ENKÄTER

 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

Visa resultat

Här kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.


Yacht materials, SJO225, 2009-2010

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-12-14 - 2009-12-22
Antal svar: 6
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 46%
Kontaktperson: Rodney Rychwalski»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Klass: Övriga
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Sjöfart och logistik 180 hp


Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

6 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»4 66%
Around 20 hours/week»1 16%
Around 25 hours/week»1 16%
Around 30 hours/week»0 0%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

6 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 16%
75%»5 83%
100%»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.83 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.66


Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

6 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»0 0%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»1 16%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»5 83%

Genomsnitt: 3.83 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.83


Teaching and course administration

4. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

6 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»0 0%
Large extent»4 66%
Great extent»2 33%

Genomsnitt: 3.33 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

5. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?

6 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»1 16%
Large extent»4 66%
Great extent»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

6. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?

6 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»5 83%
Very well»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- About the homepage: Handouts for metal and polymers missing. Also lab and project discriptions were missing.» (Rather well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.16


Study climate & course

7. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

6 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»1 16%
Very good»3 50%
I did not seek help»2 33%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

8. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

6 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»4 66%
Very well»2 33%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.33 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

9. How was the course workload?

6 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»5 83%
High»1 16%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Quite low, but considering that the other courses that are parallel to this have too high workload it is more than enough :)» (Adequate)

10. How was the total workload this study period?

6 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»3 50%
High»3 50%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

11. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Doing a project, lab, etc»
- CLT, Practical knowledge of materials to real life »

12. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Then compendium could be clearer and better structured»
- A practical part would be good experience. To actually take part in a hand lay-up or vacuum infusion.»
- Some detailed material informamations ( equations etc.)»

13. The level of information presented in the course was:

6 svarande

too low»0 0%
reasonable»5 83%
too high»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Too detailed information for parts that are not really interesting when looking at a yacht. » (too high)

14. Should the course cover fewer or more topics?

6 svarande

fewer»1 16%
reasonable»5 83%
more»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.83 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Some of the topics are too detailed un necessarily. (too detailed material knowledge) In stead of this, there must be more care on practical issues. (how to practise some knowledge to practical life), Also I prefer to be more information on aluminum which the importance and usage growing in yacht industry. » (reasonable)

15. Solved/worked problems helped training computational aspects:

6 svarande

disagree»0 0%
hesitant»0 0%
agree»6 100%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

16. Computer lab session was helpful towards laminate theory

6 svarande

disagree»0 0%
hesitant»0 0%
agree»6 100%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

17. Diary/project was helpful to realize/summarize the importance of materials for yacht building and connections between various parts in the course

6 svarande

disagree»1 16%
hesitant»1 16%
agree»4 66%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- Did not do the diary until the last day, so everything was done very hastely. Otherwise it might have been helpful.» (disagree)
- But could be clearer» (agree)

18. Compendium was a helpful source

6 svarande

disagree»0 0%
hesitant»2 33%
agree»4 66%

Genomsnitt: 2.66 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- It is a little vague descriptions of important terms. Even terms marked in bold are not described to get understanding, they are just mentioned in sentences. This gives a feeling that the compendium is more intended for people who are studying materials, and not naval architecture.» (hesitant)

19. Organization of the course was transparent and caring

6 svarande

disagree»0 0%
hesitant»0 0%
agree»6 100%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

20. On the whole I would:

6 svarande

not recommend the course»0 0%
hesitant»1 16%
recommend the course»5 83%

Genomsnitt: 2.83 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Even though the course is called Yacht Materials, the only connection with yachts is that it handles materials used in yachts. Other than that it is a strictly material course going deep into FRPs. It could/should be a little more intended for Naval Architecture.» (hesitant)
- For a yacht designer it is a very good knowledge base but I believe it needs to be in conjunction with a more practical side, as in the manufacturing course which I intend to take next year» (recommend the course)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.85


Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.94
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.71


Kursutvärderingssystem från