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.


Engineering of Automotive Systems 2012, TME121

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-18 - 2012-11-15
Antal svar: 33
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: ?%
Kontaktperson: Selpi Selpi»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Maskinteknik 300 hp
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Maskinteknik 300 hp

1. Approximately how many hours per week did you work with the course?

Estimate the total time, including both teaching activities and your own studies. Try
to estimate the average for the whole study period.

33 svarande

At most 10 hours»4 12%
About 15 hours»10 30%
About 20 hours»11 33%
About 25 hours»5 15%
About 30 hours»2 6%
At least 35 hours»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

2. How much of the teaching offered did you attend?

33 svarande

0%»0 0%
25&»0 0%
50%»2 6%
75%»15 45%
100%»16 48%

Genomsnitt: 4.42

- The contents are so broad and some is deep.» (75%)
- I attend 80% » (75%)
- Probably closer to 90%» (100%)


Goals and their fulfilment

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

After the course, the students should be able to:
1) Locate and classify different systems and components in a ground vehicle
2) Identify and analyse the subsystems and components influence on the vehicle design
3) Show an understanding of some of the tools used in design and simulation of vehicles and their behaviour
4) Interpret and analyse the manufacturer role in the automotive industry
5) Describe and explain the supplier role in the automotive industry
6) Describe how the product development process influences the automotive industry
7) Create, evaluate, and defend solutions to three specific problems within the areas of powertrain, vehicle dynamics, and safety.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

33 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»1 3%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»15 45%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»17 51%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- It is hard to get an idea how deep it should get.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- I think it should be more lectures dedicated to the topics which talking about the assignments, especially the power train, the safety lectures should contain more detailed information to help the student with the assignment.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

4. Are the course goals reasonable considering the number of credits?

32 svarande

Yes I think so»27 84%
Hesitant»5 15%
No»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.15

- You cant check them twice and if you are, then you can"t make the exam in two different parts.» (Hesitant)

5. Did the assignments + written exam assess whether you have reached the goals?

33 svarande

No, not at all»1 3%
To some extent»16 48%
Yes, definitely»7 21%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- The person who wrote the exam clearly had a very bad understanding of how a complete vehicle works. Many of the questions related more to different expressions used in the course rather than to knowledge of vehicles. For example, the question "Name the different suspension concepts" can have thousands of different answers, depending of the interpretion of the question. » (No, not at all)
- The exam questions where really weird. You really should take some questions that is more general, not just pick a random slide and make a question out of it. But again, you cant test the assignments twice by using a part of the exam.» (To some extent)
- It is a huge exam for only 3 credits, especially since half of the exam considers the assignments, which already are 4.5 credits. The exam should more consider the lectures and maybe have some questions regarding the assignments, but my opinion is that the assignment questions should not be half of the exam.» (To some extent)
- I think it should be something like ideal answers and explanations for the assignment, which given to the students at the end of the course to help for more understanding for the assignment.» (To some extent)


Lectures, visits, and assignments

6. What do you think of the lectures listed below?

Please tell us what you think of the different lectures. If the topic is relevant and if it is on the correct level.

Matrisfråga

- The steering system gets a bad becuase it was extremely simple. There was almost no depth into the actual design of each system, just some pros and cons.»
- some lecturer did not link the topic to the automotive and vehicle very well like NVH and control system.»
- I"m afraid to say, but most of the lectures were not presented well. Powerpoint can be very tempting to rush to fast through important topics without going deep enough into the subject matter. I"ve experienced this several times in this course...»

Introduction, Automotive History - Selpi and Sven Andersson
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»7 21%
Good - well needed and interesting»11 34%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»12 37%
Did not attend/Do not know»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 4.28

Design and Project Management Process - Thomas Bergqvist
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 9%
OK - needed and well performed»7 21%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 46%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 15%
Did not attend/Do not know»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

Powertrain Systems - Jan Andersson
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 12%
OK - needed and well performed»6 18%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 37%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»10 31%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

Report Writing fundamentals - Stina Hemdal
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»2 6%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 9%
OK - needed and well performed»11 34%
Good - well needed and interesting»5 15%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 28%
Did not attend/Do not know»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

Tyres - Andrew Dawkes
31 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»5 16%
Good - well needed and interesting»13 41%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»12 38%
Did not attend/Do not know»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

Braking Systems - Andrew Dawkes
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»6 18%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 46%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»10 31%
Did not attend/Do not know»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 4.18

Suspensions Systems and Components - Gunnar Olsson
30 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 6%
OK - needed and well performed»9 30%
Good - well needed and interesting»13 43%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 16%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Vehicle Dynamics, Suspensions, and SHARK - Steve Williams
31 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»4 12%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 48%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»12 38%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Steering Systems - Gunnar Olsson
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»5 15%
OK - needed and well performed»5 15%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 46%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»7 21%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

Noise, Vibration, and Harshness - Patrik Andersson
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 12%
OK - needed and well performed»5 15%
Good - well needed and interesting»13 40%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 28%
Did not attend/Do not know»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics - Lennart Löfdahl
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»5 15%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 37%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»10 31%
Did not attend/Do not know»5 15%

Genomsnitt: 4.46

Materials and Failure Analysis - Pål Schmidt
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 9%
OK - needed and well performed»8 25%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 43%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»4 12%
Did not attend/Do not know»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

Safety, Crashworthiness - Johan Davidsson
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 3%
OK - needed and well performed»7 21%
Good - well needed and interesting»13 40%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»11 34%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

Active Safety - Johan Hulten
30 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 6%
OK - needed and well performed»5 16%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 50%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»8 26%
Did not attend/Do not know»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.96

Structural Design of Motor Vehicles - Peter Urban
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»5 15%
Good - well needed and interesting»16 50%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 28%
Did not attend/Do not know»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Applied Structural Design of Motor Vehicles - Peter Urban
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 3%
OK - needed and well performed»5 15%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 43%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 28%
Did not attend/Do not know»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Environment - Katarina Sundqvist and Lotta Styrenius
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 6%
OK - needed and well performed»9 28%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 37%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 15%
Did not attend/Do not know»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

Control Systems - Bo Egardt
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 12%
OK - needed and well performed»15 46%
Good - well needed and interesting»8 25%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»3 9%
Did not attend/Do not know»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Certification - Malin Kjellberg
32 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»3 9%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»6 18%
Good - well needed and interesting»13 40%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»3 9%
Did not attend/Do not know»7 21%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

Trends in Automotive Industry - Sven-Åke Berglie
31 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»5 16%
Good - well needed and interesting»9 29%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 29%
Did not attend/Do not know»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 4.64

7. What do you think of the assignments?

Were they of help for your learning and of relevance to the course topics?

Matrisfråga

- Assignment 2 where more about to do a checklist. And write a full technical report on that one is really odd.»
- The safety assignment was simplified so much that I"m sure it is extremely far from actually calculating crash forces. I something more than essentially a momentum and energy calculation would have been more realistic.»
- Ass 2 would be even better if more understanding was involved. Little more discussion before the assignment about how one should think.»
- The assignments forced me to deal with these topics in more detail. This helped me understanding the topic much more.»
- The suspension assignment was to much fokus on the program that we never had used before. It felt like we only followed the written text without any understanding for what we were doing. Also bad to put the full report here because of the use of the new program that took too long time. Also the placing or maybe number of assignments are questionable. I don"t understand how you can have an assignment that we don"t get back until after the exam, how should we know if what we learn or wrote was right when we don"t get any feedback? »
- Some first year physics calculations in assignment 1 and 3 did not really help to reach the learning-goals of the course.»
- Very challenging and interesting in general»

Assignment 1 - Powertrain
33 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»0 0%
To some extent relevant»1 3%
OK»1 3%
Relevant and good experience»6 18%
Very good exercise for my learning»25 75%
No opinion»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 4.66

Assignment 2 - Suspension
33 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»1 3%
To some extent relevant»6 18%
OK»7 21%
Relevant and good experience»10 30%
Very good exercise for my learning»9 27%
No opinion»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

Assignment 3 - Safety
33 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»0 0%
To some extent relevant»2 6%
OK»7 21%
Relevant and good experience»9 27%
Very good exercise for my learning»15 45%
No opinion»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

8. What do you think of the discussion session on assignments?

33 svarande

Useless»1 3%
Rather useless»9 27%
OK»6 18%
Rather useful»11 33%
Very useful»2 6%
Did not attend/Do not know»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

- I think the discussion should held for each assignment separately and after the assignment is finished , because at the discussion is difficult to recall what you did before 2 months unless you revised it before that which clearly most of the people did not do.» (Rather useless)
- I don"t know what it was for. When this took place we haven"t even got the ass. 3 back.» (Rather useless)
- OK, but some info woould have been nice to have before the assignment.» (OK)
- Should be after the last resturn, so we can discuss more opnely.» (Rather useful)
- I don"t recall any.» (Did not attend/Do not know)

9. What do you think of the visits?

Matrisfråga

- During the production tour, the guiding person has yet to make sure that his voice gets to everyone in the group. consider using a speaker like in the blue train.»
- But not serving Lunch at Volvo Cars where a huge mistake, a Kanelbulle - that"s definitely not a lunch which resulted in a really tuff lecture afterwards where it were hard to staying awake.»
- The production tour at JC was extremely boring, especially since you could look around for about 2mins and know what process is done where. »
- Johnson Controls: More than three hours in a small room without a break is not reasonable, during the lecture about development.»
- volvo tour generally should be given more time in the both events,»
- Very good experience that allowed to have a clearer vision of car manufacturers and suppliers challenges.»

Johnson Controls - Development process
33 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 6%
OK»4 12%
Rather good»4 12%
Very good»14 42%
Did not attend/Do not know»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 4.72

Johnson Controls - Production tour
33 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 6%
OK»3 9%
Rather good»6 18%
Very good»13 39%
Did not attend/Do not know»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 4.72

Volvo Cars - Blue train tour
33 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
OK»2 6%
Rather good»8 24%
Very good»14 42%
Did not attend/Do not know»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 4.9

Volvo Cars - Brand Experience Centre (environment and safety)
33 svarande

Very poor»1 3%
Rather poor»0 0%
OK»3 9%
Rather good»8 24%
Very good»12 36%
Did not attend/Do not know»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 4.72


Teaching and course administration

10. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning? 10 svarande

33 svarande

Small extent»1 3%
Some extent»9 27%
Large extent»20 60%
Great extent»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- I already knew the vast majority of information presented.» (Small extent)
- in some topics the lecturer explain it like I all ready have information about it, which is not for the whole students.» (Large extent)

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

33 svarande

Small extent»8 24%
Some extent»15 45%
Large extent»6 18%
Great extent»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.18

- I already knew the vast majority of information presented.» (Small extent)
- The book were not useful at all.» (Some extent)
- The book isn"t really necessary.» (Some extent)

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

33 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Acceptable»10 30%
Good»13 39%
Excellent»10 30%

Genomsnitt: 4


Study climate

13. How was the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

33 svarande

Poor»1 3%
Fair»1 3%
Adequate»5 15%
Good»20 60%
Excellent»6 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

14. How has the cooperation been, between you and the other students?

33 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather good»9 27%
Very good»24 72%
I have not tried to cooperate»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- Your argument for making the assignment groups was that you would try to mix international and national students, as well as mixing master programm and erasmus students. That did not happen...» (Rather good)

15. How was the course workload?

33 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»22 66%
High»11 33%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

16. How was the total workload during the entire study period?

33 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»5 15%
High»26 78%
Too high»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- CFS..............................» (Too high)


Summarising questions

17. What is your general impression of the course?

33 svarande

Worst course ever»0 0%
Fair»7 21%
Good»19 57%
Excellent»7 21%
Best course ever»0 0%
No answer»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Might be due to the syllabus, but some sharpening of the learning outcome and the topics might have been helpful.» (Fair)
- An written exam on this course seems like a really bad soloution. I think it is better to make some more (smaller) assignments.» (Fair)
- I learned almost nothing.» (Fair)
- Since the course was very basic, many of the lectures didn"t realy contain anything useful.» (Fair)
- Good introduction» (Good)
- I learned a lot about automotive engineering isssues» (Excellent)

18. What should definitely be preserved for next year?

- Company visits»
- Trips, Assignments 1+3, "geust lecture mode"»
- The visits.»
- The visits»
- two visits, all the lectures.»
- More hands-on experience. A MacPherson suspension is not something impossible to be shown during lectures. »
- Volvo tour, Dawkes Lectures, Lotus Lectures.»
- The methodolgy»
- Steve Williams" and Johan Hulten"s lectures»
- the tours to volvo and johnson controls»
- Industry visit, Powertrain Assignment, Lecture on Vehicle Dynamics and Suspension by Steve Williams»
- Assignments»
- The 1:st and the 3:rd assignment were good for understanding and relevant.»
- Vehicle Dynamics lecture by Steve Williams»
- The visits and the way the different assignments were led.»

19. What should definitely be changed for next year?

- No comments.»
- nothing much.»
- Some lecturers speak with voice that make most of the students fall asleep. Don"t allow that to happen next year! Bring lecturers like Andrew Dawkes, Steve Williams and Sven Andersson!»
- More assignments, smaller ones, earlier deadlines. Take away the exam. And if keeping the exam - dont divide it into two parts.»
- The exam, It totally missed the importance of the course and was to focused on details.»
- The steering lecture needs to be more than just "This is what this system looks like...ok, next slide."»
- Exam pattern»
- Exam pattern - include more question related to problem solving and thought-involved. No memory-based or "list"-type questions, please!»
- Maybe a more defined red thread throughout the course? »
- The 2:nd assignment need to be changed to get a better understanding. At least the structure of the report, the full report could be on another assignment. Also the placing and maybe the number of assignment. »
- The exam»
- Volvo Brand Experience visit»
- the course about suspension. the teacher must add some 3D animation for a better understanding. With only pictures it"s horrible to understand »
- Some lectures objectives seemed not very clear while trying to work on them or to prepare for the exam.»

20. Additional comments

- it"s been a very very helpful course for me. thank you for all you have done for me, Selpi and Malin.»
- And what about the exam?? Valve filter? I think it is really bad to make a lot of mistakes and then not answers any questions while you"re going around during the exam. I really hope that you correct the exam with that in mind. And the fact that the questions just checked one single slide from each of the lectures instead of that you actually had understand the course and the learning obejctives it"s really weird(and stupid).»
- It was odd, becuase the class was rediculously basic and general, but the first assignment was quite deep and detailed. The course material was much much shallower than any assigned work.»
- I think it"s reasonable to at least get feedback on all assignments before the exam. If this is not possible maybe you should consider to reduce them.»


Kursutvärderingssystem från