Jacky Turner (
Mon, 29 Apr 1996 11:14:24 +0100 (BST)

Dear Steve, I do agree with you that the annoying thing about most
multiple-choice questions is that, unless they are *very* simple, an
in-depth reading can often find other possibilities besides the
"correct" answer. However, nearly all courses use them because they
are easily and 'objectively' marked, unlike essay questions, for instance.

I imagine that you are not the only person who has queries and we will of
course give consideration to the points you or others raise, when the
assignments are marked.

Meanwhile, we intend to give an opportunity for further discussion of the
many points raised in the 'discussion points' of the assignment, by
having at least one BioMOO meeting on the subject with Raj Gill.

You are not a pain. Sorry also that you had to wait for the beginning of
term for an answer - we were all off on other missions during the

Best wishes, Jacky.

On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Stephen Tate wrote:

> Jacky,
> A couple of grumbles about the assignment.
> Q4,
> How do you really known this without doing the experiment? the
> disulphide scrambleing could follow all the possibilities? we dont have
> the facilities to do this via modelling.
> Q5,
> All the glycine residues have a +ve phi angle when a Ram plot is
> performed on the structure. 1 of the residues has a +ve psi angle is
> this what you mean??
> Q6,
> none of the staements appear to be true.
> 6a would be but they are not buried in the core of the protein?
> sorry to be a pain,
> Steve.
> --
> Stephen Tate