Result Summary for Survey:Erice Crystallography 2010 Questionnaire

Erice Crystallography 2010 Questionnaire

1. How did you hear about this meeting? Multiple choice permitted.
	answered question		97
	skipped question		0
		Response Percent	Response Count
Poster addressed to you		27.8%	27
Poster in institution		29.9%	29
From colleagues/boss/director		43.3%	42
Email		7.2%	7
Web		8.2%	8
Invitation		18.6%	18
From advertizing in Journal / listing		0.0%	0
viewOther (please specify)		5.2%	5

2. Have you ever participated in a similar course?
	answered question		97
	skipped question		0
		Response Percent	Response Count
NO		37.1%	36
YES, in Erice		29.9%	29
YES, but elsewhere		22.7%	22
YES, in Erice & elsewhere		10.3%	10

3. Your research field is... (Multiple choice permitted)
	answered question		97
	skipped question		0
		Response Percent	Response Count
Transcription		13.4%	13
Membrane protein structure/function		14.4%	14
Molecular Dynamics		3.1%	3
Structural biology of muscle		2.1%	2
Signal transduction		11.3%	11
Ion channels		4.1%	4
Signalling		15.5%	15
Cryo Electron Microscopy		12.4%	12
Ribosomes/translation		5.2%	5
X-ray imaging		21.6%	21
SAXS		13.4%	13
Methods development		17.5%	17
Enzymology		22.7%	22
Chromatin		8.2%	8
Viruses		10.3%	10
Drug research and development		25.8%	25
Instrumental science		5.2%	5
viewOther (please specify)			19

4. Are you a
	answered question		97
	skipped question		0
		Response Percent	Response Count
lecturer		13.4%	13
workshop leader		7.2%	7
participant selected for an oral talk		4.1%	4
participant with poster		58.8%	57
participant without poster		16.5%	16

5. How important were the following course objectives, and how successfully were they addressed?

answered question

skipped question

Importance
	Unimportant	Somewhat important	in the middle	Very important	Essential	Response Count
A wide overview of the field	0.0% (0)	2.1% (2)	13.5% (13)	54.2% (52)	30.2% (29)	96
An overview of the most recent results in the field	0.0% (0)	1.0% (1)	17.5% (17)	55.7% (54)	25.8% (25)	97
An introduction into experimental techniques	0.0% (0)	5.2% (5)	6.2% (6)	64.9% (63)	23.7% (23)	97
An overview of the theoretical approaches	4.2% (4)	11.6% (11)	36.8% (35)	38.9% (37)	8.4% (8)	95
An overview of the existing software	2.2% (2)	12.9% (12)	21.5% (20)	49.5% (46)	14.0% (13)	93
The best available speakers in the field	0.0% (0)	4.1% (4)	2.1% (2)	55.7% (54)	38.1% (37)	97
An opportunity for the young participants to give a talk and to present their results as posters	2.1% (2)	6.3% (6)	12.5% (12)	42.7% (41)	36.5% (35)	96
Approach to difficult problems	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	24.0% (23)	56.3% (54)	19.8% (19)	96
Sufficient computing support	1.1% (1)	3.2% (3)	14.0% (13)	48.4% (45)	33.3% (31)	93
Opportunities to meet experts	0.0% (0)	1.0% (1)	1.0% (1)	39.6% (38)	58.3% (56)	96
Opportunities for young participants to exchange experience with each other during informal discussions	0.0% (0)	2.1% (2)	3.1% (3)	43.8% (42)	51.0% (49)	96
Comfortable living conditions, considering the constraints of Erice	2.1% (2)	8.2% (8)	36.1% (35)	36.1% (35)	17.5% (17)	97

Success
	Completely unsuccessful	somewhat unsuccessful	in the middle	somewhat successful	very successful	Response Count
A wide overview of the field	0.0% (0)	1.0% (1)	8.3% (8)	29.2% (28)	61.5% (59)	96
An overview of the most recent results in the field	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	8.3% (8)	28.1% (27)	63.5% (61)	96
An introduction into experimental techniques	0.0% (0)	4.1% (4)	17.5% (17)	56.7% (55)	21.6% (21)	97
An overview of the theoretical approaches	0.0% (0)	10.6% (10)	37.2% (35)	42.6% (40)	9.6% (9)	94
An overview of the existing software	1.1% (1)	7.5% (7)	21.5% (20)	45.2% (42)	24.7% (23)	93
The best available speakers in the field	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	3.1% (3)	16.5% (16)	80.4% (78)	97
An opportunity for the young participants to give a talk and to present their results as posters	1.0% (1)	9.4% (9)	14.6% (14)	17.7% (17)	57.3% (55)	96
Approach to difficult problems	0.0% (0)	3.2% (3)	25.3% (24)	44.2% (42)	27.4% (26)	95
Sufficient computing support	0.0% (0)	1.1% (1)	6.5% (6)	16.1% (15)	76.3% (71)	93
Opportunities to meet experts	0.0% (0)	1.0% (1)	3.1% (3)	17.7% (17)	78.1% (75)	96
Opportunities for young participants to exchange experience with each other during informal discussions	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	13.5% (13)	86.5% (83)	96
Comfortable living conditions, considering the constraints of Erice	1.0% (1)	2.1% (2)	5.2% (5)	19.8% (19)	71.9% (69)	96

7. Which topics were not covered as extensively as anticipated?
	answered question	37
	skipped question	60
		Response Count
view		37

8. Which topics were given exaggerated importance?
	answered question	31
	skipped question	66
		Response Count
view		31

9. Should there be a meeting like this one? If YES, how many years from now?
	answered question					97
	skipped question					0
	NO	YES, 1-2 years from now	YES, 3-4 years from now	YES, 5-6 years from now	Rating Average	Response Count
Are you in favour?	0.0% (0)	39.6% (38)	50.0% (48)	10.4% (10)	2.71	96
Would you personally attend?	1.1% (1)	40.2% (37)	45.7% (42)	13.0% (12)	2.71	92

10. Your evaluation of the following factors. Please write comments at the bottom.
	answered question					97
	skipped question					0
	Excellent	Good	Adequate	Poor	Rating Average	Response Count
Advertizing this meeting	38.5% (37)	40.6% (39)	19.8% (19)	1.0% (1)	3.17	96
Selection of "students"	36.2% (34)	59.6% (56)	4.3% (4)	0.0% (0)	3.32	94
Notification of acceptance	65.6% (61)	31.2% (29)	3.2% (3)	0.0% (0)	3.62	93
General correspondence	72.9% (70)	24.0% (23)	3.1% (3)	0.0% (0)	3.70	96
Documents on the course	56.3% (54)	35.4% (34)	8.3% (8)	0.0% (0)	3.48	96
Web announcement	42.1% (40)	47.4% (45)	9.5% (9)	1.1% (1)	3.31	95
Documents on the course (in Erice)	57.9% (55)	34.7% (33)	7.4% (7)	0.0% (0)	3.51	95
Computers	62.8% (59)	26.6% (25)	10.6% (10)	0.0% (0)	3.52	94
Technical facilities in lecture hall	62.9% (61)	32.0% (31)	4.1% (4)	1.0% (1)	3.57	97
Workshop organization	54.8% (51)	30.1% (28)	11.8% (11)	3.2% (3)	3.37	93
Workshop quality	33.0% (30)	38.5% (35)	25.3% (23)	3.3% (3)	3.01	91
Quality of presentations	62.8% (59)	35.1% (33)	2.1% (2)	0.0% (0)	3.61	94
Poster session	48.9% (46)	39.4% (37)	8.5% (8)	3.2% (3)	3.34	94
Leisure (social program, excursions, etc)	70.2% (66)	28.7% (27)	1.1% (1)	0.0% (0)	3.69	94
viewComments on meeting organization						37

11. Please rate the workshops you attended ( from 0 to 100):
	answered question			74
	skipped question			23
		Response Average	Response Total	Response Count
viewDatabases of Protein Interactions - Bickerton		56.91	1,935	34
viewCCP4 - Murshudov		72.57	3,338	46
viewProteopedia - Sussman, Prilusky and Hodis		80.83	1,455	18
viewARP-wARP - Perrakis		69.53	2,225	32
viewSHARP/autoSHARP - Vonrhein		81.29	3,089	38
viewAnalysis of large assemblies - Chirgadze		83.48	1,920	23
viewCryoEM - Sachse		58.15	1,570	27
viewCrystallization - Bergfors		78.75	1,260	16
viewMODELLER and IMP - Webb		65.86	1,844	28
viewCOOT - Emsley		82.90	4,145	50
viewMolecular Dynamics - Vendruscolo		40.00	520	13
viewVirtual Screening - Irwin		80.55	2,658	33

13. Any other comments, suggestions, observations, or criticisms? We remind you that this survey is completely anonymous.
	answered question	36
	skipped question	61
		Response Count
view		36