Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 1;23(12):996–1001. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2017.0033

Table 2.

Participants' Satisfaction with Distance Learning Course on Tuberculosis

  TOTALLY DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED SATISFIED TOTALLY SATISFIED
Course design 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 41 (62.1) 24 (36.4)
Methodology 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 41 (62.1) 24 (36.4)
Interaction with course coordination 0 (0) 0 (0) 46 (69.7) 20 (30.3)
Appropriate methodology tools 1 (1.5) 0 (0) 48 (72.2) 17 (25.8)
Course content: relevance, suitability of content, and organization 0 (0) 0 (0) 13 (19.7) 53 (80.3)
Activities: Relevance, degree of difficulty and time required, speed of responses, and level of readability of materials 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 13 (19.7) 52 (78.8)
Assessments: frequency, relevance, quantity of topics, and difficulty 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 54 (81.8) 11 (16.7)
Adequacy of content to the course schedule 0 (0) 0 (0) 52 (78.8) 14 (21.2)
Number of materials/contents in the VLE 0 (0) 0 (0) 40 (60.6) 23 (34.8)
Access to information on decisions taken by the course coordinator 0 (0) 0 (0) 52 (78.8) 13 (19.7)
Information about course rules and standards 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 48 (72.2) 17 (25.8)
Ease of access to course coordination 0 (0) 0 (0) 14 (21.2) 52 (78.8)
Content update 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 13 (19.7) 52 (78.8)
Good communication between the student and coordinator 0 (0) 0 (0) 48 (72.2) 17 (25.8)
The learning focuses on subjects of interest 0 (0) 0 (0) 11 (16.7) 55 (83.3)
Learning in the VLE is important for my professional practice 0 (0) 0 (0) 38 (57.6) 28 (42.4)
Stimulus of the course to follow my career 0 (0) 0 (0) 54 (81.8) 12 (18.2)
Stimulus of the course to continue studying at a distance 0 (0) 0 (0) 45 (68.2) 21 (31.8)
Labor market stimulation for DL students 0 (0) 2 (3.0) 40 (60.6) 24 (36.4)
Clarity of course objectives and mission 0 (0) 1 (1.5) 35 (53.0) 30 (45.5)

Data are presented as numbers (%).

DL, distance learning; VLE, virtual learning environment.