Visa resultat

Experimental design, KBT120

1. What type of student are you?

Master student»		18		60%
Biotechnology student»		1		3%
Exchange student»		8		26%
Other»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 1.86

- PhD» (Other)

2. If you are a Master student - are you?

Swedish»		12		57%
International»		9		42%

Genomsnitt: 1.42

3. Gender?

Male»		17		56%
Female»		13		43%

Genomsnitt: 1.43

Your own effort

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

29 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		4		13%
Around 20 hours/week»		9		31%
Around 25 hours/week»		10		34%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		6%
At least 35 hours/week»		4		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- It was more time towards the end with the project, MVD and the exam.» (Around 25 hours/week)

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

30 svarande

0%»		1		3%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		2		6%
75%»		11		36%
100%»		16		53%

Genomsnitt: 4.36

- Mostly of the exercises but not many lectures» (50%)
- more than 75% but not 100 %» (75%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

6. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		4		13%
The goals are difficult to understand»		1		3%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		14		48%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		10		34%

Genomsnitt: 3.03

- The goals are clearly in the lecture but are missing more or less totally in the exercises.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Its somtimes har to se how importent different parts are. Espasally in the MVDA part.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

27 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		1		3%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		23		85%
No, the goals are set too high»		3		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

- The goals are reasonable but,as I am not a quick learner, I need more time to achieve the goals» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- I feel that in particular the MVDA computer section contains far to much detail without enough teaching time. Especially because it is hard to learn to use a computer program in larger class sizes. The project could have been explained more clearly to begin with. I feel that many people did not understand what exactly was required. » (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		11		40%
Yes, definitely»		3		11%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		13		48%

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- My feeling is that many new (at least to me) methods were brought up at the exam. I had to learn new things during the exam.» (To some extent)
- The time given for MVDA computer examination is too short. We need to read the instruction, understand the question and data given, run evaluation in SIMCA and write report in just 1 hour. We were tested on speed more than understanding.» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

9. How was the subject coverage of the lectures ?

They covered too little material»		4		13%
About right»		15		51%
They covered somewhat too much material»		7		24%
They covered much too much material»		2		6%
Don"t know/did not attend»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 2.34

- The lectures covered the material well but the lecturing was a little bit to fast and could have used more time explaining the material» (About right)
- Everything was just gone over briefly. I would have liked a little more depth of the topic even if this means less material to go through.» (They covered somewhat too much material)
- A bit too much topic to be covered. No deep understanding on every topic» (They covered somewhat too much material)
- I personally did not like how the class material was presented. I did not like having the teachers using power point for a "Math" course. Also, it would have been nice to have simplified practice problems (ie. 2^2 factorial design instead of 2^6 which takes a long time to solve. Smaller problems would be easier to practice and comprehend the material and concepts)» (They covered much too much material)

10. How large part of the lectures offered did you attend?

30 svarande

0%»		1		3%
25%»		2		6%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		10		33%
100%»		17		56%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

11. To what extent did the lectures help you learning?

Small extent»		4		14%
Some extent»		11		39%
Large extent»		13		46%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.32

- reading lectures note on the web» (Small extent)
- Some theory was passed over to quickly to understand. » (Some extent)
- The lectures seemed to be an exact overview of the textbook. It would have been nice if the professor used his own examples and created his own notes instead of a power point presentation of the text book.» (Some extent)
- The lectures was very good but it went too fast.» (Large extent)

12. What do you think of the lectures of Claes Niklasson?

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		1		3%
Adequate»		3		10%
Good»		15		51%
Excellent»		9		31%

Genomsnitt: 4.03

- dont know» (?)
- It would have been good with a little better explanation on how to use the different techniques in reality with some examples» (Adequate)
- I think Claes Niklasson is an excellent professor, however I personally did not like his teaching methods (ie. power point presentation of the textbook). » (Good)
- I like that the teaching were based on examples/problems» (Good)
- From the way he conducts thelecturer,he seems to be an energetic lecturer. He conduct the lecture in easier understandable way by using some example.His lecture really enjoyable and informative.» (Excellent)

13. What do you think about the lecture by Magdalena Svanström

Bad»		1		4%
Fair»		1		4%
Adequate»		10		43%
Good»		7		30%
Excellent»		4		17%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- dont know» (?)
- I did not attend» (?)
- She is a lecturer who enthusiastic about the environment and her course management/arrangement is excellent. One"s manner can influencde by her especially in environment awareness.» (Excellent)

14. What do you think of the lectures by Jonas Sjöblom?

Poor»		3		10%
Fair»		4		13%
Adequate»		8		27%
Good»		13		44%
Excellent»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.17

- dont know» (?)
- Hard to understand, most of the time due to his too quite voice. » (Poor)
- Jonas was not able to explain the MVDA at the proper level for students with no previous experience of MVDA. He used a too advanced level in his explanations.» (Poor)
- Perhaps trying to teach to much to quickly. » (Fair)
- N/A» (Good)
- well presented, well prepared, good english. but he is so into his work that he somteimes don"t see what could be difficult for us (who are new to the field). The computer presentations are in a too small format = difficult to see.» (Good)

15. What do you think about the lectures by Carl Johan Franzen

Bad»		1		4%
Fair»		4		16%
Adequate»		9		36%
Good»		10		40%
Excellent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- dont know» (?)
- I did not attend» (?)
- It was hard to now what you should learn and how.» (Adequate)
- N/A» (Good)
- Well structured.» (Good)

16. What is your opinion about having a discussion-lecture concerning Sustainability in this course in experimental design

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

Small extent»		2		6%
Some extent»		12		40%
Large extent»		13		43%
Great extent»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- I learned the most from this class when the lecturers solved written examples (not power point) in the class.» (Some extent)

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

Small extent»		1		3%
Some extent»		4		13%
Large extent»		16		53%
Great extent»		9		30%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

- Montgomery - good MVDA - not needed to do the course. Maybe good in the furutre Examples - better answers are badly needed!. To large lack of answers and no explanations! Se further comments. » (Large extent)
- The textbook was a great supplement.» (Great extent)
- You cant learn all without the book, but you could read things you miss at thr lecturs» (Great extent)
- The literature is great!!» (Great extent)

19. What do you think about the tutorials/calculations?

Poor»		4		13%
Fair»		6		20%
Adequate»		10		33%
Good»		8		26%
Excellent»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- Attend on a calculation lecture and went after 15min... cant hear what he says and what he write on the board (Rodmar, was haveing the calculation)» (Poor)
- Jan Rodmar is not a good teacher. He barely speaks English and it´,s very hard to see what he is writhing. And when he don´,t know what to say ha speaks Swedish, which makes it vary hard for the international students.» (Poor)
- Very hard to hear what the teacher was saying. Very hard to read the handwriting on the board. To little time for the examples - we were always behind the schedule. Good intentions from the teacher, but he does not reaach through to the students. » (Poor)
- I only attended the first calculation. Rodmar is a good advisor for one student, but I can"t hear what he say, and I cant read what he write. This makes it difficult.» (Poor)
- Sometimes difficult to follow Jan Rodmars, and his writing on the board was unclear. Full solutions should be given for at least a few exercises on each chapter in the exercise compendium. especially the later chapter, 10,11,13» (Fair)
- It would have been good if Jan used real numbers instead of general letters when doing the calculations, since it was hard to understand how to use the letters for calculating even the same exercise as he had done previously on the black board» (Adequate)
- Jan Rodmar really knows his subject, but there are several problems with his teaching. His English is hard to follow and he has difficulties to understand our questions. He should need to talk louder (microphone?). Especially since he is often talking to the black-board instead of the class. He should also plan so he keeps the schedule. » (Adequate)
- Harder than exam problem. More of easier problems to start each chapter.» (Adequate)
- They were relevant but badly planed.» (Adequate)
- A little more details in the answers provided would be good. Some steps in the calculations are skipped which is confusing.» (Good)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		0		0%
Rather well»		20		66%
Very well»		10		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- Very good with printed handouts at al the lectures! » (Rather well)

21. How well did the optimization/experimental design project support your learning of the subject?

Poor»		2		6%
Fair»		2		6%
Adequate»		9		30%
Good»		9		30%
Excellent»		8		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- Very bad planning, and confusing in the optimazation. When we finlaly understdo what to do we made it in one day including the report. NOT GOOD» (Poor)
- It didn"t help at all. It was mostly a guessing game, and the advisor (Rodmar) was busy helping other groups al the scheduled excercises. I learned most of the course after the project was finished.» (Poor)
- In the end it helped learning but I felt that if the assignment was made clearer from the beginning it would have been easier. » (Adequate)
- It increases my understanding to a small deal, and my experience to a larger extent. » (Adequate)
- Allways good with practical work.» (Excellent)

22. What do you think about the optimization project?

23. How well do you think that the optimization project supports your learning about the course content?

none»		0		0%
some»		4		13%
adequate»		4		13%
good»		13		44%
very good»		4		13%
excellent»		4		13%

Genomsnitt: 4

24. How well do you think that the MVA (Multi Variate Analysis) project supports your learning about this subject?

30 svarande

Poor»		3		10%
Fair»		7		23%
Adequate»		8		26%
Good»		10		33%
Excellent»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 3.03

- It is hard to learn a computer program from just two lessons especially when the number of staff does not permit all students to be able to ask individual questions. » (Fair)
- The three lectures are not enough to understand it. All most of the people did was to figure out how to run the program and make some fortune telling about the results. » (Fair)
- The theory was ok. But the examination form was not so good. Maybe it should be a larger project instead of an exam.» (Fair)
- It"s ok but move the Mvda exam back on week, and use that time for exam consultation. Or remove it altogether and set higher standards on the project.» (Adequate)
- You learn som basic things.» (Adequate)
- The project gave a lot but my group got no help at all at the MVDA-consaltation.» (Adequate)
- There is a large need for more teachers. When doing the project, Jonas was in our room the first hour, where he just checked that everyone was there and helped us decide on what needed to be done. Then, just when people had gotten started and started to get questions, he had to leave for one hour to get the other class started. He then returned for one hour, where he had time to help approximately 30 % of the students then he had to go beck to the other class again. This ment that 70 % of the students did not get any help with their project at all, whole 30 % did. This is both unfair and frustrating and it felt like wasted time. The project in itself is however good, but there is a need for more teachers.» (Good)
- Need to be clear on the ambition level of the MVDA-part. Give it a own course so we can learn more» (Good)
- The project was good, but it was difficult to find proper data.» (Good)
- Good way to get into simca» (Excellent)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		3		10%
Rather poor»		6		20%
Rather good»		11		36%
Very good»		8		26%
I did not seek help»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Imposible to get help almos!» (Very poor)
- The only time scheduled for questions disappeared. Otherwise there were only time for questions during the pause in the middle of the class. Not so efficient.» (Very poor)
- It takes to long before you get help. It must be more teachers in the optimization/experimental design project.» (Rather poor)
- Sometimes we did"t get any help at all in 4 hour at the Wednesdays» (Rather poor)
- Great to have solutions available! It helped a lot!» (Rather good)
- Not good at all when it came to the project (during the class, after class it was good).» (Rather good)
- Good in general, but poor in the optimization project.» (Rather good)
- Jan Rodmar always have time for students. Excellent.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		2		6%
Rather poorly»		2		6%
Rather well»		8		26%
Very well»		16		53%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- It is very bad to be forced to work with a student who hardly speak english and cannot write a report either. I had to do most of the work myself.» (Very poorly)
- That was the only way of help, by talking to othre students !» (Very well)
- I have a very nice groupmate in both optimization and MVDA projects. He helps me a lot in both the course"s knowledge and other useful information that I need to know as a intertional student.» (Very well)

27. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		14		46%
High»		13		43%
Too high»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- This could be more evenly spread out.» (Adequate)
- High but not to high. » (High)
- If the work with the project where splited equaliy between the members it would have been good. But it is not to good if one has to do all work alone.» (Too high)

28. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		13		43%
High»		11		36%
Too high»		6		20%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- Togheter with the other madiatory cours it is to much some weeks, but not all the time. Could maybe plan better together?» (High)
- Alot of different presentations were required in Global chemical sustainability.» (Too high)
- But I"m studying at 150%» (Too high)
- But that depended that I took 3 courses. » (Too high)

Summarizing questions

29. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		6%
Adequate»		4		13%
Good»		20		66%
Excellent»		4		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.86

- The content is very good, but the course organisation is very bad/poor !» (Good)
- Very useful knowledge for an engineer.» (Good)

30. Level of information presented in the course was:

too low»		0		0%
reasonable»		26		89%
too high»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 2.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

31. Do you think the course should cover more or fewer topics?

more»		1		3%
reasonable»		22		73%
fewer»		7		23%

Genomsnitt: 2.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- If they are thought a little more into depth so the understanding is easier.» (reasonable)
- Skip the placket burman. It is good to know that it exists, but there has to be more of both lecturetime and exercises on it if we should really learn it. I think it is better to skip it than to focus more on it. Put more time on experiments with random factors, mixtures or nested design instead.» (fewer)

32. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

33. What should definitely be changed to next year?

34. Additional comments