Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:58:11 -0500 Reply-To: Bioinformatics List From: Lynda Ellis Subject: symposium evaluations Thanks to Alison Baerwald for summarizing the Symposium Evaluations. 25 of the symposium audience members returned an evalutation form. The responses were scored: 5 = Excellent, 4 = Very Good, 3 = Good, 2 = Fair, 1 = Poor. -------- -- ----- Item N Score -------- -- ----- Overall 24 3.9 Packets 24 3.8 Room 24 4.2 AV 21 3.8 Food 24 4.1 Schedule 24 4.1 Posters 25 3.3 Speakers 21 3.9 9(!) respondants had additional comments. - Good to see there is some group here at the U of MN providing services we need. - Tutorials almost content free. - I enjoy the opportunity of attending the Building Bridges seminars (this is my 3rd year). The set of speakers this year was quite good. Especially Dr. Palsson and Dr. Kaznessis, who dealt with the aspect of Genetic Engineering & synthetic biology, which align with some work I'm involved in from a computational perspective. (Tom Mullins, IBM) - Keep it up! Very valuable! - Great to have NCBI represented at symposium - Need more time for poster session, one day -> 2 or more days to invite more speakers. - Presentation session for graduate/post doc? More time on poster session. - Abstracts on talks should be included. A single large screen would have been better. - Very good, should have it next year.