Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSimilar(60)
This session received a mean rating of 4.71.
It can be noted that among the items in this criteria set, it was item 10 that received a mean rating of less than 4 (3.96 = very satisfactory).
The FT overall received a mean rating of 2.73, with all attendees indicating the training as either somewhat valuable (n = 8) or very valuable (n = 22, 86% responding).
The remaining topics received a mean rating less of than 4 for both educational groups and failed to achieve a consensus for either group.
The remaining topics received a mean rating of less than 4 for both educational groups and failed to achieve a consensus for either group.
The workshops overall received a mean rating of 4.51 on a five-point Likert scale from poor to excellent with all attendees indicating the training as either good (n = 4), very good (n = 14), or excellent (n = 27), with 94% reporting.
Only item 6 received an "outstanding" mean rating of 4.58.
The first two items of this criteria set received the highest mean rating.
This criteria set has received an average mean rating of 4.07.
Item 3 received the lowest mean rating (4.00, although still very satisfactory).
In general, the card design has received an average mean rating of 4.45, which is "very satisfactory".
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com