Evaluation of the questionnaire:
“Lectures “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” and “Project   
         Management, Irkutsk, September, 2008”

Contents
1.	Introduction
2.	Evaluation process
3.	Evaluation of the students who participated in the 
         lectures “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” and “Project   
         management”
 
4.	Conclusion

5.	Appendix

1.	Introduction

The first  lectures “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” and “Project management” took place at the Irkutsk State University in the basis of Research and educational centre “Baikal” from 16th of September to 19th of September 2008.

The lectures had been drawn up by the professors of the Ecological Centre of the Christian Albrecht University in Kiel Prof. Dr. Manfred Bölter (“Soil ecology and soil microbiology”) and Dr. Christiane Eschenbach (“Project management”). 

Listeners were students, PhD students and candidates of scientists from Geography department and  Biology and Soil Study department of Irkutsk State University (ISU),  Institute of Biology of ISU, Institute of Geography of Siberian Branch of Academy of Science (SBAS), Siberian Institute of physiology and biochemistry of plants of SBAS. 

13 participants (students, PhD students and Candidates of scientists)  took place in the evaluation process and answered at the end of the lectures a short questionnaire, which consists of 14 questions.

The questionnaire plays a critical role for purposes of making evaluations of how clear for listeners were these courses.
2.	Evaluation process

The most part of  the questions included a ranking were evaluated in the following way:
•	All the figures given by the participants were summarized  and  ranking  in extent of statement or question correctness. Every question of the table has a ranking chain very-rather-medium-rather not-not.

Another 4 questions supposed ‘open” answers and reveal attitudes of past and wishes for the next lectures that are supposed to be.

3.	Evaluation of the students who participated in the lectures “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” and “Project management”

1)	This course was useful and helpful for my future career.

•	For majority of the participants course “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” is rather and medium helpful for their career
•	For majority of the participants course “Project management” is very  or rather helpful for their career

2)	I liked this course.

•	Majority of the participants like both courses very much. 

3)	The course was understandable.

•	For majority of the participants both courses was very or rather understandable. 

4)	The level of the course (content) was too high.

•	For majority of participants “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” course (content)  was medium or rather not too high. 
•	For majority of participants “Project management” course (content)  was medium or was not too high. 

5)	The level of the course (content) was too low.

•	For majority of the participants “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” course (content) was not low. 
•	For majority of the participants “Project management” course (content) was medium or was not low. 

6)	I could follow the lectures in terms of language.

•	Majority of the participants rather could follow the lectures in terms of language. 

7)	I felt engaged during the lectures.

•	Majority of the participants of “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” course felt rather engaged during the lectures.
•	Majority of the participants of “Project management” course felt very or rather engaged during the lectures.

8)	Were the illustration adequate?

•	For majority of the participants of “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” course the illustration was very or rather adequate.
•	For majority of the participants of “Project management” course the illustration was very or medium adequate.

9)	The number of exercises was appropriate.

•	For majority of the participants of “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” course the number of exercises was  rather appropriate but for some of participants was rather not or not appropriate.
•	For majority of the participants of “Project management” course the number of exercises was very or rather appropriate.

10)	The course met my expectations.

•	For majority of the participants both courses rather or very met their expectation.

11)	What should be made better next time?

•	Majority of the participants think that period of time when lectures are should be increased and be 5 days or a week.

12)	What do you like most of all in lectures?

•	Majority of the participants liked most of all exercises in lectures.

13)	How many people should be in every working group?

•	For majority of the participants quantity of participants in a group was ok (12-14) and some participants think that in every group should be lower participants.

14)	Which additional lectures you would like to have?

•	Majority of the participants would like to have course of ecology. They also would like to have also limnology, botany, geography, social science, economy, soils, geology, biochemistry.

4.	Conclusion

Majority of the participants like both courses very much and both of courses will be helpful for future career of participants. For most participants both courses had medium level and were understandable in terms of language. Illustrations of the courses were adequate. Majority of the participants were engaged during the lectures. For majority of participants the number of exercises was appropriate, except 3 participants of the course “Soil ecology and soil microbiology” who thought that number of exercises was rather not or not appropriate. For all participants the courses met their expectations. Participants mostly liked exercises in lectures. For most of participants number persons in each group (12) were appropriate.  
For improving courses next time participants told about extending time of courses duration. And in prospect they proposed to organise next lectures: ecology, limnology, botany, geography, social science, economy, soils, geology, biochemistry.

5.	Appendix

Questionnaire
Irkutsk, 18 September 2008
Please answer the following questions.  Your opinion is important.
Thank you.

Please give some short information about your background / state of education:

	very	rather	medium	rather not	not	
1. This course was useful and helpful for my future career
a)	project

b)	microbes
	
5

1	
4

5	
3

4	1
		
2. I liked this course.
a)	project

b)	microbes
	10

7	

1	1

2	1

3. The course was understandable.
a)	project

b)	microbes
	7

4	3

3	1

2	1

1		
4. The level of the course (content) was too high.
a)	project

b)	microbes
	1

2	1

1	7

3	

3	3

1	
5.T he level of the course (content) was too low.
a)	project

b)	microbes

1	
5

2	
2

1	
5

6	
6.I  could follow the lectures in terms of language.	2	7	3			
7.I felt engaged during the lectures
a)	project

b)	microbes
	7

1	3

9	2

8.Were the illustrations adequate?
a)	project

b)	microbes
	
5

5	
2

3	
5

2			
9.The number of exercises was appropriate
a)	project

b)	microbes
	7

2	5

3	

2	

1	

2	
10.The course met my expectations.
	5	7	1			

11. What should be made better next time? 

Longer time

12. What do you like most of all in lectures?

       Exercises

       13. How many people should be in every working group?

           Ок (7)
           Lower (3)

     14. Which additional lectures you would like to have?

Ecology   7
Limnology   2
Botany    2
Geography   1
Social science   1
Economy   1
Soils   1
Geology   1
Biochemistry   1