Approaches
and methods: It uses concepts and methods in molecular biology (e.g.,
phage display screening, creating libraries, RT-PCR, cloning), cell biology
(e.g., confocal microscopy, monitoring intracellular ion concentrations
using fluorescence probes), biochemistry (e.g., Western blots, immunoprecipitation,
membrane and protein isolation, enzyme activity measurements, ion transport
assays, determining concentrations of various metabolites), physiology
and pharmacology (monitoring the effects of different drugs on arterial
contractility using organ baths).
Manuscripts Accepted D
Davis, K., Samson, S., Kiss, L., Fulop, F., Grover, A.K. (2008) Functional linkageof Na-Ca-exchanger to sarco/endoplasmic reticulum Ca pump in coronary artery: comparison of smooth muscle and endothelial cells J. Cell. Mol. Med.
Recent Publications:
Course objective:
Ability
to read books and papers with pharmacological content.
Course approach:
Combination
of lectures, tutorials with assignments, free group discussions to solve
problems, student presentations and an essay.
Course Evaluation:
Tutorial
Assignments: 20 %. 6 tutorial assignments are included in this package.
Assignment given to you in a tutorial is due in the next one.
Midterm: 20% (to be held in class)
Group presentation + essay: 20 % on an assigned topic.
Final Exam: 40 % (includes the whole course, to be scheduled).
90 % or more in final exam is an automatic A+.
You may use any calculators in the midterm and the final
examinations.
Course content:
General basis of drug action and selectivity
Drug transport, absorption, distribution
Dose and time response relationships
Factors modifying drug effect
Drug Toxicity
Neurotransmitters
Drug receptors, receptor classification, second messengers:
main examples used are adrenergic and cholinergic receptors
Other mechanisms of drug action
Nitric oxide & viagra
Pharmacogenomics
Courseware Package: Available
in the bookstore. Lecture notes (Copies of the overheads to be used in
the lectures and Tutorials): Bring these with you to class and tutorials.
Course Organization:
2 lectures/week
1 class/week for lecture/free discussion, questions/presentations
1 tutrial/week*
Thursday: tutorials, 50 min each**
** Each tutorial will be for a 50 min duration. There
will be 4 to 6 different sections starting at different times/
Tutorial sections will be assigned in the first class. Tutorial times and rooms will also then be announced.
Office hours to be determined on Jan 7.
The instructor is readily available by Learnlink, e-mail,
phone or in person.
Tuturials
Tutorial Format: Tutorials 1-6 are to help you to understand
quantitative aspects of drug action. In each of these tutorials, your TA
will go over the concepts with you taking one or two examples of each.
Do the assignments individually and hand them before the deadlines to your
T.A. who will mark them.
Each of the tutorials 1-6 also contains an in class discussion.
Expectation: All students will participate in the discussion
and the TA will moderate it.
Tutorials 7-12 have a different objective and format
and no assignments. The purpose of these tutorials is to put together various
concepts you have learned without any pressure of marks etc. In each of
these tutorials, the students should select one student to direct the discussion.
The expected involvement of the T.A. in these tutorials is no different
from that of any student.
Presentation and Essay
(20 % of the final course mark)
Aims: The first aim in this section is to learn to read
scientific papers with pharmacological content, to interpret data, to grasp
essential information, and to present findings in an oral and written format.
A second aim is to learn to work as a team.
Approach: To explore the contribution of rat in pharmacology
Increasingly, we realize that genetic make up of an individual
is important in the drugs they receive and dose scheduling of these drugs.
We will examine this issue with reference to: asthma, depression, hypertension
and diabetes.
Details of the approach:
The number of students per group, their roles and marks
will be decided based on the course enrollment.
- several students will work as a team and work on the
assigned topic. The group will decide which student will take up individual
tasks.
- one student will make an in-class presentation on
behalf of the team. Non- presenting members of the group will be responsible
for answering any questions after the presentation. If the originally designated
member is unable to present, it is the team's responsibility to find a
replacement. If a team fails to present, all members of the team lose the
presentation mark. Therefore, the team must have a backup member ready
to present.
- one student will be responsible for writing a lay
summary, the abstract, critiques and response to critiques.
- some members of the group will write the main body
of the essay.
- the group will hand in an original (not taken from
any source) comprehensive scheme connecting everything based on their understanding
of the topic.
- Title page of the written essay should give name,
ID and exact contribution of each member of the group.
Presentation:
10 min/topic, 3 presentations/class. The remaining time will be used for
open discussion on the 3 topics.
Critiques: Each team will write a critique on the
two other presentations made on that day. Marks of the presentation will
not depend on these critiques. The idea of the critiques is to help the
other teams in writing the essay in case they have overlooked something.
Therefore, comments on presentation style are not to be included. A critique
will consist of 3 parts: (i) a brief summary of your understanding of the
presentation (5-6 lines), (ii) strength of the topics presented (4-5 lines),
and (iii) what does the presenting team need to explain better or include
to make their essay more complete or lucid (10-15 lines). A critique without
(i) and (ii) will not be accepted although it will be marked only on (iii).
The critiques will be given to the presenting teams within 48 h to help
them write the essays. The presenting team will be required to address
the critique - how and where they have included the comments in the essay
or why they feel it is not appropriate to do so. Examples of critiques
of manuscripts and grant applications are provided at the end of the notes
in Lecture 1.
Lay summary: Approximately 50 words written in a language
that a high school student can understand. You have to convey the exact
message without using scientific jargon.
Abstract: Approximately 250 words - giving description
of the problem, data available, interpretation of the data and a concluding
sentence.
Comprehensive Scheme: Marks will be based on understanding
of the subject and lucidity and creativity of the presentation. This scheme
must be original, designed by you and not taken from any source. A legend
of 50 words or so explaining the scheme should accompany it. See Lecture
23-5 for an example.
Text of the essay: Approximately 12 pages including
figures, tables and references and excluding lay summary, abstract and
comprehensive scheme. Introduction, key data selection and presentation,
interpretation based on your analysis, and conclusion. These marks will
be assigned based on relevance of the data chosen, understanding of the
subject, your analysis and clarity of presentation. Appropriate references
must appear in the text where cited and as a bibliography at the end. You
are required to write this essay in your own words. You may use figures
or quotes from the literature only if you explicitly indicate the source
at the same place as the item appears. Not doing so will be considered
plagiarism even if the references are given at the end.
Attendance: There are no marks for attendance or participation.
However, the Final Exam will contain questions based on the topics covered
in the presentations.
Logistics:
Titles and dates to be posted
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS
OF BIOLOGY 3AA3 for 2008
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.84; Median =5.0
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response: 3.50; Median = 3.0
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.63, Median = 4.00
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 7.16; median = 8
STUDENT COMMENTS:
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS
OF BIOLOGY 3AA3 for 2007
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:5.0; Median =5.0
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response: 3.60; Median = 4.0
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.53, Median = 3,00
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 7.32; median = 8
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- Clear explanation on what is expected for group work
will be helpful. Great teacher. It is visible that you want
the students to learn. Courseware is very organized - better than
a textbook.
- Unfair marking but amazing prof. Go
to the top.
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2006
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:3.78; Median =4.0
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response: 3.86; Median = 4.0
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 2.89, Median = 3,00
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 5.34; median = 5
STUDENT COMMENTS:
-Really enjoyed the class. Material seemed to relate
to other courses. Dr. Grover is a very good professor.
-Tutorials and assignments were helpful. Professor
approachable and able to answer questions.
-A fantastic course. A+++. Let's hope the
exam is equally rewarding.
-A textbook for this course would be very helpful.
The courseware is very busy and assumes background knowledge.
-The courseware lectures were fairly sparse and expected
too much background understanding in order to interpret lectures.
You should take more time to explain what you are talking about instead
of finishing class early all the time. I do not feel this was representative
of a general pharmacology course. And I feel it was not worth taking to
see if I am interested in pharmacology. You need to revise your testing
and lecturing.
-This course assumed too much prior knowledge.
Change the pre-requisites.
-Lecture notes should be improved in order to understand
when self studying.
- Tutorials not helpful (as to the TA).
Instructor's note: There were two practice sessions
but very few students attended. More practice answering questions
were incorporated in the next year's tutorials in response to the following
comments. The instructor thanks for the suggestion.
-I think we need to be prepared more for the thinking
questions asked. Thinking questions are great but show us how to do them.
Assignments were helpful.
-Some of the test questions were too open ended yet had
a hidden (ideal) answer and no direction was given, This course seemed
to focus on the topics too much, need more general overview. More
insight into drug design would have made this course more interesting.
-Tests do not test material taught in the class: Instructor's
note - The course objective is listed as "Ability to
read books and papers with pharmacological content". The students
were informed in the beginning that this exams will tests the ability to
apply what they have learned rather than what they can memorize.
-Not what I expected from this class. The testing
was not related to what we were taught in the class. More practice
answering his questions in tutorial would be better because it is difficult
to understand what he is expecting in for answers. Go
to the top.
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2005
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.74; Median =5
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response: 3.26; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.59, Median = 4
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 6.96; median = 7
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- Dr. Grover makes difficult concepts easy to understand
and is willing to answer questions in and out of lecture time. The
material is well organized but a textbook would aid in knowing background
information that is not presented in class.
- This class exceeded my expectations!
- I have enjoyed this class very much. I feel that
I have been given the opportunity to become a more critical thinker.
I feel that I've not been "spoon fed" all the material we've learned.
Dr. Grover provided me with a very positive, encouraging and enthusiastic
learning environment. I greatly apreciate his willingness to teach
me what to learn and how to learn. Thank you.
- didn't like second half of tutorials where students
moderate discussions.
- Interesting topics - excellently designed courseware.
- This is one of the most useful courses I've taken at
McMaster so far. Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2004
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.78; Median =5
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response: 3.5; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.39, Median = 3
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 7.11; median = 7
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- Group project topics not exactly what I would
consider "pharmacological" but more so related to physiology. Different
topics would be better.
- Dr. Grover is a rarity at McMaster. He
seems to know what students need. The courseware is awesome and really
allows for full comprehension of lectures. He understands how much
material students can handle in 50 min and quits when we are saturated.
This is by far the best biology course offered at Mac!
- Dr. Grover is an experienced prof who really knows
how to reach his students. He really seems to understand what the
students need and how much they can take during one lecture.
The courseware is a terrific idea. This has been by far my favourite
bio course.
- Comments a/b presentations. Grps of 5 (4 grps
present each day - 15 min). 2 people present. 1 person does
the "scheme.....". 2 persons do essay. Powerpoint and overhead
should both be an announced option.
- more applications of material after each lecture. Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2002
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.56; Median =5
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.11; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.5; Median = 3.5
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 6.53; median = 6
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- more PBL questions would be nice
- more applications of material after each lecture
- PBL activities not all that useful
- TA's were helpful
- TA's - generally good
- assignments were a helpful tool to learn from - a very
good class.
- assignments were generally good but often marks were
taken away for not having answered a
question that hadn't been asked in the first place
- it would be nice if all the columns in the charts actually
lined up (even close) - strange
formatting often made it very hard to read
- didn't mind not having a text
- if we're expected to apply concepts to experimental
situations (which is fair), please spend
more class time helping us learn how to do that (examples),
because the types given in
assignments were very different from those on midterm.
- the previous midterms were a TERRIBLE indication of
what to expect - they were very simple
in comparison and did not stress on experimental procedures,
while this year's did. I do not feel
this was fair for a midterm as it was not discussed in
tutorials much either. It would have been
better to focus on concepts for the midterm and leave
such applications for the final exam.
- lectures were merely and mostly a recitation of stuff
on the course pack and the course pack was
not self explanatory. There are so many bits and
pieces of information - almost listed in
fragments in the course pack; therefore, very hard to
keep track of general concepts. Course pack
need major reformatting 1) to thoroughly state basic
concepts and 2) to make it look aesthetically
acceptable.
- Dr Grover is a very dedicated teacher, who likes to
make students think, at least in his PBL and
test questions.
- there was a lot of info to learn, but you covered it
very well in the time we had. The test was
fair, and it was nice to offer the essay but I do not
believe that knowledge would be increased by
having to write a compulsory essay (instructor's note
- there was no compulsory assay, merely a
question of its usefulness was brought up).
- want 2 tests or test and essay - i.e. smaller marks
not just one test
- want more time on general principles and less examples
done in more detail
- want a text book
- custom courseware was nice but needs to be more formatted
- very enthusiastic and dedicated. Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2001
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.38; Median =4
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.38; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.54; Median = 3.5
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 7.13; median = 7
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- Dr. Grover really cares about the students and is always
readily available to answer any questions. He is very concerned with
our feedback and as to what he can do to improve it.
- I found the diagrams in the custom courseware were
unacceptable to me. For example the pitcture of a nephron looks to
me like it was scribbled by a two year old. Learning the material
would be enhanced if these diagrams could be improved. Also it isvery
nice that Dr. Grover asks our opinion about the class so that we can discuss
it but if he defends himself against every suggestion, it makes it hard
to improve and inhibits students from making further suggestions.
- A textbook (available in the bookstore) for the course
would be helpful. May be have 2 tests instead of 1. The instructor
was very enthusiastic and was concerned with our learning. Sometimes,
the notes were hard to follow but the time Dr. Grover took to prepare a
course is much appreciated.
- Tutorial questions were unclear and hard to answer
(Instructor's note: class average in tutorial assignments was 93%).
- lecture notes are very difficult to follow because
they are not aligned. Tutorials 7 and onwards are a bit boring.
(instructor's note: Tutorials 7 and onwards are designed for discussion
among students to open ended problems). I did not feel that Dr. Grover's
response to student questions enouraged student participation. He
often made us feel dumb.
- There was bit too much emphasis on discussion.
The problems in the tutorial probably would have been sufficient.
Dr. Grover really seemed to care about teaching his students.
-- courseware can be confusing at times.
- The assignments are quite lengthy for 1 wk assignments.
Should give a small class test before mid term. The optional essay
is fair. I like the comics. It would be a good idea to make
Cell Physiology (3P03) a prerequisite. I don't think that Biology
3UO3 or 3UU3 were adequate. I think that if I had 3PO3, it would
be more valuable and helpful. Go
to the top
- Great course.
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 2000
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.54; Median =5
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.15; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.35; Median = 3
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 6.73; median = 7
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- I liked the PBL aspects of the course and I found the
tutorials to be very helpful. Both the TAs and Dr. Grover were very
approachable and friendly. The assignments were very long for weekly
assignments - it would have been better to have more time and shorter assignments.
Next year, I think that a textbook should be recommended - it would just
make it easier.
- I really enjoyed the course. I found the materials
to be interesting, for the most part. I really liked the fact that
we had all of the notes already - it made it easier to follow along. I
have recommended this course to others. I would have liked a better
text book reference though.
- Great course - very interesting.
- Dr. Grover is a very good prof. Very approachable,
good attitude towards students, fair person. Always asks for feedback
from students. Always time to answer questions students have.
- I like the cartoons to get every one attention at the
beginning of the class. PBL use - very good examples were relevant
to lectures.
- Option to write term paper is very good. Tutorial
very helpful. Lectures too curt. Not enough detail. Text
book would be useful. Dr. Grover is very understanding.
- Dr. Grover recited most of his lectures.
He spent more time reading of the overhead, which I could have done by
myself, he spent almost no time explaining the principles of pharmacology.
This unfortunately made the class seem useless and uninteresting.
- It was a good course, the whole course integrated a
lot of other courses I have taken at McMaster, Lot of things make
more sense now after this course. Dr. Grover is very helpful and
resourseful and there is enough help available through out the course when
needed.
- Apreciate the chance to write the assay. Thanx. Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 1999
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:4.83; Median =5
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.05; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.63; Median = 4
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 7.58; median = 8
STUDENT COMMENTS:
- Need 2 midterms with lower weighting rather than 1
large test. Good emphasis on the learning process. Course material is interesting
after mideterm but dry beforehand. Courseware is difficult to read in places.
- I found the first half of the course to be very interesting
but after the midterm found it boring and did not learn much.
- First half of the course was extremely helpfuland was
interesting. After the midterm I was a little bored by the material and
lost interest in the course. Tina was excellent as TA - helpful, cheerful,
knowledgeable.
-The midterm test I thought that we should have had more
time in which to complete it. Not enough time to write the midterm test.
-Not enough time to write the mideterm.
-I think it was good that we were given the option of
writing a paper if we didn't do well on the midterm.
-Dr. Grover was an excellent Prof & he was very good
to our class. I enjoyed his teaching style and I learned a lot from him.
His style also helped me think of concepts in a different way. I would
rather have had 2 midterms worth less marks than one worth a lot.
- I think this was an excellent class because of the
discussion style and tutorial style which caused the students to think
and ask questions. This is a much better way of learning vs being spoon
fed information. Dr. Grover is enthusiastic and interested in helping us
learn.
-Friday tutorials should be a more practical problem
based learning format for interest's sake.
-Great class.
- I liked the fact that the notes were in a custom courseware.
It made it easy to read ahead and prepare and it was useful for review.
All the notes were in one place which was great. The PBL thursday was useful
but having it every other week would have been sufficient.
-I liked the Friday tutorials. I find that more "real
world" applications would be helpful in tying this course with other courses.
I think the course was well used, although an uptodate text would be more
helpful.
-Great course, Excellent planning of lectures, tutorials
and discussions. I liked the comics at the start of each lecture. Thankyou.
- Regarding the Friday tutorials, I found it extremely
helpful when the group went over all the figures in the article. This helped
me understand the article itself and we were able to move on and discuss
the given questions. The tutorial assignments were a pain and often I found
the questions quite difficult. But I suppose I have to be challenged to
think and do work and and the assignments definitely served this purpose.
Tina (TA) was awesome. She knew what she was talking about and she was
very helpful (Go Tina).
-Excellent course. Exellent balance of problems &
lectures. Thursday problems were interesting and valuable. Tutorials were
thought provoking. Best course I have had in 4 yrs! I wish I had nominated
Dr. Grover for an award. Tina (TA) was great!
-Need to slow down lectures, done lectures too early,
therefore poor use of time. Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 1998
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-6).
Mean of response:5.55; Median =6
2. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.00; Median = 3
3. OVERALL, how do you rate the value of this course
compared with others you have taken at McMaster? 1-5, 3 = about the same
as the others.
Mean of response: 3.95; Median = 4
4. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 8.85; median = 9
STUDENT COMMENTS:
-Excellent teacher, course & TA.
-Very good interesting course. I thought it went swell.
Not much really to improve on.
-Definitely don't have that textbook in the bookstore.
It's not worth it to buy. Great overheads, overhead custom courseware.
-This is the absolute best class I have had in 4 yrs
in McMaster. He exceeds even Dr. **** in his interest in the students.
(****. This name was deleted in making the summary). Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 1997
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-7).
Mean of response:5.28; Standard deviation = 1.17
2. How much of the course material did you find interesting?
(1-6).
Mean of response:5.14; Standard Deviation =0.97
3. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.07; Standard deviation = 0.36
There are several smaller questions. Most important improvements
suggested: 19% said overheads/slides hard to read and 35% said text was
of poor quality of relevance.
30. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness
of the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 8.65; Standard Deviation = 1.11
STUDENT COMMENTS:
-Text would have been better as just a reference available
on reserve.
-One of the best courses on Campus. Good organization.
Picked out what was important. Fair evaluation. Perhaps one of the contributing
factors is his wanting of suggestions for improvement for future years.
-Dr. Grover is such a nice prof. Very helpful and concerned
@students. Great overheads.
-This is an excellent course, one of the best that I
have ever taken. I really enjoyed Dr. Grover's teaching style and felt
that he made this into an excellent course (Instructor's Note: This comment
was not anonymous).
-It seemed that the instructor thought that we had too
much background knowledge. Often lost in class and on Wednesday discussion.
(Instructor's Note: This was PBL session where the students were supposed
to brainstorm without worrying about the answers being right or wrong). Go
to the top
OVERALL STUDENT RATINGS OF BIOLOGY
3AA3 for 1996
1. How much of the course material seemed valuable to
you? (1-7).
Mean of response:5.19; Standard deviation = 0.78
2. How much of the course material did you find interesting?
(1-6).
Mean of response:4.88; Standard Deviation =0.96
3. How heavy was workload in this course (compared to
other courses at this level) 1-5, 3 = about the same.
Mean of response:3.13; Standard deviation = 0.60
Parts relating to class room facilities etc. not summarized
here. There are several smaller questions. Most important improvements
suggested: 15% said not enough tests and 12% said text was poor quality
of relevance. 30. OVERALL, what is your opinion of the effectiveness of
the instructor as a teacher? (1-10).
Mean of response: 9.00; Standard Deviation = 0.96
STUDENT COMMENTS:
-Dr. Grover is a very good prof & well organized
with course material. As well as being very approachable & a nice person.
-Great course.
-Analogies are good for recall.
-Dr. Grover, my major concern is with your testing methods.
You ask open ended questions yet are looking for one specific answer. This
is unfair. If you feel that the test was too easy and the marks were too
high, it is not fair to seek an adjustment by marking.
-Dr. Grover out of his way to be accessible & is
very interested in the students. Very responsive to feed back.
-Text book is unncessary.
-Dr. Grover shows a genuine interest in his students
and goes out of his way to help them. The way the course is set up (weekly
assignments, tutorials) has been benficial in maximizing what we learn.
-I really enjoyed this course. Dr. Grover was always
available and tried to make sure we understood concepts. Really enjoyed
the last of the tutorials where it was discussion.
-Dr. Grover was very organized - having all the lecture
notes ahead of time was very helpful. I learned lots in this class because
concepts were clearly presented -summary at the end of each lecture was
helpful too. Go
to the top
Announcements