Cycle 6 Phase II Questionnaire

A. GENERAL

1. Which is the primary instrument of your proposal?

    TOTAL   %   % of cycle proposals
    ==================================
FGS     2   1       2
FOC     7   3       6
FOS    45  21      20
GHRS   39  19      23
WFPC2 117  56      49

210 responses received; 198 used for the statistics 18 responses had multiple instruments, the "primary instrument" was identified by the selection of the CS. 9 responses had more than one proposal, these numbers are included in the table.

2. Did you uncover any problems in planning your approved program that you wished you had known about in making your Phase I proposal?

   FGS   FOC   FOS   GHRS  WFPC2     %
   =====================================
yes  0.0  28.6  27.9  20.0  14.0    18.5 
no 100.0  71.4  72.1  80.0  86.0    81.5

Comments by topic

General           : 4
CVZ               : 2
FOC               : 1
GHRS              : 1
Moving Targets    : 3
Orient            : 2
RPS2              : 3
Target acquisition:16
WFPC2             : 8

3. How long did it take you to prepare your Phase II proposal?

days+ FGS   FOC   FOS GHRS  WFPC2   %
====+=================================
<1   0.0  14.3   0.0   0.0   3.7   2.6 
1    0.0  14.3   0.0   2.9   5.5   4.1
2    0.0  14.3  15.9  23.5  15.6  16.8
3    0.0  14.3  15.9  14.7  14.7  14.8
4    0.0   0.0  13.6   8.8  15.6  13.3
5    0.0  42.9  20.5  20.6  15.6  18.4
6    0.0   0.0   0.0   5.9   1.8   2.0
7  100.0   0.0  11.4  11.8  11.0  11.7
8    0.0   0.0   2.3   0.0   0.9   1.0
>8   0.0   0.0  20.5  11.8  15.6  15.3
                           ===========    
                         Mean  =  5.67

4. Did you received the Phase II information and templates in a timely manner?

    TOTAL   %
    ===========
yes   167  84.8
no     30  15.2
NA      1

5. Please rate the Instrument Handbooks (1=poor 6=excellent)

    FGS   FOC   FOS   GHRS  WFPC2    %
   ====================================
1    0.0   0.0   4.7   2.9   0.0    1.6 
2    0.0  16.7   7.0   2.9   2.9    4.2
3    0.0  16.7   7.0   2.9   7.6    6.8
4   50.0  16.7  23.3  34.3  25.7   26.6
5    0.0  50.0  53.5  48.6  50.5   50.0
6   50.0   0.0   4.7   8.6  13.3   10.9
                            ===========  
                          Mean  =  4.52

6. Please rate the Phase II instructions (1=poor 6=excellent)

    FGS   FOC   FOS   GHRS  WFPC2   %
   ===================================
1    0.0   0.0   2.6   3.0   0.0   1.1 
2    0.0   0.0   5.3   0.0   7.4   5.1
3   50.0   0.0  10.5  15.2  11.6  11.9
4    0.0  28.6  39.5  33.3  24.2  29.0
5    0.0  71.4  31.6  36.4  51.6  44.3
6   50.0   0.0  10.5  12.1   5.3   8.5
                           ===========    
                         Mean  =  4.36

Comments on the documentation

What was missing from the documentation or presented in a manner that made it difficult to understand how to proceed?

General:           33
Budget:             1
RPS2 and Phase II: 43
WFPC2:             16
FOS:                5
GHRS                8

How could the documentation be improved?

General:          50
Add examples:     27
Include an index: 11
On line :          8

7. Please rate the level of difficulty you had in completing the Phase II template (1=easy 6=very difficult)

     FGS   FOC   FOS   GHRS  WFPC2   %
   ====================================
1   50.0   0.0  10.0  11.4  15.5   13.3 
2    0.0  28.6  22.5  25.7  35.9   30.3
3   50.0  42.9  15.0  25.7  27.2   25.5
4    0.0  28.6  30.0  28.6  12.6   20.2
5    0.0   0.0   7.5   5.7   7.8    6.9
6    0.0   0.0  15.0   2.9   1.0    4.3
  ===========  
Mean  =  2.90

What was the most difficult part of the process for you?

Communication:        6
Optimization:        29
Target Acquisition:   8
Easy but...          20
Budget:               4
RPS2 
	slow           20
	didn't run     18
	installing      4
	buggy           5
        outputs         3
        how it works/
        what it does   10
Targets               8

B. RPS2

8. Please rate the RPS2 manual (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       2   1.1
2       9   5.0
3      22  12.3
4      51  28.5
5      71  39.7
6      24  13.4
NA     19
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.41

9. Please rate the ease of installation of RPS2 (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1      10   8.2
2      11   9.0
3      13  10.7
4      13  10.7
5      36  29.5
6      39  32.0
NA     76
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.40

10. Please rate the ease of use of RPS2 (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       6   3.2
2       2   1.1
3      19  10.0
4      46  24.2
5      85  44.7
6      32  16.8
NA      8
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.57

11. Please rate the speed of RPS2 (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1      78  41.1
2      51  26.8
3      34  17.9
4      20  10.5
5       4   2.1
6       3   1.6
NA      8
    ===========  
Mean  =  2.11

12. Are the RPS2 outputs understandable? (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       2   1.0
2       8   4.2
3      14   7.3
4      44  23.0
5      76  39.8
6      47  24.6
NA      7
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.70

13. Are the RPS2 descriptions clear? (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       2   1.1
2      14   7.7
3      28  15.4
4      50  27.5
5      68  37.4
6      20  11.0
NA     16
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.25

Comments

Speed:                    51
Solaris and other systems: 2
Doesn't work/buggy:        8
Download and remote use:   4
Installation:             10
Error listings             5

C. PED

14. Did you use the Proposal Editor (PED)?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    60  31.2
no    132  68.7
NA      6

percentages by instrument

     FGS  FOC   FOS   GHRS  WFPC2   %
   ===================================
yes  0.0  42.9  25.6  21.2  36.4  31.2 
no 100.0  57.1  74.4  78.8  63.6  68.7

Why didn't you use PED?

There was no need/use                  17
Didn't want to learn it                11
Didn't know about it                    2
Didn't work                             8
Other reasons                          15

Didn't keep the comments or had other
problems with the "functional" part    10

Prefer editor they know                64

15. Did PED made it easier for you to create a diagnostic-free proposal?

     FGS  FOC   FOS  GHRS   WFPC2   %
   ===================================
yes  0.0  60.0  50.0  40.0  66.0  58.3 
no   0.0  40.0  50.0  60.0  34.0  41.7
(84 responses)

Percentages of those using PED (58 responses)

     FGS  FOC  FOS   GHRS   WFPC2    %  
   ====================================
yes  0.0 100.0  63.6  85.7  89.2   84.5 
no   0.0   0.0  36.4  14.3  10.8   15.5
(58 responses)

16. Did PED lessen the need to refer to proposal instructions or other documentation?

    FGS  FOC   FOS  GHRS  WFPC2      %
   ====================================
yes  0.0  60.0  28.6  38.5  51.0   45.7 
no   0.0  40.0  71.4  61.5  49.0   54.3  
(81 responses)

Percentages of those using PED

     FGS  FOC  FOS   GHRS   WFPC2    %       
   ====================================
yes  0.0 100.0  36.4  71.4  67.6   63.8 
no   0.0   0.0  63.6  28.6  32.4   36.2
(58 responses)

17. Should STScI add more capabilities to PED?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    52  50.0
no     52  50.0
NA     94

18. Please rank the following new PED capability: duplication of visits (1=low 6=very high)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       9  10.6
2       1   1.6
3      13  15.3
4      10  11.8
5      24  28.2
6      28  32.9
NA    113
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.45

19. Please rank the following new PED capability: ability to cut and paste (1=low 6=very high)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1      10  11.8
2       2   2.4
3      12  14.1
4      12  14.1
5      11  12.9
6      38  44.7
NA    113
Mean  =  5.92

D. Contacts

20. Did you contact your Program Coordinator in order to complete your Phase II proposal?

     FGS  FOC   FOS  GHRS  WFPC2    %
   ===================================
yes  0.0  80.0  92.7  90.6  85.1 87.8 
no   0.0  20.0   7.3   9.4  14.9 12.2
(180 responses)

21. Did you contact your Contact Scientist in order to complete your Phase II proposal?

   FGS    FOC FOS  GHRS   WFPC2   %
   ====================================
yes 100.0  83.3  80.6  88.5  73.3 78.2 
no    0.0  16.7  19.4  11.5  26.7 21.8
(156 responses)

22. Did you contact other Institute personnel in order to complete your Phase II proposal?

    FGS   FOC   FOS  GHRS  WFPC2     %
   =====================================
yes 100.0  50.0  64.5  47.4  38.0   46.8 
no    0.0  50.0  35.5  52.6  62.0   53.2
(126 responses)

23. Did you contact help@stsci.edu in order to complete your Phase II proposal?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    16  14.8
no     92  85.2
NA     90

24. If you did contact your PC, CS or other institute personnel, did you receive an answer in a timely manner?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes   164  92.1
no     14   7.9
NA     20

25. If you did contact your PC, CS or other institute personnel, how helpful was this contact? (1=not helpful 6=extremely helpful)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       3   1.8
2       2   1.2
3      12   7.1
4      18  10.6
5      54  31.8
6      81  47.6
NA     28
    ===========  
Mean  =  5.12

26. If you did contact your PC, CS or other institute personnel, would you rather have obtained the information you needed instead via:

                                     TOTAL   %   
                                     =========== 
better documentation                    50  59.5
better software                         16  19.0
better documentation and software       18  21.4

21 comments expressed a need for a "human contact"

E. Target Measurement

27. Did you measure your target coordinates using the instructions provided with the Phase II instructions or the WWW page?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    74  38.9
no    116  61.1
NA      8

28. Where these instructions easy to follow?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    75  98.7
no      1   1.3
NA    122

Results from those that used this method:

   TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    70  98.6
no      1   1.4
NA      3

29. Did you have any problems measuring the coordinates?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    31  44.3
no     39  55.7
NA    128

Results from those that used the method:

   TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    28  43.1
no     37  56.9
NA      9

Comments

Problems with STSDAS:    9
	older version
	wrong description
Jukebox inaccessible:    7
Hipparcos           :    2
Other               :    8

F. Information and Tools

30. Did you use the information on STEIS?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes   110  88.7
no     14  11.3
NA     74

31. Did you know STEIS existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0
no      1 100.0
NA    197

32. Please rate the information on STEIS (1=poor 6=excellent) (from those that used STEIS)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       0  0.0
2       2  1.8
3       4  3.7
4      23 21.1
5      63 57.8
6      17 15.6
NA     89
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.82

33. Did you use StarView?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    75  70.8
no     31  29.2
NA     92

34. Did you know StarView existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0
no      8 100.0
NA    190

35. Please rate StarView (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       1  1.4
2       4  5.5
3       4  5.5
4      13 17.8
5      34 46.6
6      17 23.3
NA    125
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.73

36. Did you used synphot?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    14  21.2
no     52  78.8
NA    132

37. Did you know synphot existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0
no     13 100.0
NA    185

38. Please rate Synphot (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       0   0.0
2       4  26.7
3       1   6.7
4       3  20.0
5       5  33.3
6       2  13.3
NA    183
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.00

39. Did you used the Linear Ramp filter selection tool?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     4  7.4
no     50  92.6
NA    144

40. Did you know the Linear Ramp Filter selection tool existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0
no     15 100.0
NA    183

41. Please rate the Linear Ramp Filter Selection tool (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       0   0.0
2       0   0.0
3       0   0.0
4       0   0.0
5       2  50.0
6       2  50.0
NA    194
    ===========  
Mean  =  5.50

42. Did you use the WFPC2 Exposure Time Calculator?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes    62  68.9
no     28  31.1
NA    108

43. Did you know the WFPC2 Exposure Time Calculator existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     1   9.1 
no     10  90.9
NA    187

44. Please rate the WFPC2 ETC (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       1  1.7
2       1  1.7
3       5  8.5
4      10 16.9
5      24 40.7
6      18 30.5
NA    139
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.85

45. Did you use the Orientation Calculator in StarView?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     3  5.9
no     48 94.1
NA    147

46. Did you know the Orientation Calculator (in StarView) existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     1   2.2 
no     45  97.2
NA    152

47. Please rate the Orientation Calculator in StarView (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       1  50.0
2       0   0.0
3       0   0.0
4       0   0.0
5       0   0.0
6       1  50.0
NA    196
    ===========  
Mean  =  3.50

48. Did you use the FOC Simulator?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     5  9.4
no     48 90.6
NA    145

49. Did you know the FOC Simulator existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0
no     11 100.0
NA    187

50. Please rate the FOC simulator (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       0   0.0
2       1  20.0
3       0   0.0
4       0   0.0
5       2  40.0
6       2  40.0
NA    193
    ===========  
Mean  =  4.80

51. Did you use the FOC Orientation Calculator?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0   0.0   
no     45 100.0
NA    153

52. Did you know the FOC Orientation Calculator existed?

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
yes     0    0.0    
no     26  100.0
NA    172

53. Please rate the FOC Orientation Calculator (1=poor 6=excellent)

    TOTAL   %   
    ===========  
1       0   0.0
2       0   0.0
3       0   0.0
4       0   0.0
5       0   0.0
6       0   0.0
NA    198
    ===========  
Mean  =  0.00

D. Golombek (golombek@stsci.edu)
last updated: 15 May 1996