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.

KBT220 - Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry 2012, KBT220

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-22 - 2012-11-05
Antal svar: 5
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 71%
Kontaktperson: Stefan Allard»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Kemiteknik 300 hp

1. Lectures: Difficulty

Please grade the difficulty of the lectures in general, with 1 being easy and 5 hard.

5 svarande

1»2 40%
2»0 0%
3»3 60%
4»0 0%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

2. Lectures: Interesting

Please grade how interesting the lectures in general have been, with 1 being "not interesting" and 5 "very interesting".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»3 60%
4»0 0%
5»2 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.8 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Varied a lot. A lot of things vere repetition from the applied course and that is a waste as all of the attending students had taken that course. Stures lecture was very interesting.» (3)

3. Lectures: Relevance

Please grade how relevant the lectures in general have been, with 1 being "not relevant" and 5 "very relevant".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 20%
3»2 40%
4»1 20%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- More chemistry should be implemented, less stating of different facts without elaborating more» (2)
- The repetition parts were unnecessary. Instead maybe the lecturer could just refer to relevant chapters in the Choppin et al. book for that students that haven"t taken the applied course could read. » (3)

4. Lectures: Handouts

Have the handouts been good? Please grade them with 1 being "very bad" and 5 "very good".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»3 60%
4»1 20%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.6 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Could be elaborated more» (3)
- There is definitely room for improvement. There is some irrelevant information that could be removed.» (3)
- Pictures should be in colour given the few number of participants this year.» (5)

5. Lectures: Time for questions

Please indicate if there has been enough time for for questions, with 1 being "not enough time" and 5 being "very much time".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»1 20%
4»2 40%
5»2 40%

Genomsnitt: 4.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

6. Lectures: Number of lectures

Would you have liked more lectures to cover the course?

5 svarande

Yes»2 40%
No»3 60%

Genomsnitt: 1.6

- It was very interesting to have Sture as a lecturer. If it would be possible to take in more people from Sahlgrenska to cover the parts that are related to their research that would be great. Also it would be nice to get Mark Foreman to have a lecture about the organic synthesis parts of radiopharmaceutical chemistry.» (Yes)

7. Lecturer: Prof. Gunnar Skarnemark

Please grade the lecturer, with 1 being "terrible" and 5 being "excellent".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»4 80%
4»0 0%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Masta" Skarnemark never fails!» (5)

8. Lecturer: Dr. Teodora Retegan

Please grade the lecturer, with 1 being "terrible" and 5 being "excellent".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»3 60%
4»1 20%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.6 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- It is interesting with other cultures in the course, she knows her stuff very well.» (5)

9. Lecturer: Dr. Sture Lindegren

Please grade the lecturer, with 1 being "terrible" and 5 being "excellent".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»2 40%
4»1 20%
5»2 40%

Genomsnitt: 4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

10. Project: understanding

Please indicate how the project have increased your nuclear chemistry understanding, with 1 being "not at all" and 5 being "very much".

5 svarande

1»1 20%
2»0 0%
3»3 60%
4»1 20%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.8 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The third part of the project didn"t give anything it just took time and was confusing» (3)
- It would have been good to have a clearer more explicit project description in the PM for the project as several of the students had trouble understanding the tasks. Also some sort of practical lab part of the project (not just optional) would be very useful for understanding things.» (3)

11. Project: relevance

Please indicate how relevant to the course the project has been, with 1 being "not relevant" and 5 "very relevant".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 20%
3»1 20%
4»2 40%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.6 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Practical work should be mandatory» (2)
- Good way to cover more of the course.» (5)

12. Project: interesting

Please indicate how interesting the project has been in general, with 1 being "not interesting" and 5 "very interesting".

4 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 25%
3»0 0%
4»3 75%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

13. Project: difficulty

Please grade the project with respect to difficulty, with 1 being "very easy" and 5 "very hard".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 20%
3»3 60%
4»1 20%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

14. Project: supervisor

Please grade the supervisor Dr. Teodora Retegan, with 1 being "terrible" and 5 "excellent".

5 svarande

1»1 20%
2»0 0%
3»1 20%
4»2 40%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

15. General: Workload

Please indicate how you perceive the 7.5 hp workload, with 1 being "very low" and 5 "very high".

5 svarande

1»1 20%
2»2 40%
3»2 40%
4»0 0%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

16. General: Textbook

Please grade the book "Radiopharmaceuticals in Nuclear Pharmacy and Nuclear Medicine", with 1 being "terrible" and 5 "excellent".

4 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 25%
3»3 75%
4»0 0%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.75 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Expensive and use obsolete units. The stoneage called and wanted its units back.» (2)
- The book is ok except it is too expensive to buy. If it had been more affordable I would have bought it and probably read much more of it.» (3)

17. General: Administration

Please grade the course administration in general, with 1 being "terrible" and 5 "excellent".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»1 20%
3»4 80%
4»0 0%
5»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.8 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Some handouts didn"t reach me.» (2)
- We didn"t get the slides for Sture"s lecture and that was bad.» (3)

18. General: Information

Please indicate how well course information was provided, with 1 being "terribly" and 5 "excellently".

5 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»4 80%
4»0 0%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

19. Exam

Please indicate how well the exam reflected the course, with 1 being "poorly" and 5 "very well".

5 svarande

1»2 40%
2»0 0%
3»1 20%
4»1 20%
5»1 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.8 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- the exam was just a copy past exam from a old one with around 4-6 new questions» (1)
- It was really bad that the majority of the questions were the same as the example exam handed out. That should definitely be changed next time.» (1)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.31

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.31
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.57

Kursutvärderingssystem från