Visa resultat

Kursutvärdering Powertrain Mechanics 2010, TME170

Your own effort

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

24 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		3		12%
Around 20 hours/week»		9		37%
Around 25 hours/week»		9		37%
Around 30 hours/week»		3		12%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- The Assignments took a lot of time to perform and correct.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

24 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		2		8%
75%»		7		29%
100%»		15		62%

Genomsnitt: 4.54

- More than 75% though... Probably 90%.» (75%)
- almost 100% +/-95%» (100%)
- 100%» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		2		8%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		7		29%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		15		62%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

23 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		23		100%
No, the goals are set too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

No, not at all»		2		8%
To some extent»		5		20%
Yes, definitely»		17		70%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- the exam was very tough, some course content can be thought in the class before. The Automatic transmissions assignment as well as the exam part was very tough and the classes could have been better.» (No, not at all)
- It was a rather difficult Exam. Some questions where offcours rather easy. But the difference in difficulty was large.» (No, not at all)
- Some questions were very basic(free points) and some wasnt worth trying to answer. Very uneven examination.» (To some extent)
- I think they did, with the reservation that i have not read the goals in detail.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		3		12%
Some extent»		11		45%
Large extent»		8		33%
Great extent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- -The differential part could be explained a little easier such that one can understand - Automatic transmissions lectures were not helpful and I guess everyone in the class had problems with it. - Hybrids lectures could be more better.» (Small extent)
- Most of the material I (and others I know) used was found from other places rather than from lectures and handouts.» (Some extent)
- There was no course litterature so all the lecture slides was of great importance for me. There schould be some kind of compendium with all lecture slides and some more text.» (Great extent)

7. What did you think about the lecturers?

Matrisfråga

- -Arjan was good and detailed about many powertrain parts, I like. -Sven did good on the balancing, I wanted more literature about this tho. Anders Hedman was good, maybe at a too low level, could be more details and formulas. -Jan andersson talked to much about other stuff, like "tips on how to remember lectures", I wanted to hear about planetary gears. He was good once he did that. -Bengt Jacobsson was very confused, had slides with 100 equations on each page and edited them during class -Jonas Hellgren was not needed, he talked for 10 min then gave us an assignment and just sat there.»
- After the the 2 courses about internal combustion engine, the engine configuration and component is a bit too easy.»
- arjan, just fine, clear presentations, could speed up during lectures. explains things that were clear to me quickly. liked that he explained why a v8 has the typical v8 sound :D sven, good lectures about the balancing, i finally understood how it works anders hedman, really great in teaching, should be teacher. very good explanation of how transmissions work. his presentations/pictures helped a lot. jan andersson, made a too big jump into the planetary gears calculations without starting at the beginning. his lectures didnt really help witht the assignment. the calculations on hydraulic clutches was too general. needs more explanation about how the clutches work and why the properties of clutches are how the are. bengt jacobsson, had some hard to understand presentations jonas hellgren, just fine»
- Svens lectures were not very easy to understand though he is usually very pedagogic. Bengt had extremely messy slides and a confusing lectures. Anders was very inspiring. »
- Comments on some of the teachers: Arjan Helmantel - Better than usual actually. Good points and pretty straight forward. Sometimes pretty hard to understand, but that has nothing to do with the teaching itself. Sven Andersson - He had some difficulties explaining some points and it got out of hand sometimes... but Sven is always good. Anders Hedman - was very good at explaining and made it more fun to learn by being a little open and down-to-earth about his subject. Jan Andersson - He was not bad per se... But in the first lecture he actually brought up what the last year students had said about him and somehow was trying to make a point?? It was all very confusing and lots of time was wasted there. And I don"t think that you need to explain for students in our last year of the masters how to learn things. A good thought, but probably not so appropriate. His way of presenting was very good but sometimes it just got a little confusing, and stuff that would be easy to understand was without reason being not understandable. Bengt Jacobsson - I did not understand a single thing of what this man was trying to teach. Many people around me seemed very confused as well. Either he was using a lot of confusing terms, or the subject is just hard as it is. But I doubt the latter, since I found lots of good material about differentials etc. It"s funny how one teacher can talk about "how to learn by picturing things in your head" and the other just is at Rocket-Science-Level... typical Chalmers thing. Jonas Hellgren - I did not attend his "lecture".»
- Jonas talked for about 5 minutes and that didn´,t help me to learn anything new, neither did his exercise. Sven was very confusing when he wrote equations without eplaining or understanding them himself. Jan was also quite confusing but overall good. Bengt and Anders where really good, their presentations was held at a high (knowledge) level and had high quality. Arjan becomes better and better, a little unclear when talking but very interesting slides and information. Some text to complement his slides would be great.»
- Jan Andersson was not suitable for presenting automatic gearboxes, hire a proffesional teacher such as Kjell Melkersson(he has the course machine design - basic/advanced course at Chalmers Lindholmen or the teacher at Chalmers Johanneberg who has the machine element course. Bengt Jacobsson - I really can´,t understand these two leactures, his leactures was vehicle dynamics to 100%.... I did not chosen this course for vehicle dynamics understanding. Jonas Hellgren - Really unrelevant because we have had the course, "Hybrid vehicles and control".»
- Bengt´,s visual material is full of text and figures, being difficult to follow.»

Arjan Helmantel - engine configuration and components
24 svarande

poor»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		3		12%
reasonable»		8		33%
good»		11		45%
excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Sven Andersson - engine balancing
24 svarande

poor»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		2		8%
reasonable»		5		20%
good»		13		54%
excellent»		4		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.79

Anders Hedman - manual transmissions and clutches/couplings
24 svarande

poor»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		0		0%
reasonable»		1		4%
good»		6		25%
excellent»		17		70%

Genomsnitt: 4.66

Jan Andersson - automatic planetary transmissions
24 svarande

poor»		3		12%
somewhat poor»		4		16%
reasonable»		9		37%
good»		5		20%
excellent»		3		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

Bengt Jacobsson - Differentials, AWD, and AWD clutches
23 svarande

poor»		5		21%
somewhat poor»		8		34%
reasonable»		5		21%
good»		3		13%
excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

Jonas Hellgren - powertrains in hybrids
23 svarande

poor»		4		17%
somewhat poor»		6		26%
reasonable»		9		39%
good»		4		17%
excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

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

Small extent»		1		4%
Some extent»		11		45%
Large extent»		12		50%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- I refer the previous comments...» (Some extent)
- I felt that i had a lot of background knowledge about this already (having disassembled a few engines) but the course also gave me som new knowledge and the potential to express in with equations.» (Some extent)
- I didnt read muck at all, I want proper course literature not hand outs.» (Large extent)

9. What did you think about the assignments

Matrisfråga

- Ass2: The drawing that was asked as part of the assignment was probably not necessary and not relevant Ass3: The way that it was explained by the assistants was quite bad - we had to spend a lot of time to understand, and finally needed help from the assistant. It should be made clearer how we should solve it - what method should be used.»
- Assignment 3 basics for torque equations could be explained better in class rather than just giving out a few equations and an assignment sheet.»
- assignments were good. the two transmission assignments were almost too easy.»
- all interesting assignments, spend a lot of time on assignment 3. spoiled a lot of time on the equations. could have been more efficient if we were told how to set up the equations. that we shut cut the gearbox into pieces to solve the equations. we wasted a lot of time trying to get the equations right for every gear and we didnt learn anything from that. once we asked gunnar, he told us to cut the system and solve it like that. would have been nice to know that in advance. in general the help of the phd students was not useful. could explain more about the assignment rather than just handing out the papers.»
- Assignment 3 was very confusing. »
- The magnitude of some of the assignments was quite large and the necissary background information was not always given before the assignment started. Too large focus on the sketching skills on the drawings and wague descriptions of tha task itself in some cases.»

Assignment 1 - Valve spring dimensioning
24 svarande

poor, not relevant to the course»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		2		8%
reasonable»		5		20%
good»		12		50%
excellent, highly relevant»		5		20%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

Assignment 2 - Step transmission, ratios and gears
24 svarande

poor, not relevant to the course»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		0		0%
reasonable»		3		12%
good»		12		50%
excellent, highly relevant»		9		37%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Assignment 3 - Planetary gears
24 svarande

poor, not relevant to the course»		0		0%
somewhat poor»		1		4%
reasonable»		6		25%
good»		10		41%
excellent, highly relevant»		7		29%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		2		8%
Rather well»		13		56%
Very well»		8		34%

Genomsnitt: 3.26

- Late handout. Not all was available etc...» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		7		29%
Very good»		16		66%
I did not seek help»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

- Someone was always available.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		1		4%
Rather well»		3		12%
Very well»		20		83%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.79

- I played safe cards this time, only worked with people i know.» (Very well)

13. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		4%
Adequate»		19		79%
High»		3		12%
Too high»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- The assignments sometimes needed more time than we counted on.» (High)
- The assignments was a bit to extensive, but It schould have been OK if not for my parallel course having eaven more assignments and presentations...» (Too high)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		3		12%
Adequate»		15		62%
High»		5		20%
Too high»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- Two courses, 9 assignments, 3 presentations, 2 exams.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		3		12%
Adequate»		6		25%
Good»		11		45%
Excellent»		4		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- I learnt a lot.... even if some teachers where complicating things and some of the assignments where hard.» (Good)
- This is the course i have been waiting for ever since i started the machine-program, this is machines! I would have liked to learn more in a course "powertrains mechanics Advanced"....» (Excellent)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

18. Additional comments