This document catalogs the results from a questionnaire administered
on November 18, 1999 evaluating the GFESuite training for RPP that took
place at Forecast Systems Lab in Boulder, Colorado. Thirteen respondents
filled out the questionnaire. The questionnaire was accessed from the same
display as GFESuite.
Due to technical difficulties, the questionnaires were not updated on
all of the machines, and therefore, two respondents filled out a draft
version of the questionnaire. The results are summarized separately for
those two respondents.
This catalog includes both statistical summaries when possible, and
for open-ended questions, every response is provided. Bold type indicates
questionnaire items. For many of the open-ended questions, the response
to the previous question is included with the answer, for purposes of interpreting
the comment. The questions are numbered sequentially.
GFESuite Training for RPP Evaluation Questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to systematically collect participant
feedback about the GFESuite training. We appreciate your time and consideration
in providing feedback that will enhance future training.
We are interested in all of your comments, so feel free to add any
remarks you consider necessary to amplify your responses.
Your responses are confidential and your name will never be associated
with any results.
Thank you very much for your participation.
=========================================================
For each the following topics covered in the training, make the following
ratings by typing a number in the appropriate box.
Rate the ADEQUACY of the training for each topic:
1=inadequate 3=adequate 5=exceptional
Did you think that the material for this topic was presented at a
LEVEL that was:
1=too easy 3=just right 5=too difficult
Was the right amount of TIME spent on this topic?
1=too little 3=just right 5=too much
Use the comment box to list anything that was particularly good or
problematic, or suggest improvements.
| n=11 | 000-007. Adequacy | 008-015. Level | 016-023. Time | |||||||||
| min | mean | max | sd | min | mean | max | sd | min | mean | max | sd | |
| Tu AM joint session | 3 | 3.7(1) | 5 | 0.8 | 1 | 2.9 | 4 | 0.8 | 3 | 3.4 | 5 | 0.7 |
| Grid manager | 1 | 2.9 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.6 | 5 | 0.8 | 1 | 1.8 | 4 | 1.0 |
| Spatial Editor display | 1 | 3.7 | 5 | 1.2 | 2 | 3.1 | 5 | 0.7 | 1 | 2.9 | 4 | 0.7 |
| Spatial Editor tools | 3 | 3.5 | 5 | 0.8 | 3 | 3.1 | 4 | 0.3 | 1 | 2.7 | 3 | 0.6 |
| Edit areas and queries | 2 | 3.4 | 5 | 0.8 | 2 | 3.0 | 4 | 0.4 | 2 | 2.8 | 3 | 0.4 |
| Smart tools | 2 | 3.7 | 5 | 1.2 | 3 | 3.2 | 4 | 0.4 | 1 | 2.4 | 3 | 0.8 |
| Temporal editor(2) | 1 | 1.8 | 3 | 0.8 | 1 | 3.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 1 | 2.2 | 3 | 1.1 |
| Th PM GFESuite items | 1 | 3.2 | 5 | 1.1 | 3 | 3.5 | 5 | 0.8 | 1 | 2.3 | 3 | 0.9 |
Maybe for those who are new to the IFP concept, this was helpful, but
I think for most of us, this was all review. Could have used that extra
hour in some of the other sessions.
025. Comment (Grid manager):
Name Code: 014
Q#001: 3
Q#009: 5
Q#017: 1
The manager is the most complex component and needs more time to explain
clearly.
Name Code: 007
Q#001: 2
Q#009: 4
Q#017: 1
the grid manager is a tough concept for those who have not seen it.
A thorough explanation of how this works and why it need to be so complicated
is essential
Name Code: 003
Q#001: 1
Q#009: 4
Q#017: 2
The training went on to the Spatial Editor. More time needs to be spent
explaining how everything is tied together and somewhat controlled by the
grid manager. On the other hand, the GM is a very dry part of the program
to start with.
Name Code: 008
Q#001: 5
Q#009: 3
Q#017: 1
Wish there would have been more time but then you only had three days.
Name Code: 004
Q#001: 3
Q#009: 3
Q#017: 1
Is one of the more difficult interfaces. May want to spend a little
more time.
Name Code: 010
Q#001: 1
Q#009: 5
Q#017: 1
There just wasn't enough time to digest the information.
Name Code: 001
Q#001: 3
Q#009: 3
Q#017: 4
I think the Grid Manager is something that is best learned through experience.
I thought the training was adequate, and that although there are still
significant UI problems, its not that difficult a tool to use.
Name Code: 011
Q#001: 4
Q#009: 3
Q#017: 2
Personally, I would have liked a little more time on the Grid Manager.
However, due to the complexity of the GM and the "newness" of this tool,
I thought the staff did a good job in presenting this material.
026. Comment (Spatial Editor display):
Name Code: 014
Q#002: 5
Q#010: 3
Q#018: 3
Very clear topic. Well designed component.
Name Code: 007
Q#002: 3
Q#010: 3
Q#018: 3
Training was about right.
Name Code: 010
Q#002: 1
Q#010: 5
Q#018: 1
The same was true for this section.
Name Code: 006
Q#002: 4
Q#010: 3
Q#018: 4
similarities to D2D can be glossed over pretty quickly
027. Comment (Spatial Editor tools):
Name Code: 014
Q#003: 4
Q#011: 4
Q#019: 1
Somewhat confusing topic, the contour tool especially.
Name Code: 010
Q#003: 3
Q#011: 3
Q#019: 3
A few more exercises would have been nice to allow the material to sink
in.
028. Comment (Edit areas and queries):
Name Code: 014
Q#004: 4
Q#012: 4
Q#020: 3
The Replace/Union/Intersect modes are a little confusing, otherwise
the training was clear.
029. Comment (Smart tools):
Name Code: 014
Q#005: 5
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 3
Spending lots of time on this worked very well. Future GFE focal points
will appreciate that.
Name Code: 007
Q#005: 2
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 2
scripts and tools are a little confusing. Probably need some more time
on this subject. It should begin with some very general concepts before
getting into the exersices and details.
Name Code: 003
Q#005: 3
Q#013: 4
Q#021: 3
The training quickly advanced to the Smart Tools phase, probably too
fast for us to catch all the nuances of the spatial editor. At times I
felt like Smart Tools was being pushed on us because the programmers know
that it is the way to go. People need a little bit more time to absorb
the relationships between data grids, times, and various elements to begin
to realize how they are interrelated, and then can be incorporated into
a forecast process involving smart tools.
Name Code: 008
Q#005: 5
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 1
A powerful tool that was taught well but I would have liked more practice
time.
Name Code: 004
Q#005: 5
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 3
Great concept that has a lot of future potential. I like the idea of
using a simple scripting language.
Name Code: 010
Q#005: 3
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 1
I can see individuals spending a lot of time mastering the Smart tools
at their home base.
Name Code: 001
Q#005: 4
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 3
Very good presentation. Its hard to spend too much time here, since
I believe that the smart tools are the most useful part of the GFE.
Name Code: 011
Q#005: 4
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 2
I would have liked to spent more time on this...seeing as (IMHO) this
is pretty powerful stuff. Though the staff did a good job with this.
Name Code: 006
Q#005: 2
Q#013: 3
Q#021: 2
This wasn't necessarily difficult to pick up, but a little more time
to absorb the subject through exercises might be good
030. Comment (Temporal editor):
Name Code: 014
Q#006: 2
Q#014: 3
Q#022: 3
This was covered very little, which is probably ok considering its disadvantages.
This tool could be very powerful for point forecasts (aviation, fire wx,
etc..) however and may need some more training time.
Name Code: 003
Q#006: 2
Q#014: 3
Q#022: 3
Being told that the Temporal Editor was not necessary to get going on
the GFE allowed me to understand why it was not covered. You were right
in not spending any time on it, since we were already being loaded up with
plenty of info about more important parts of the system.
Name Code: 004
Q#006: 1
Q#014: 1
Q#022: 1
We did not really cover the temporal editor. It looks like it could
be used for aviation forecasts.
Name Code: 001
Didn't cover this.
Name Code: 011
not applicable.
Name Code: 006
NA
031. Comment (Th PM GFESuite items):
Name Code: 014
Q#007: 3
Q#015: 5
Q#023: 2
This section seemed to go to fast.
Name Code: 003
Q#007: 3
Q#015: 3
Q#023: 3
A very nice synopsis of all the material that was covered. Some of the
information that was related to Grid Manager could have been covered earlier
to help improve the understanding of the GM's place in the system.
Name Code: 012
Q#007: 3
Q#015: 4
Q#023: 1
I know you guys admitted it several times, but I have a feeling in another
month, I'm going to REALLY wish we had spent more time on this section.
Name Code: 011
Q#007: 3
Q#015: 3
Q#023: 1
I would have liked to spend more time on this...maybe some exercises
with configuring the system components and developing forecast products
(just to give more of a "taste" of doing this).
Name Code: 006
Q#007: 3
Q#015: 4
Q#023: 2
My background is not in systems management, so a lot of this was not
familiar to me. Mostly the pace was a little too quick
Rate the adequacy of the following documents:
(1=inadequate 3=adequate 5=exceptional)
032. GFE Training Guide
min=3 mean=4.0 max=5 sd=0.8 n=11
035. Comment:
Name Code: 014
Q#032: 5
Nicely organized.
Name Code: 007
Q#032: 4
This will get a lot of use by focal points back at the office.
Name Code: 003
Q#032: 4
Dry material at times, but certainly a very thorough document.
Name Code: 008
Q#032: 5
The documentation was excellent. Will it be possible to download the
guide in either wordperfect or PDF.
Name Code: 010
Q#032: 3
It wasn't entirely clear what steps we were suppose to take in the exercises.
033. Configuration File Information
min=3 mean=3.9 max=5 sd=0.7 n=11
036. Comment:
Name Code: 007
Q#033: 4
Good to include examples like you did. The files appear well documented.
Name Code: 003
Q#033: 4
Have only had a cursory look at it. But it seems to be very thorough.
034. Supplemental Program Documentation
min=3 mean=3.5 max=5 sd=0.7 n=11
037. Comment:
Name Code: 003
Q#034: 4
Have also not had a chance to look at this, but feel that it is probably
quite good, based on parts of it that showed up in the GFE training guide.
038. Comment:
Name Code: 003
It seems as though we probably have plenty of information to go back
to our station with and start working and tinkering with.
Name Code: 012
The documentation looks very thorough, at least at first glance. The
GFE certainly appears to be much better documented that ICWF was (thank
goodness!).
Name Code: 010
This training course could have been 5 days long instead of just 3 days.
Name Code: 006
Overall the documentation looks reasonably comprehensive. I would suggest
that slide presentations found in the GFE training guide section be paired
somehow with their applicable material elsewhere in the guide. This could
either be done by physically moving it, or providing references to the
other sections (with page numbers)
039. Do you think the order in which you received the training was
appropriate?
Yes: 10/91%
No: 1/9%
040. Explain:
Name Code:
Q#039: No
Probably need to go over definitions first. Most other things were in
appropriate order. More time needs to be spent on the grid manager.
Name Code: 003
Q#039: Yes
Except that the Grid Manager was not given enough attention at the beginning.
It is one of the foundations on which understanding of the system is strongly
dependent. Somewhere during the SmartTools and Scripts I became overloaded
with information. A pause after the introduction of SmartTools could allow
the trainee to take a step back and see the picture up to that point. The
trainee possesses a lot of capability after learning about the SmartTools.
Learning how Tools can be incorporated into scripts and Consistency Checks
overloads the mind.
Name Code: 012
Q#039: Yes
The definitions Mark presented on Thursday might have come earlier (as
he admitted) but endured training when the definitions have come first
and they have no meaning w/o seeing the software first.
Name Code: 008
Q#039: Yes
Started from basics and moved to harder material. Some precourse reading
maybe would have been helpful.
Name Code: 004
Q#039: Yes
May want to spend more time upfront talking about new terms and concepts.
Name Code: 010
Q#039: Yes
I think the training flowed smoothly through the week.
Name Code: 011
Q#039: Yes
I thought the order was appropriate, since you wouldn't want to have
it structured another way.
041. How comfortable are you about using GFESuite?
(1=very uncomfortable 5=very comfortable)
min=2 mean=3.4 max=4 sd=0.7 n=11
042. Comments:
Name Code: 014
Q#041: 3
Very complex system but vastly improved from earlier versions. The D2D
like functionality is great.
Name Code: 007
Q#041: 4
I have experience with this system from Boise in 1998. That made a big
difference to me when we were doing the exercises. unfamiliarity lead to
a lot of frustration when working through the initial exersices.
Name Code: 012
Q#041: 3
This will obviously improve with time.
Name Code: 008
Q#041: 4
Can't wait to get it back to the office to learn more.
Name Code: 004
Q#041: 3
Still having some trouble with a few grid manager functions.
Name Code: 010
Q#041: 2
I will need a great deal more exposure to the system software. I do
feel that with enough practice time that a lot of this material will become
second nature to us all(just as AWIPS did).
Name Code: 001
Q#041: 3
The UI is still fairly cumbersome. Some actions required too many button
clicks. I think it will take some time to get used to the interface before
it will become efficient to create a forecast with it.
Name Code: 011
Q#041: 4
After playing with the system for a little while longer, I began to
feel more comfortable with this software. I think this is just a case of
getting used to a different UI and a different way of producing forecast
products.
043. How comfortable are you about teaching GFE Suite to others?
(1=very uncomfortable 5=very comfortable)
min=1 mean=2.9 max=4 sd=1.0 n=11
044. Comments:
Name Code: 014
Q#043: 2
The spatial editor training should go well but training forecasters
to use the grid manager will be extremely challenging. They will see it
as extra work that they didn't have to do before.
Name Code: 012
Q#043: 2
No way can we learn in 3 days (actually 2 when you subtract the configuration
training time) the complexities of the software well enough to teach it
to others. I could teach the main points right now, but feel like I am
going to have to spend several days just experimenting with the software
in order to be familiar enough with it to train.
Name Code: 008
Q#043: 4
With your documents and a little practice it won't be to hard at all.
Name Code: 002
Q#043: 2
I'll be teaching the GFE at the NWSTC. I'll need a lot of time training
myself and setting up the course, so I'll be talking to folks a lot in
the near future.
Name Code: 004
Q#043: 3
Will need to go through a lot of review information and spend more time
using the software.
Name Code: 010
Q#043: 1
I will need time to "spin-up" and become familiar with the software
and all of its functionality.
Name Code: 001
Q#043: 4
I don't think I will be training anyone, however, I think I could do
a decent job at this point if asked to do that.
Name Code: 011
Q#043: 3
Like any new piece of software, some forecasters are going to pick up
on the software quickly, while others are going to take a little more"hand-holding".
045. Rate the adequacy of this training to support the "train the
trainer" process:
1=inadequate 3=adequate 5=exceptional
min=1 mean=3.1 max=4 sd=0.9 n=11
046. Comments:
Name Code: 014
Q#045: 3
On-site training by off-site experts (developers, development team leaders)
usually works much better, especially when combined with train the trainer
approach to create local experts.
Name Code: 007
Q#045: 3
pretty much adequate. A set of 20 minute lessons which I can assign
to forecasters would help. Probably a few more than the exersices we went
through in the training. I would sit down with forecasters and give them
an overview, with emphasis on the grid manager, then set them lose to do
exersices, or "job sheets".
Name Code: 012
Q#045: 1
Way too short of time to adequately train others, at least w/o self-training
at home first. This may not be an entirely bad thing though since the UI
is still pretty fluid. Additionally, it is nice to just have a 3 day course.
Also, I don't feel like I have any real training materials other than the
exercises in the book.
Name Code: 008
Q#045: 4
I believe the training guide, your training, and being able to get questions
answered should make the training process in the office manageable
Name Code: 002
Q#045: 3
I know this is a beginning, so a lot of adjustments will need to be
done before we present this to all the field offices.
Name Code: 004
Q#045: 3
A lot of material was covered in a short amount of time. But still feel
it will be a good away to provide staff training.
Name Code: 010
Q#045: 2
Again, all its going to take is time to get to know the system.
Name Code: 001
Q#045: 4
Overall I thought the training was presented very well. Again, I think
that training can only go so far and that using GFE on a daily basis is
the real way in which to learn how to use the tool.
Name Code: 011
Q#045: 4
By letting the focal points get the "hands-on"experience, and the interaction
with other focalpoints and FSL developers, this allows us to get a deeper
understanding of the software. This hopefully will help us take this information
back to our offices and apply.
Name Code: 006
Q#045: 3
I would just have liked a little more time in general...and specifically
on site configuration
047. List the GFESuite concepts that were easiest to learn:
Name Code: 014
Philosphy of RPP, Spatial Editor
Name Code: 007
graphical editor tools
Name Code: 003
I've been familiar with the software in various states for quite a while,
so I'm not the one to ask about what was easy to learn.
Name Code: 012
spatial editor was easy to learn since it is now similar to D2D.
Name Code: 008
Menu bars Grid manager Spatial Editor
Name Code: 002
Spatial editor was fairly easy. It was comparable to what we have on
AWIPS
Name Code: 004
spatial edit areas.
Name Code: 010
Smart Tools
Name Code: 001
Spatial Editor tools Initialization tools
Name Code: 011
Most of the concepts were somewhat straightforward to learn...it was
just a matter of getting used to what they did and where they were located
on the UI.
Name Code: 006
Spatial editor
048. List the GFESuite concepts that were most difficult to learn:
Name Code: 014
Grid Manager, Configuration files, Consistency checks.
Name Code: 007
grid manager copying grids from models to "fcst" grids.
Name Code: 003
SmartTools and Consistency Tools. Its going to take me a little bit
of time to get comfortable with Python programming. Its hard to remember
each and every one of the edit action and grid loading procedures. I think
time with the system is what is needed to get more comfortable with the
system. But you didn't have any extra time for that.
Name Code: 012
grid manager was tough, but I have a hunch we will find it much easier
to work with after some experience. felt like we didn't spend enough time
in the system config section.
Name Code: 008
Creating Smart Tools
Name Code: 002
GRID editor. As you found out, most of the other were having problems
with it also. I would suggest taking baby steps (e.g. color scheme, minor
format changes)
Name Code: 004
Grid manager time scale.
Name Code: 010
Grid Manager
Name Code: 001
Grid manager mouse button functionality Smart tool consistency tools/scripts
Name Code: 011
(1) Grid Manager (until I had a chance to experiment and play with the
system)(2) GFESuite config - it *might* have helped toget more hands-on
with this, before we headback to our offices.
Name Code: 006
grid manager smart tools
049. Please make any other comments about the training you received:
Name Code: 014
Very well organized training. The team was well prepared and reacted
well to what few problems arose. The GFE is vastly improved and very fast
compared with ther demos I have seen the last year or two. The positive
attitudes and pride in the teams work seemed to rub off on the trainees.
Name Code: 007
You have done a tremendous amount of work since late 1998. Nice job!
Name Code: 012
The "scenarios" were very helpful in kind of putting together some of
the concepts and tools. Thanks for giving us two full travel days...of
course at the expense of training time! Ideally the course should probably
be a little longer, and probably will have to be a little slower once this
is presented to all of the NWS. Most of us here can handle drinking from
a fire hose, but there are a lot out there who won't be able to keep up.
I do feel like one major component of the training was missing: There was
zero guidance given as to how to set the system up once the box arrives
in the offices. Sounds like it is far from a turnkey system and I'm very
apprehensive as to just how this will go. PLEASE have some documentation
on the list server that assists in the initial setup (both hardware and
software).
Name Code: 008
The training was great...thanks.
Name Code: 002
You guys did a great job. I'll be in touch with you a lot since I have
to teach this stuff next year.
Name Code: 004
Overall, I thought the training was excellent!
Name Code: 001
It was a good exchange of knowledge. I think the trainers also learned
a great deal from the participants about how to improve the GFE.
Name Code: 011
I thought that bringing the focal points and managers here to get "hands-on"
(rather than distance-learning) training was a very good idea.I enjoyed
the training and am looking forward to using this system. However, I would
have liked to had a little more instruction on some of the technical aspects
on how to set this system up (in the firewall, etc.).
Name Code: 006
Overall it was good and the trainers were interested, knowledgeable
and patient.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOWING IS THE DRAFT QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETED BY 2 PARTICPANTS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GFESuite Training for RPP evaluation Questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to systematically collectparticipant
feedback about the GFESuite training. We appreciate your time and consideration
in providing feedback that will enhance future training.
We are interested in all of your comments, so feel free to addany
remarks you consider necessary to amplify your responses.
Your responses are confidential and your name will never beassociated
with any results.
Thank you very much for your participation.
================================================================
For each the following topics covered in the training, make the following
ratingsby typing a number in the appropriate box.
Rate the ADEQUACY of the training for each topic:
1=inadequate 3=adequate 5=exceptional
Did you think that the material for this topic was presented at a
LEVEL that was:
1=too easy 3=just right 5=too difficult
Was the right amount of TIME spent on this topic?
1=too litte 3=just right 5=too much
Use the comment box to list anything that was particularly good or
problematic, or suggest improvements.
| n=2 | 000-009. Adequacy | 010-019. Level | 020-029. Time | |||||||||
| min | mean | max | sd | min | mean | max | sd | min | mean | max | sd | |
| GFESuite intro | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 0.7 |
| GFE Demo | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 0.7 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 0.7 |
| GFE overview | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 0.7 |
| Grid manager | 2 | 3.0 | 4 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2.0 | 2 | 0 |
| GFE data types | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 |
| Spatial Editor display | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 |
| Spatial Editor tools | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 0.7 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 0.7 |
| Smart tools | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 |
| Consistency Checker | 3 | 4.0 | 5 | 1.4 | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 0.7 |
| Temporal editor(3) | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | - | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | - | 3 | 3.0 | 3 | - |
More time needs to be spent early on about the logic of Grid manager,
ie, how it "thinks."
034. Comment (GFE data types):
no comments made
035. Comment (Spatial Editor display):
no comments made
036. Comment (Spatial editor tools):
no comments made
037. Comment (Smart tools):
Name Code: 013
Q#007: 5
Q#017: 3
Q#027: 3
I much appreciated being taught, or, at least, introduced to, my first
UNIX (LINUX) programming languege.
038. Comment (Consistency checker):
no comments made
039. Comment (Temporal editor):
Name Code: 009
Not covered
Name Code: 013
Q#009: 3
Q#019: 3
Q#029: 3
I agree with the trainers' assesment that this wasn't worth much time.
040. Rate the adequacy of the ***insert name of documentation***:
(1=inadequate 3=adequate 5=exceptional)
min=4 mean=4.0 max=4 sd=0 n=2
041. Comment:
Name Code: 009
Q#040: 4
Documentation package seems very good and complete
Name Code: 013
Q#040: 4
I will be able to judge this better after having had some time to look
at it. Corel presentations slides are great but they don't copy well at
all...perhaps something can be figured out. It is good that it is being
posted to the RPP server; this could be helpful in training local staff.
Some of the slides are step, ei, more information is added to the slide
with each step. I don't think Tracy needed to copy every last step in some
of hers, especially being they didn't even come out that well.
042. Do you think the order in which you received the training was
appropriate?
Yes: 2
No: 0
043. Explain:
Name Code: 013
Q#042: Yes
I think, as you've alluded to, that it would have been better to do
the terminology near the beginning or on the fly with the related material.
044. How comfortable are you about using GFESuite to produce products?
(1=very uncomfortable 5=very comfortable)
min=3 mean=3.5 max=4 sd=0.7 n=2
045. Comments:
Name Code: 013
Q#044: 3
I think this will be a matter of time both in terms of practice and
development. Eventually, it is hoped, the development reduces the practice
needed.
046. How comfortable are you about teaching GFE Suite to others?
(1=very uncomfortable 5=very comfortable)
min=3 mean=3.5 max=4 sd=0.7 n=2
047. Comments:
no comments made
048. List the GFESuite concepts that were easiest to learn:
Name Code: 009
Spatial editor
Name Code: 013
Spatial Editor, Smart Tools
049. List the GFESuite concepts that were most difficult to learn:
Name Code: 009
grid manager
Name Code: 013
Grid manager, database. The latter is highly a function of UNIX experience.
050. Please make any other comments about the training you received:
Name Code: 009
Overall good content and well paced
Name Code: 013
I thought everyone did a good job and there was good interaction. I
think there's much more room for improvement with GFE itself than with
the training, although I realize a lot has already been acomplished thanks
to much effort and time.
1. n=10
2. n=6 for this row