1. The structure of Dubinsky's course was good. I found it well designed and useful . The theoretical beginning gave me a good glance of back ground even though I had read about it a lot. But anyway, the actual practice-session was the best part of the course.

The starting day was quite long. Maybe it would have been a good idea to give some actual examples in real ISETL-environment. By portable computers it wouldn't have been so difficult. For me the ISETL-environment was familiar, but I am not sure if it was the case for all the other audience too. On the other hand, on the second day of course, we had the opportunity to see actual ISETL- and Maple-environments.

Second day was mainly focused on analyses, and in my opinion it was good way to do that. Most people were already familiar with the mathematical content so that they could focus on the computer.

The third day was also good because it gave most of people the actual learning (re-learning) opportunity in ISETL-environment. I was most interested in the algebra-part of the course.

The last day was little a bit different from others. I think that it was good to finish up Saturday's work, but maybe some new contents were needed. Especially at afternoon I did hope to hear something more about the gathering of data. The two articles of student's understanding of mathematical concept were interesting.

I didn't find any bad things about Dubinsky's course. Even the course timetable and technical things were functioning.

2. The course gave me a practical example of how Dubinsky's theory on learning mathematical concept was used in reality by the developer. The theoretical part was quite familiar to me, so it was repetition for me. Even the spoken examples were familiar from many of the Dubinsky' s articles.

As I said earlier already, I was missing some more lecturing about gathering of data, about interviewing technics and so on, but maybe it can be found from pedagogical studies elsewhere.

Maple was used quite little in this course. The calculating of derivatives and integrals was good exercise. I would like to have some more examples of Maple' s use in that senior high school level.

3. What I expect from the point of teaching is quite same what I gave from this course. But on the other hand, as mathematics pedagogical studies are made for future pedagogy's teachers so in the future there could be some research and researchers of middle- and senior high school situations - I mean not only for university level mathematics or practical assessment of teaching which are suitable only in university.

4. And the last good thing I can say is Dubinsky' s high professionality in the field of didactical mathematics. It's time to congratulate mathematics department of good work by inviting Dubinsky here in Joensuu.