BL A260 Human Physiology, Prof. Stark
Fall 2005 Assessment

The form students filled out is in plain text, while responses and my comments (added later) are in italics. Ten students responded.

Here are the stated objectives of the course:

BL A260 Human Physiology was created in 2004 by chairs of Biology and Biomedical Engineering (BME). It is the third and final biology requirement (after Principles of Biology I & II [BL A 104 & 106]) for BME students. BME majors successfully completing Human Physiology will know systems physiology (homeostasis, circulation, respiration, digestion, nervous system, etc.) comprehensively at a level that does not have those prerequisites (biological chemistry and cell biology) needed for biology students.

"The course fulfilled these objectives."
1. strongly agree 2 2. agree 8 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

"These objectives were reasonable."
1. strongly agree 2 2. agree 8 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

"The preceeding two semesters of Biology provided adequate preparation for this course."
1. strongly agree 2 2. agree 6 3. disagree 2 4. strongly disagree

This is because more of a focus was put on respiration
and ecology than actual anatomy


"This Human Physiology course a good idea for your third semester requirement."
1. strongly agree 1 2. agree 7 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree NA 2

If not, why not?

I think that this class would be a good idea for someone's
third semester; however, this is not applicable to me
because I have taken a biology course every semester since
freshman year.


"The selection of topics for emphasis were reasonable."
1. strongly agree 1 2. agree 7 3. disagree 2 4. strongly disagree

i think there could have been more anatomy
and analysis of systems rather than so much focus on
circuits (but this may tie in with the "BME track mind"
rather than the mind of a biology major.

The course seemed to focus a bit heavily on the nervous
system, and very little on the musculoskeletal system, which would tie in
better with classes such as biomechanics.


"The level of the textbook was appropriate."
1. strongly agree 2 2. agree 7 3. disagree 1 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

i only bought the handbook (advice of a
prior student)

The detail in the book vs. the detail covered was that
book was to detailed to apply to what i learned in class and
was used mostly as a refernce for terms not covered
completly in class.


"The level of the lecture coverage was appropriate."
1. strongly agree 2 2. agree 8 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

"Having outlines on the web was useful."
1. strongly agree 9 2. agree 1 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

However, parts of some of the outlines were a bit confusing.

"Having last year's applicable test questions on each outline was a useful study aid." (new, 2005)
1. strongly agree 5 2. agree 4 3. disagree 1 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

for some reason they seemed more basic
than the specific details tested this semester. i felt like
it gave me a clue how the test would be structured, however
the questions were easier than those actually given on the
tests.

VERY HELPFUL!!! Useful when studying for the tests.


"Having several stories from recent literature, e.g. heart tissue engineering, women's health initiative study, etc.) was useful." (new, 2005)
1. strongly agree 4 2. agree 6 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree

Delete? Keep? Add more?

It add interest when
topics are made relevant to recent news/developments.

no, coverage was pretty good

anything correlating something that
is in our class notes to a story is always beneficial, ie. i
will never eat the liver of a polar bear....haha.

The outlines should be kept.

I don't know if the stories increased our knowledge of the subject, but they were interesting.


"Having links to Nobel lectures is an interesting resource for the web site." (new, 2005)
1. strongly agree 1 2. agree 7 3. disagree 2 4. strongly disagree

If not, why not?

i never remember names and i never visited
the nobel prize website. never studied them either.
although, good info for people who retain everything they
here. they seem like they would only be beneficial in
trivial pursuit.

I enjoyed that


Are there any topics you would like to be added to the syllabus in future years?

I think that the last lectures
could be expanded; however, it makes sense that they are not
due to time constraints.

brain lobes and their function,
skin, and skeletal...at least more anatomy then add physio
for these

Ican't think of any.

No

I think that a bit of anatomy would help, as it would provide better
groundwork for the physiology. Nothing real extensive is needed, but there
was almost no anatomy in Intro Bio, so we were pretty much limited to
locations of the major organs.

One topic that wasn't discussed much was cancer. I would have liked to know how/what actually causes it to develops, how it progresses, how it can be treated, etc


Are there any topics you think should be reduced or eliminated?

no

I think the course is fine the way it is.

ENDOCRINE

Coverage was pretty reasonable overall between
the topics.

No
On a whole i thought the class was prettty well taught and
very interesting.

Perhaps a
little less focus on the nervous system.

Comment
The class had 24 students, 22 of whom were biomedical engineering majors (mostly sophomores).

Plan for next year
Students largely approved of everyting in this course. As always, I will endeavor to improve the course and to deliver the best product I can. There are a few comments I hope to address:
(1) by posting this year's test questions, along with last year's, on the lecture outlines, I may solve the issue of the one student who thought last year's postings were easy questions while the tests had harder questions.
(2) I hope to further emphasize skeletal-muscle anatomy (and possibly make corresponding cust in nervous system