Aktuella utvärderingar

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.

Computer Security, EDA263

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-09-22 - 2008-11-31
Antal svar: 70
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: ?%
Kontaktperson: Roger Johansson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

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.

69 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»19 27%
Around 20 hours/week»25 36%
Around 25 hours/week»15 21%
Around 30 hours/week»9 13%
At least 35 hours/week»1 1%

Genomsnitt: 2.24

- I have 3 courses per study period» (At most 15 hours/week)
- about 5 hours tops...» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Reports entail an enormous amount of homework!» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

69 svarande

0%»1 1%
25%»8 11%
50%»7 10%
75%»26 37%
100%»27 39%

Genomsnitt: 4.01

- Read another course where the Lectures collided with this course.» (25%)
- Interesting lectures, but you have to study about lot of subject, and the book is a little bit complicate.» (50%)
- Overlap with other courses» (75%)
- it was great» (75%)
- I missed 4 classes in the beginning because i arrived late.» (75%)
- I had been not in Sweden for two weeks. The rest I attended 100%.» (75%)
- The best way with no coursebook» (100%)
- Very good teacher, good pace and clear. » (100%)
- Skipped only a few due to lecture-content that was already known to me.» (100%)
- - 1 course.» (100%)

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?

69 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»12 17%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»23 33%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»34 49%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

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.

60 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»55 91%
No, the goals are set too high»2 3%

Genomsnitt: 1.98

- not seen the goals» (?)
- But the area the course covers is huge. It is hard to understand the dept of the knowledge of each subject to have.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- The course could go further I think (especially from a practical point of view).» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

64 svarande

No, not at all»2 3%
To some extent»37 57%
Yes, definitely»17 26%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»8 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.48

- Many topics where left out. E.g: security policy....» (No, not at all)
- The exam did not cover all aspects (e.g Information hiding, steganography and covert channels, UNIX security). On the other hand, some questions were too specific (like dealing with Kerberos details). Furthermore, the exam mainly checks whether the student has learnt a lot of terms by heart by asking to give definitions.» (To some extent)
- The yes/no-question was in my opinion not well suited to check if one understood the CC-topic.» (To some extent)
- In this sort of "overwiew" course, an exam about specific details like this one does not verify the understanding that well. An exam with problems to solve, "what concept to apply here?", "give a solution to this problem" etc. would have been a better way to measure results.» (To some extent)
- Examination assessed the reaching of some goals, while the laborations saw to other goals.» (To some extent)
- The grade definitely tells if I have succeeded :)» (Yes, definitely)
- becuase the time was fewer than that i can finish book» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

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

69 svarande

Small extent»7 10%
Some extent»22 31%
Large extent»31 44%
Great extent»9 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- It would have been very helpful if I had actually gone to the lectures.» (Small extent)
- Rather too fast to take meaningful notes, but nevertheless helpful.» (Some extent)
- Could be better...» (Some extent)
- Some parts of the lectures were very obvious.» (Some extent)
- To pass the course reading the slides and the book may be enough.» (Some extent)
- the book was in no way organized. » (Large extent)

7. To what extent has the laboratory excercises been of help for your learning?

69 svarande

Small extent»7 10%
Some extent»21 30%
Large extent»30 43%
Great extent»11 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.65 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The labs were to easy, didn"t learn very much from them, make them more challenging.» (Small extent)
- The laboratory excercises where to simple and didnt help my learning at all...» (Small extent)
- Kind of easy labs, the most time and effort was to answer the questions, but the actual work in the lab was minimal» (Some extent)
- Lab1 helpful, but timeconsuming Lab2 interesting, less help for learning Lab3 poor» (Some extent)
- you can cut short each lab and increase number small labs, that perhaps give us a broad idea!» (Some extent)
- time for practical is less.» (Some extent)
- From my point of view practical exercises are very beneficial to learn.» (Large extent)
- good labs» (Great extent)

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

68 svarande

Small extent»10 14%
Some extent»16 23%
Large extent»35 51%
Great extent»7 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

- What coursebook?» (?)
- Papers seemed outdated, for example in one lecture, there was a reference to a paper that stated that the MTTF could be over 5000 years for a program, the research was from 1984. Since computer science and programing languages is a very fast growing field i find it hard to believe that 24 years old research is still accurate. Handouts was also pretty old, it would be more intresting with more up to date information. » (Small extent)
- I think the book is a very bad choice and I regret very much, that I spent so much money for it (not because it was so expensive but because it was so bad). I think it is ill-structured, bad in explaining things and very often too informal when it should be formel and sometimes trying to be formal where it is not necessary and therefore missleading. Many of the illustrations could be made much better, too.» (Small extent)
- No coursebook» (Small extent)
- The book is very hard to read, it isn"t complicated it just doesn"t feel motivating. » (Small extent)
- A book with 781 pages is much to read. Subtracting excluded parts, there still remain about 600 pages. Maybe tighten reading instruction?» (Large extent)
- The book provided a lot of information.» (Large extent)
- But I did not buy the book - everything was accessible from the net ,)» (Great extent)

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

69 svarande

Very badly»2 2%
Rather badly»5 7%
Rather well»39 56%
Very well»23 33%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- Laboration 2 took sevral weeks to get back...» (Very badly)
- it took very long to get feedback on lab2, forcing us to spend extra time at the very end of the course.» (Rather badly)
- it was ok. BUT lab registration did NOT work. PLEASE put it on studieportalen. This is a university of TECHNOLOGY - COMPUTER science department. Sharpen up!» (Rather badly)
- lecture notes etc was pretty good. Lab administration was not very good, it took very long time to get the labs corrected and the handin form was bad, for example why should you sign up to a group using the student portal but sign up for a specific lab occation using a hand written paper, why not use the student portal for that also?. One more thing, why doesn"t lab handins use the fire system? It is so much easier.» (Rather well)
- The home page could be made more functional. For example with links to slides, downloads and specially the lab page at a left frame or at the top of the page!» (Rather well)
- Well organized, yet we had to wait a long time for the result for Lab2.» (Very well)
- Everything was perfectly clear.» (Very well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.65

Study climate

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

69 svarande

Very poor»1 1%
Rather poor»2 2%
Rather good»27 39%
Very good»24 34%
I did not seek help»15 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- It was over crowed.» (Very poor)
- Large class few assistans» (Rather poor)
- In the labs not so good» (Rather good)
- There where too many people at the labs.» (Rather good)
- In my opinion it could be more interactive. Both the lectures and the lab assignment. » (Very good)

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

68 svarande

Very poorly»1 1%
Rather poorly»8 11%
Rather well»23 33%
Very well»31 45%
I did not seek cooperation»5 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- I worked with an international student who had read 5 years on another university, this student did not know any programming (even though previous program was software engineering) at all so I had to teach which held me back a great deal.» (Rather poorly)
- We actually did not have the opportunity to get to know other students. People from same nationalities were grouped together and we did not have the chance to use other students" knowledge and experiences. As an example I had never worked with Unix and Linux before. Neither did my partner! So we had a hard time learning to use it alone! But if both of us was grouped with a person who knew it, we could have a better outcome. I mean it was better if the lab grouping was random.» (Rather poorly)
- Please make random groups for labs, otherwise everybody stays with the students from his/her home country.» (Rather poorly)
- Work groups with teacher assistens would be good» (Rather well)

12. How was the course workload?

69 svarande

Too low»1 1%
Low»7 10%
Adequate»41 59%
High»17 24%
Too high»3 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- More excersises and harder laborations!» (Too low)
- The workload to follow the lecture was not too much, however what had to be learned for the exam was much more and often in my opinion not relevant (remembering abbreviations I probably will never need anymore - even if so, could be looked up fast).» (Adequate)
- Alot of material to read in this course, some chapters in the book are not fun at all and not easy read but overall it"s ok» (High)
- Labs, reports, large book» (High)
- I would say high but adequate. Since it was an introductory course it had to have such a workload.» (High)
- Especially during the last weeks.» (High)
- Because of my partner.» (Too high)

13. How was the total workload this study period?

69 svarande

Too low»1 1%
Low»6 8%
Adequate»30 43%
High»20 28%
Too high»12 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- More excersises and harder laborations!» (Too low)
- I did not study any other course so..» (Low)
- I had an extra course left from bachelors.. else, it is WAY to low speed.» (Adequate)
- Especially during the last weeks.» (High)
- Have choosen the wrong courses :)» (Too high)
- Because of my partner. International students who cannot program (or miss vital skills about the program) should not rely on other students to teach them and get free rides.» (Too high)
- Since I wasn"t familiar with the quarter based study period I always had problem with estimating the required time for study! But I finally learned.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

69 svarande

Poor»2 2%
Fair»5 7%
Adequate»13 18%
Good»38 55%
Excellent»11 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Too slow, sure it"s the first security course on chalmers. But most of the students are in their 4th or 5th year so you can demand some prior knowledge in the field. The first 5-8 lectures felt like basic repetition» (Fair)
- Some parts in the beginning of the course was good, but the latter parts was in my opinion rather bad. For example the CC-part was far too big, in my opinion CC could just be mentioned, not going so deep into the certain expression of it, i do not think learning acronyms is a good way of learning something. I also think that the security modelling part is quite diffuse/abstract and hard to put in the context.» (Fair)
- I think the course and especially the exam require too much memorisation and too less understanding.» (Fair)
- Very interesting and important topic - but the approach could be better: Although it is intended only to give an overview, a more scientific approach to the presented details would sometimes help: When distinguishing between different types of attacks for example there was no good definition for them that stated clearly what is a unique property of each of them. In other topics often bulleted lists were presented that distinguished the topic on different dimensions at the same time.» (Adequate)
- basic good to have knowledge. You are supposed to know these things. Skip the object system model though.» (Adequate)
- Interesting, good teaching» (Good)
- Both a difficult (because many many concepts to acquire in a few time) and excellent course (very rich, good for starting in computer security world).» (Good)
- A good introduction course for computer security.» (Good)
- Erland"s a very good teacher. He"s hat-in-hand, knowledgeable and caring.» (Excellent)
- I learned much more than I expected before the course started.» (Excellent)

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The lab is excellent. We can learn much actual skills.»
- ibm slides in the last lecture»
- the professor»
- Lecturer :). »
- The labs.»
- information about certain types of attacks and how to protect a system from them(sql-inj,buffer overflow etc). In my opinion this part should be more advanced.»
- The Professor, the slides»
- The laboratories»
- the lab format and how the labs cover very different topics»
- Information about cryptography»
- I don´,t know.»
- staff»
- The Teacher.»
- The labs.»
- labs»
- the professor»
- Laboratories»
- Laborations.»
- His finishing remarks on the last lecture.»
- the teacher»
- structure of lectures»
- The teachers clear lessons. The teacher!»
- teacher»
- Laborations»
- The teacher! He is so enthusiasm about teaching this topic.»
- everything in the course in this quarter is necessary»
- Slides on the portal.»
- concentration on theortical study is equal to the practical studies.»
- Pretty much everything.»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The labs! More resources if the number of students, attending is high. Consider using a programming language, familiar to majority´,of students. Use C with Realtime extensions or something similiar. The biggest handicap in the course was ADA95.»
- More difficult labs»
- nothing.»
- content fo lab 2»
- the slides of the course because are not well related with the book»
- web based related problems like group join, exam notice, etc.»
- Require some prior knowledge so that those who are intrested in security dont fall asleep»
- Lab administration, use fire and the student portal, do not use regular paper to sign up for labs. CC, learning acronyms is not good Exam, YES/NO questions on an exam without having to motivate your choice, seriously a little more effort please.»
- Questions in the lab are not always clear, Assistants there are not always able to help »
- The professor should not recommend to read an entire chapter of the book while he only explains part of it.»
- nothing»
- Harder laborations»
- More understanding, less memorisation.»
- It already very good.»
- some literature we studied in the end e.g common criteria and echelon was not quite interesting. And exam included an objective question that was from common criteria, objectives should demand logic rather than memory.»
- Maybe some of the sources updated - or at least checked if still valid. If a slide refers to a source from 1983 I would be more motivated to look at if it was at least argued, that this is still relevant today.»
- lab registration & exam»
- group member should be assigned by the teacher»
- Random group pairing must be enforced (probably for all the labs). A forum or mailing list should be created for exchange of ideas and discussing labs, course, etc with lab instructors.»
- grouping students»
- maybe a more interesting book with less general information. Including more "mandatory-to-read" Papers in course material could work very well to be up to date.»
- Stricter look up on students and their capabilities.»
- more practical world knowledge»
- Nothing in particular»
- The grouping of lab groups should be random. The design of the home page should be more comfortable. As an example I can mention the very good design if the home page for Cryptography course (TDA351). And I think it"s good to notice that a perquisite for this course is a general knowledge about Unix, Linux and C programming.»
- Didn"t take the course because it had the same schedule as fault tolerant systems. Isn"t the students supposed to be interested in both secure and fault tolerant systems?»
- nothing special»
- We should move faster into the details. The first five lectures was sometimes rather obvious (ie, password length..)»
- Maybe more guide for knowing what is important or not in the book.»
- The way Lab groups are made.»
- It would be good if there where a few more examples of recent incidents/viruses etc.»

17. Additional comments

- more practical usage should be added.»
- Good course and a teacher who knows what he is talking about»
- Other than that pretty good course, good lecturer.»
- First part of the course very interesting, second part (security models, common criteria) rather boring»
- None.»
- The ethics topic was in my opinion not well motivated (neither in the lecture, nor in the book) and got only about 10 minutes lecture time (although we were told to read the book on our own, I think the topic is too important to "get rid of it" that way). Instead of jumping direclty into ethical-vocabulary (and learning that by heart for the exam almost without thinking about it) one could talk a lot about the relevance of privacy for a society or other related examples.»
- I think there should be some short tutorial about linux and security in linux. Most of us haven"t worked in linux before and felt lot of difficulty in understanding and running the commands well in enviornment.»
- I had a general loss of interest in studying during this period, so any answer that seems criticising should be seen in that light. »
- very understandable lectures, perfect english and voice clearness.»
- Good and interesting course»
- I"ve not liked some exam questions.Because some of them was didn"t like as exam questions.For example:In 2nd question written that:"Give brief&comprehensive explanation.." ,confusing here»
- Totally the course was really really good! I learned a lot of new things that I find useful for my career. The teacher was so well-behaved,knowledgeable and responsible that I had never seen before in my home university! And it was a very nice encouraging course for starting my studies at Chalmers.»
- none»
- It was a nice course, I liked it»
- I THINK if we are useing the practice of question answer that is successfully pedagogy. At least this sort of pedagogy acknowledges the gravity of the remedial task.»

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.65
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.55

Kursutvärderingssystem från