lectures.
Labs were not much like physiology—they should be one week labs instead of three
week long ones.
Lab.
The ecology unit was not helpful or adequate.
The 151 lab exercises.
It jumped from concept to concept rather abruptly without trying it all together as a set of
linked concepts.
Zoo. 151 labs were a waste of time.
Plant biology.
Most Zoo. 151 labs.
Discussion & most of the labs. At least make discussion less than 1 hour 15 min!
The lab was almost entirely pointless and overly tedious.
The T.A. I has for 152 hadn’t taken a biology course since who knows when and wasn’t
very helpful. There should be stricter standards.
At UW-Rock we used more hands-on models and less computer simulation in our labs
for physiology.
Labs.
I felt the labs in Zoo. 151-152 were useless. In fact, at times we taught TA’s cause they
didn’t understand math backgrounds.
Zoo. 151/152 has the wrong focus. The lectures are almost meaningless because the
exams are based on details from the text. I did very well in both semesters so don’t read
these comments as coming from a bitter student. For the amount of hours that class takes
up, I learned very little in comparison to other upper level bio classes. If I knew the
course was designed to distribute large lectures by details on the exam, I would have
taken Bio-core.
The lab and independent study paper.
Watching extremely depressed instructors trudge through a miserable curriculum day
after day.
Labs were inapplicable—especially 2nd semester (except for the rat lab).
The lab reports, didn’t really need to utilize the extensive format in the rest of my college
career. Especially since I’m not looking to get published.
The least valuable was the section on plants. Along with the discussion which were not
helpful at all.
Plant biology.
Pointless labs, pointless busy work.
NEGATIVE (LEAST VALUABLE):
LABS = 13`/30 LECTURES = 7/30
Was there anything you felt really should have been addressed in an introductory course,
but that was not?
The lab work was terrible … too much detail & too long for write-ups. (Note = repeat of
above JH)
N/A.
Circlatory system—in animal phys part of 152.
No. (7 people).
More basic human anatomy.
Nerve anatomy and function.
Yes the so called mentored research should be offered and given to every student, it was
unfair that some students were not included and is discouraging students to enter into
science.
Nope.
Immunology and more human systems.
I felt I had a more than adequate understanding of basic biology from my Zoo. course.
Perhaps basic biology. I don’t mean this fliply—I really think Zoo. 151/152 were
severely lacking in content and form.
Even if you didn’t go as well as you wanted don’t give up.
Any additional thoughts or comments on your introductory course?
Change the labs! Amount of work for reports is ridiculous. (Note = repeat of above JH)
No.
Nope.
Unless you can make some of the labs more relevant, a portion of the labs should be
eliminated. Some of them were a waste of time. (Note = repeat of above JH)Also, I
can’t think playing with Plato in discussion really enhanced my learning.
Changing the lectures for each section puts you at a disadvantage the tests are
unpredictable each time. You can’t get used to a certain testing style.
None.
Get better TA selection.
Also, I had the option of taking Biocore and opted out—and was grateful after watching
the majority of my friends burned out, one after another.
Less scantron exams & more free response—students learn & process info. better &
retain it longer.
TOTAL N =
578
POSITIVE
NO
RESPONSE
NEGATIVE
LAB
%
LECTURE
%
35
6%
80%
18
3%
93%
79
14%
22
4%