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.
Metal processing: Casting, forming and joining 2013, MTT046
Öppen för svar: 2013-05-24 - 2013-08-20
Antal svar: 22
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 57%
Kontaktperson: Marie Iwanow»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs
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.
|At most 15 hours/week»||3|| 13%|
|Around 20 hours/week»||5|| 22%|
|Around 25 hours/week»||8|| 36%|
|Around 30 hours/week»||4|| 18%|
|At least 35 hours/week»||2|| 9%|
- 2 last weeks was more like 50 hours/week» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Spend more time in the end.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- Very skewed work load.
Our group planned as good as we could but there were a lot of deadlines in the end of the semester and I see no need for it. The dead lines could have been more distributed during the whole term.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- Not much work load in the beginning of the course but extreme during the last 4 weeks.» (At least 35 hours/week)
2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?
Goals and goal fulfilmentThe 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?22 svarande
|I have not seen/read the goals»||1|| 4%|
|The goals are difficult to understand»||8|| 36%|
|The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»||12|| 54%|
|The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»||1|| 4%|
- It is not clear what is required for the various grades. It is not quite clear what the learning outcomes are.» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- Fem part far from basic as stated in pm» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- the goals are very generally written..» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- The goals doesnt correlate to the actual course so new goals or new course...» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- I"m not even sure now after course what the goals of the course where» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- I do not think there were any goals presented in this goal, and if there were so the were extremely bad performed» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- The course goals was wrong!! Basic FEM????» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- The goals say something about basic FEM, this is confusing. » (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Stated goals do not correspond to actual content of the course.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.
|No, the goals are set too low»||0|| 0%|
|Yes, the goals seem reasonable»||11|| 55%|
|No, the goals are set too high»||9|| 45%|
- See the comment below » (?)
- If the goals where followed.......... » (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- High loadwork. Assignments for more than one course» (No, the goals are set too high)
- I do not think that basic Fem incloude explicit and implicit scheme! The pm did not same as the course» (No, the goals are set too high)
- The goals stated were not followed. It was much more advanced than what the course PM read.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Especially in FEM» (No, the goals are set too high)
5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?22 svarande
|No, not at all»||6|| 27%|
|To some extent»||11|| 50%|
|Yes, definitely»||2|| 9%|
|I don"t know/have not been examined yet»||3|| 13%|
- The only part of the course that let me show my knowledge was the welding "dugga" and to some extent the forming exercises. » (No, not at all)
- Some of the examination was good, such as most of the forming, welding and casting assignments but the FEM assignment was ridiculous (as was the lectures. The group work was OK to the most part but the welding group was horrible. I ended up having to do 12 of 16 pages myself. 2 out of four didn"t participate and the third only worked on it at the day of hand-in... People slept during my presentation which made me nervous (for not doing a good presentation - I even walked down the class room to wake them) and angry. The listeners should be asked to participate, e.g. be able to ask 3 academic questions each.» (To some extent)
- There where no discription before the course how we should be graded, and I don"t still know how they will grade us» (To some extent)
Teaching and course administration
6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?22 svarande
|Small extent»||8|| 36%|
|Some extent»||9|| 40%|
|Large extent»||5|| 22%|
|Great extent»||0|| 0%|
- Worst planned course ive had» (Small extent)
- Very various. Casting was OK. Forming was really good. Welding was OK but needed more time to cover more parts. I would suggest dumping the horrible FEM lectures as these did not add to any knowledge at all and give large parts of the time to welding so it can cover practical parts. I.e. how to solve welding assignments in real life and not only the theory behind welding. After all, we are supposed to be able to work with this once finished. The FEM lectures were the worst I have ever had, and that"s not an overstatement. No purpose, no feedback, no context. Horrible. It felt like being taught in the 19th century.» (Some extent)
- Some part of the course...» (Some extent)
- The lecture for welding, forming and casting were okay» (Some extent)
- The FEM part the teaching did not help at all. Way to hasty and then the assignment did not even include the little teaching we got.» (Some extent)
- FEM lectures had NOTHING to do with the assignment.
Forming was to much based on lecture, information could not be found in literature. You had to be attentive and present during class.
Same for welding, bad PPs. Hard to understand what the teacher wanted to teach us.
Casting lectures was ok.» (Some extent)
7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?22 svarande
|Small extent»||6|| 27%|
|Some extent»||11|| 50%|
|Large extent»||5|| 22%|
|Great extent»||0|| 0%|
- The fem part was very hard to understand» (Small extent)
- The FEM book was horrible. The rest was good but I had no time to read all of the literature...» (Large extent)
- The material given out has been relevant for the assignments given.» (Large extent)
- Only source for FEM.
Welding some extent.
Casting large extent.
Forming, what literature?
Make better PowerPoints or don"t do them at all.» (Large extent)
8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?22 svarande
|Very badly»||13|| 59%|
|Rather badly»||3|| 13%|
|Rather well»||5|| 22%|
|Very well»||1|| 4%|
- worst I have seen on Chalmers» (Very badly)
- Very poored organized course. hard to find the important info.» (Very badly)
- Worst course ever when it comes to planning!» (Very badly)
- It was the worst administration of a course so far in my 4 year long education » (Very badly)
- It is nice to get a receive on the haneed in work. Better to have an eaven workload, mabe finish one part before start the other.» (Very badly)
- This has been BY FAR the worst course i have ever taken from a administrative point of view. The communication between lecturers must of been close to zero.
The information about what is expected from a presentation (time, extent of info, etc) and the grading system (comparing the assignments with each other and grading them from worst to best) is a fucking joke. This is only affecting the casting part though.» (Very badly)
- The worst course I have taken in this regard. It was beyond horrible to finding the right information. Often ended up with slow mail dialogues with one of the teachers.
I would not recommend anyone to take this course just because of this.» (Very badly)
- I do not know if there actually were a "course administration", handouts were a mess.» (Very badly)
No structure at all.
Did not upload on time.
There were no handouts describing the different assignments. State the problem to solve clearly and list criteria.» (Very badly)
- Handouts were OK though late sometimes. Letting us know info could have been better. That many projects and that many groups made it very fuzzy. Couldn"t we have had the same group for all assignments?» (Rather badly)
- no structure» (Rather badly)
9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?21 svarande
|Very poor»||1|| 4%|
|Rather poor»||9|| 42%|
|Rather good»||7|| 33%|
|Very good»||4|| 19%|
|I did not seek help»||0|| 0%|
- Dependent on who you would like to contact, but over all it was bad» (Rather poor)
- Using email should be something lecturers know....» (Rather poor)
- Teachers at Lindholmen were hard to reach.» (Rather poor)
- Often good but not during FEM. That teacher answered arrogantly to questions and actually made me scared of asking questions. He almost seemed aggressive in class (verbally).» (Rather good)
- You were have to ask questions to get the info because it wasnt mentioned in the course memo or on the lectures. » (Rather good)
- It would be polite if you could get an answer from Mr Kenneth when sending e-mail.» (Rather good)
10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?21 svarande
|Very poorly»||0|| 0%|
|Rather poorly»||1|| 4%|
|Rather well»||9|| 42%|
|Very well»||11|| 52%|
|I did not seek cooperation»||0|| 0%|
- too many groups had to be formed so many difficulties occured. » (Rather poorly)
- It was good in all groups but one were I had to do almost everything...» (Rather well)
- The course organisation did not help the work at all» (Rather well)
11. How was the course workload?21 svarande
|Too low»||0|| 0%|
|Too high»||4|| 19%|
- Nothing for the first five week because everything was supposed to be done in the last two weeks» (Adequate)
- I like the workload only not that concentrated to the last 2-3 weeks. We could have done the FEM presentations week 3 (since most of us didn"t know what we were presenting anyway).» (High)
- low in the start, crazy during the last week» (High)
- Very low in the beginning and very high the last two weeks.» (High)
- The FEM part of the course was extreme and the number of assignments where way to high considering they where all group projects. In a group project everyone needs to be able to attend and if we have this many assignments with different groups it is hard to find time.» (High)
- High last weeks when everything was suppose to be examined, before that it was adequate.» (High)
- Its to high when the parts has the examination in the same week!! it was also o much in each part.» (Too high)
- low at the beginning adequate at mid term and extremely high the last two weeks.» (Too high)
12. How was the total workload this study period?21 svarande
|Too low»||0|| 0%|
|Too high»||5|| 23%|
- Extremely high at the end. » (High)
- very stressfull! especually in the end» (Too high)
13. What is your general impression of the course?22 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.72 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)
- Worst course I"v taken on Chalmers» (Poor)
- Poor organisation. The FEM part was crazy, Too much work load in the other parts. cant have all examinations in the end...» (Poor)
- It was the worst course so far at Chalmers. You could either change it (very much by adding some organization of the course) or just delete it from the program. If anyone asks me next year about this course I"ll just say that it"s a very bad course and that he/she should take another course. Because any other course would be a better choice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!» (Poor)
- Bad planned and to manny bad excuses frome teachers! » (Poor)
- This course need a major change, remove the FEM and change examinator so there can be some structure and good information.» (Poor)
- This course tries to combine many things and in the end achieves nothing. Awful administration and organization, very bad communication between lecturers/examiners and students. Definitely not recommended.» (Poor)
- Over 300 HP studied, this was by far the worst course attended. Would not recommend it to anyone.» (Poor)
- Interesting subjects overshadowed by poor planning from teachers and lack of interest from the teachers. Seemed like no one cared about the course.
The teachers thought they had a 7,5 hp course of their own.
No coordination, did they even speak to each other?» (Poor)
- When looking back, I have learnt something about forging, welding and casting but I could have learnt more if the FEM part was out. » (Fair)
- interesing aspects but not well educated with this organisation system.» (Fair)
14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Forming, welding and casting.»
- Change the FEM part! »
- Study visit good.»
- The casting simulation was good.»
- The welding part.»
- Hum... Hard question. No, but the information in the parts casting, welding and forming is good but they have to distribute the work load over the whole period and define before the course how they will greade. The study visit as ESAB was very good!»
- Casting simuhlations, but better pland. Nice to know before the same day that the simulations were that the mail with cad model was wrong. The study visit was nice.»
- Study Visit»
- study visit. »
- Casting and weld parts.»
- Everthing exept the FEM-part»
- Content except for FEM.»
15. What should definitely be changed to next year?- FEM and that "teacher" has to go. Give the time to the rest»
- Change the FEM part!»
- fem, poorly planned»
- More organized, an actual course PM that is followed, no FEM, not all examinations last week....»
- remove FEM, distribute examinations, less examinations»
- The Fem, casting simulation and the planning should be finished when the course start»
- The organization, the administration, the communication between the different professors and the FEM MUST be changed or even removed. In the course PM it says "intro of FEM", what we have had had not been a introduction of FEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!»
- FEM part to be removed»
- Fem, was extremely bad, too high level for basic fem. Bad planning over all in the course, I think a nine year old child could plan this course better.»
- FEM part»
- FEM. No need for doing such a demansing presentation without any previous knowledge or guidance. organisation of reports, assignments, exams and presentations so that not all of them are to be made the last week»
- FEM, remove, erase and obliterate.»
- the FEM part »
- Remove the FEM-part and have countinous examinations with interval of one or two weeks. »
- If it"s not used in any other part of the course, remove FEM altogether. As it is, this part was completely irrelevant. Irrelevant for students with FEM experience and too difficult for students without prior knowledge.
Split the course into separate courses to be able to get in-depth knowledge. Otherwise run it at "min-courses" one after the other and keep a better schedule.
NDT and X-ray "labs" seemed superfluous.»
- Make a proper course evaluation. Give each subject an own section.
Finnish one part before starting with the next. Spread out deadlines.
Put the dugga in the middle, Lv4.
Make a proper course-PM. This one was a joke. There is such an easy recipe (Structure, put ALL important info there such as exam dates, how the examination will be, name all mandatory parts, % weighed into the grade, structure the course literature well, organize it well, requirements and criteria for 3,4,5) JUST DO IT RIGHT! So many stuff that changed during the weeks (first it"s not graded, than it is, than someone changes his mind again).
Better preparation and lab instructions in welding.»
- Remove FEM or modify the contents of the lectures»
16. Additional comments- FEM course work should be changed.all the assignment deadlines and presentations are in the last week which increases the workload.It could be planned well »
- It gave a very fuzzy impression when the examiner was not present during the first lecture. We got no introduction and the FEM "teacher" was no help at all. »
- There are almost no information about what you need to do to get the different grades. Even at the "dugga" no limits where set. Also the group assignments where graded individually which is impossible to do. The course should be pass or no pass as it is today.»
- If this course will go next year I truly hope that you use the comments from the students to improve this course because this is supposed to be a master course, a good course, but this course doesn"t give that kind of knowledge that it should!»
- please be clear in stating the grading system and your expectations»
- If I have had the knowledge I have now about the course when I was choosing cours I would NEVER chosen this course!»
- too much workload. 1 exam for welding, 1 lab report for welding 2 presentations (casting - FEM), 2 exercise parts for forming, 2 reports (casting - welding). are all these necessary?? extremely strict grading for forming, casting and fem. for forming it"s unacceptable to get an answer for your exercise: very good work!!! and get a grade 3. who can take then 5 in forming?? only God?? »
- The course will definatlt give the students more if the examinations is more continiouns and not everything in the end. »
- Teachers attitude was embarrassing!
Kenneth attitude towards women/men?
Quotes from Gert:
"I am surprised of how well you performed, I did not expect you to take this seriously. You even made your own slides!" - condescending
"Didn"t you do this in secondary school? No? Well it"s the decline of the academic standard I see" - condescending again.
This was the worst organized course on Chalmers that I have attended. Why should I care if you don"t!?
I am so disappointed that this can be a course given by Chalmers University of Technology, is this what you want to show your students and exchange students!?
BAD, BAD, BAD just so BAD.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 1.72
Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 1.72
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.18