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.

Advanced Computer Aided Design evaluation, PPU080

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-10-20 - 2008-11-30
Antal svar: 58
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 68%
Kontaktperson: Andreas Dagman»
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.

55 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»9 16%
Around 20 hours/week»18 32%
Around 25 hours/week»17 30%
Around 30 hours/week»8 14%
At least 35 hours/week»3 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- This course was rather time consuming.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- Was doing the project work by my self.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- Much more than 35 because it was very fun and easy to learn Catia. Which made it easy to use from the start. The RD&T program was much harder to get a grip on and it feels like it gets a little bit squeezed into the course. Of course it was fun to learn and use aswell, and it is a realy powerfull and interesting tool. But in my opinion it could be a 7.5 p course by its own. And that would be much nicer because then you realy get to learn the program. I would definately take a 7.5 p course in RD&T if it was offered.» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

55 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»9 16%
50%»12 21%
75%»18 32%
100%»16 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.74

- the lectures where ineffective and influenced by bad planning» (25%)
- The lectures are irrelevant for the skills needed in CATIA and are also badly performed.» (25%)
- Only read from the slides. No adding value» (25%)
- I had some Catia experience already» (25%)
- Due to other course conflicting in the schedule» (25%)
- kursen krockade med en annan så jag kunde inte gå på alla föreläsningarna.» (25%)
- Attended most lectures, but only the first exercise.» (50%)
- Nothing was learned from the lectures that could be read in the pdf:s.» (50%)
- Did not need the exercises at the end of the term» (75%)
- Very good with time for exercises in the computer rooms.» (75%)
- The other course I took this quarter often overlaped with this course. Otherwise, I would have attended 100%.» (75%)
- Some of them didn"t feel important so I left half way through.» (100%)
- i only missed one half of a lecture» (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?

55 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»9 16%
The goals are difficult to understand»5 9%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»21 38%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»20 36%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- the extra tasks were very diffuse. Didnt knwo how much there were supposed to be done on each task.» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- It was very unclear at the beginning (before the course started) what the course was all about. It was not mentioned anywhere that it was 80% Catia modelling.» (The goals are difficult to understand)

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.

48 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»5 10%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»42 87%
No, the goals are set too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.91

- But the RD&T part of the course was rushed and I didn"t feel that I learned that part at all as thorough as Catia. That is acheiving the RD&T golas was more focused on just doing that rather than learning the program.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- But I guess they were reasonable» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

50 svarande

No, not at all»7 14%
To some extent»31 62%
Yes, definitely»9 18%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»3 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.16

- The examination has nothing to do with being able to cad and is not relevant in this type of course. It feels like it"s there just because there should be an exam.» (No, not at all)
- A written exam is definitively redundant! The project works is the best way of examination» (To some extent)
- Nothing that we did in project could be linked to the examination.» (To some extent)
- The main part was to understand and handle Catia. If that was not a goal i have totally misunderstand the goals.» (To some extent)
- I´,m not sure how my understanding of CATIA whould be improved by the lectures given.» (To some extent)
- The questions/answers were mostly "repeat after me".» (To some extent)
- There were some really weird questions on the exam... collision and z-buffer?» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

6. Was the setup of the project work good for learning CAD and CAT systems?

(e.g. excavator model, extra points for using new modules, ...)

55 svarande

No, not at all»1 1%
To some extent»4 7%
Adequate»13 23%
Yes»19 34%
Yes, definitely»18 32%

Genomsnitt: 3.89

- The information should have been clearer. Much time was spent on figuring out which level the details should be and many things had to be done again.» (To some extent)
- Good with a project, but too little guidance, goals, requirements for how the work should be performed by the students and valued by the teachers.» (To some extent)
- Because the project was done in pairs it was common that the different parts of the excavator were divided between the two and hence some important tools such as parameterisation was only learned by one individual. I am not saying the project should not be done in pairs, but that perhaps two parts should include parameterisation.» (To some extent)
- Gjorde ju bara samma sak många gånger. Alldeles för många som gjorde en riktigt ful/enkel kropp och sedan bara tjatade sig til extrapoängen...» (To some extent)
- The idea of the project work is good but the information on how to carry it out is spread out over at least three different sources. The definition of what extra tasks that will be accepted is also very vague.» (Adequate)
- To work in pairs are very good for problem solving. The excavator was a reasonable project to model, and had a nice variety with different parts. The setup for extra points didn"t really promote learning since it many times was easier to skim through many modules than learn them thouroughly. You didn"t benefit to the grade to look deeper into some things. Also it was more effective to divide work and work one by one, which lead to that one in the pairs didn"t get any experience of Geometry Assurance, Parametrization etc. There could have been more guidance on how to approach a CAD project, it was clear what you should do but sometimes unclear how to approach it and get it all together.» (Adequate)
- It was a fun project» (Yes)
- But also here, there was a lack of what level the exavater´,s parts should be at.A lot of the time in the beginning was mostly examine how an exavator is constructed. » (Yes)
- I think the project was relly inspiering. The description of RDnt was also very good, I understood the program and the result good in the end. The interaction between the excavator and RDnT was good. Didn"t do so manny extra tasks, wasnt that motivated to do that. That was however influenced by a poor colaboration in my group.» (Yes)
- project is the one which needs to be continued in future for the course as we learn more from the project in CAD and CAT tools» (Yes, definitely)
- Very good project. I"ve learned a lot» (Yes, definitely)
- Good that extrapoints were given for extra modules instead as it were last year» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

55 svarande

Small extent»19 34%
Some extent»27 49%
Large extent»9 16%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.81

- Change the teacher. The lectures were a joke.» (Small extent)
- None extent!!» (Small extent)
- The people teaching has to be more involved, not just standing in front of the class reading word by word from the slides.» (Small extent)
- I skipped all lectures and read the PDF:s. Had Catia basic knowledge from the beginning.» (Small extent)
- Alldeles för många slides och bara rabbling av vad som stod på dem. Kunde ju inget egentligen! En anledning att salen bara var halvfull. De flesta gick inte dit..» (Small extent)
- Had some difficulties in the english language.» (Some extent)
- Most of the learning was through the online help.» (Some extent)
- A large part of the theoretical information for the exam is not really» (Some extent)

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

55 svarande

Small extent»15 27%
Some extent»20 36%
Large extent»17 30%
Great extent»3 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.14

- The Catia book was good.» (Small extent)
- Expensive book that is only used during the first 2 weeks and is only useful to understand the basic. A more advanced book could is needed.» (Small extent)
- Didn"t even open the course book, nor did the tasks in it» (Small extent)
- using the CAT tools especially RD&T was used mostly from literature» (Some extent)
- The CATIA book exercises were good.» (Large extent)
- The Catia book with examples was good. Sometimes the explanations feel a little drawn out and redundant. But its understandable that it is hard to find relevant literature. The exercises for RD&T were good.» (Large extent)
- The lecture slides was my only knowledge source to pass the exam.» (Great extent)
- The exercises was good for my learning» (Great extent)

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

54 svarande

Very badly»1 1%
Rather badly»7 12%
Rather well»30 55%
Very well»16 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- Smarteam funka inte. Lägga ut Cathia filen på portalen istället för CD» (Rather badly)
- smartTeam is a joke.» (Rather badly)
- SMARTeam didnt work and it took too long time to get the different parts in the project graded.» (Rather badly)
- What happened to "smart team"?» (Rather badly)
- Information was difficult to get a hold of, because vital information was not collected into one document. You would have to look at many documents to get the entire information e.g. infortmaion vital to the project. Hence it was difficult to know if you actually did the right thing in the project, becuase maybe you would have missed something. And the instructions for the project were bad. Like the parameterisation of the wheel, how the wheel was to be parameterised was not at all mentioned. more than just me thought that the ENTIRE wheel was to be parameterised. This is an important piece of info but this did not come across to the students. There were more examples like this but i will not go through them. » (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

55 svarande

Very poor»1 1%
Rather poor»6 10%
Rather good»27 49%
Very good»20 36%
I did not seek help»1 1%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- För få bokade timmar i datorsalarna. Kunde få vänta i två timmar och sedan gå utan att ha fått hjälp!» (Rather poor)
- Too few teachers/too many students» (Rather good)
- In the beginning it was good, in the end more extra help would have been appreciated.» (Rather good)
- Good in the beginning. In the end they were tied up with grading the projects» (Rather good)
- Good at first, but later on when we wanted to show our work, it took about 1 hour to be examined» (Rather good)
- I felt that the teachers did not have more than basic Catia knowledge.» (Rather good)
- But more time in the computer rooms whould have been nice. especially in the end of the course when everyone wanted to be approved.» (Rather good)
- It depended. Near the finish of the course» (Rather good)

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

55 svarande

Very poorly»1 1%
Rather poorly»1 1%
Rather well»12 21%
Very well»41 74%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- Didnt work well in my group, my colleage didnt do the exercices in the beginning of the course. So he had poor knowlege of CATIA in the beginning of the project. » (Rather poorly)

12. How was the course workload?

55 svarande

Too low»1 1%
Low»2 3%
Adequate»45 81%
High»6 10%
Too high»1 1%

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- A lot of time spent on the project, but why must there be an exam? Make the project bigger and skip the exam!» (Adequate)
- The basic parts required quite a lot of work, but still adequate I think. The extra points felt unbalanced, too easy to get full points without learning that much. The exam was too simple, and the result from the exam meant less than the extra tasks.» (Adequate)
- A bit too high due to that I worked by myself» (High)
- With catia exercises, project, extra exercises and especially RDnT + an examina with a LOT of pages to go through, the course is rather extensive. It might be better with a "dugga" and put more focus on the catia model for grading.» (Too high)

13. How was the total workload this study period?

55 svarande

Too low»1 1%
Low»3 5%
Adequate»35 63%
High»11 20%
Too high»5 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- Personally i was into another course which was a project in automotive engineering and so i had to find time for the project both in Adv. CAD and other course as well prepare for the exam.» (High)
- Had three courses. And this course took a lot more time than expected.» (Too high)
- However, this was more due to my own ambitions increasing my workload. » (Too high)

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

54 svarande

Poor»7 12%
Fair»11 20%
Adequate»10 18%
Good»22 40%
Excellent»4 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

- There is nothing advanced about this course. The level should be increased.» (Poor)
- Well you told us about the Catia introduction, but besides that...» (Poor)
- It could be greatly improved.» (Poor)
- The lack of information and instruction in the project brought down my impression of the course. » (Fair)
- lectures where not very understandable» (Fair)
- I really know Catia by now.» (Adequate)
- I love modelling, good project. The examn didnt gave much (I will not construct my own cad software), better to concentrate on modelling and create advanced stuff in catia. That is really something to put in your CV. SKIP EXAMN» (Good)
- A fun course that gave a very good solid foundation for 3D modelling.» (Good)
- There were too few computers at some occations.» (Good)

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the excavator task.»
- The project.»
- the project»
- The telling about the Catia book.»
- A project with extra assignments.»
- the extra task evaluation system»
- The project»
- The project work.»
- the project work is very good for student learn how to work with CATIA!»
- The project work.»
- project should e preserved for the next year »
- -The project, building up something from your own thoughts. -Amer, he was great, and nice.»
- The project was fun»
- Catia project»
- CAD-exercises»
- Some kind of project work.»
- More interesting information being presented with an English that is better than the lecturers english, he is very smart and everything but he just can"t speak english.»
- The project work was very good, and it is good that you have time to really learn the programme. The introductory exercises from Xdin was also good and easy to follow. »
- The project as it is now»
- The project.»
- THe CAD and CAT part»
- Project work»
- The course litterature»
- The idea behind the project is good and should be kept n the course. »
- the project work.»
- The project was good and should be preserved.»
- the project work»
- The integration of CAD and CAT»
- The Catia project, since it was through this that you learned something..»
- The excavator seems like a good thing to model. RD&T was interesting to use.»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- the form of the lectures.»
- The lectures and the level.»
- planning, lectures, excersizes with help etc.»
- The classes, something drastic needs to be done..»
- Contents of lessons, no exam should be carried out, the type of project should be changed (excavator has been done for several years), a clear definition of the task is needed (in one place), and the book isn"t great either. »
- the style of lectures»
- The exam, why have one when it seems totally unnecessary? »
- Have clearer requirements on what is expected on the extra points.»
- easier write exam»
- Make the RD&T part to an course by itself. You can mention it in this course for orientational purposes but it should be a course by itself.»
- I think that a written exam is a very poor way to test the skills in a course like this. I wouldäve preferred if the project work was expanded instead.»
- if planning to have project with grade till 6, then i think exam is really not necessary as we learn most of the thing in the project itself, but at the same time having extra tasks for more grades can still be followed with no written exam.»
- -More explaination about why and how one should think when building something in catia. -More detailed project explaination. »
- Make the project bigger and skip the exame.»
- How the parts are graded. For example make time to grade the manditory parts first (takes less time) and then grade the extra parts in the end.»
- no tenta, maybe a small dugga and a bigger project with hand in rapport or something»
- You could consider making a large project work and skip the exam»
- Fokusera mer på det prakitiska. Teorin är ganska dåli. Större delar av den känns helt orelevant. varför koncentrerar man sig inte på att undervisa i hur man som bäst bygger upp en CAD-ritning? Tips om hur man bör tänka lite, och inte bara säga attman bör tänka till innan man ritar!»
- Skip all weird stuff about beizer formulas, decomposition & constructive models, etc. that you will have no use of in real life. These things are all ready formulated in the softwares you will use.»
- less focus on how CAD-programs work»
- Some lecturesw were so irrelevant to CATIA or 3D modelling. The lecture content should be reconsidered. Some info or tutorials about other CATIA modules would be useful. »
- -Smart team should be working. -Feedback and result of the rapid prototype parts, if the rapid prototype is kept. -The lectures, background knowledge is good, but how to work with the CAD system in advanced situations and complex models and how to build your model in a good way is also important, the lectures or exercises didnt cover this. Too basic instructions on the system, not Advanced as the course discription says. -The lecturer should say more than what is stated on the slides.»
- Not sure about the exam. Possibly a dugga instead.»
- The english knowledge that the lecturer has. More specific and interesting information that can help you in your project.»
- In general the project work was presented in several different power-point slides, and in a project work hand out. The information was presented slighly different from time to time, which means that is was hard to figure out what we were expected to do. Also, it would be good to have a little more explanatory text in the project work pdf in order to clarify. It would also be good to have an introductury computer exercise lection for the RD&T programme, where you have time to to the exercises and at the same time have the possibility to ask questions. »
- The contents and layout of the lectures»
- No need for a exam.»
- the lectures could be improved, the exam had questions who was not really relevant to the course.»
- Take away the exam and put more effort to the CAD and CAT»
- Maybe have a bigger project, and no written exam. Or some other kind of written exam in the middle of the course. »
- The instructions and information about and for the project need to be imrpoved so that it is easier to follow and understand what needs to be done in the project. What needs to be included in the extra exercises also need to be made more clear e.g. what needs to be done in a rendering for it to be satisfactory. »
- It would have been good if SmarTeam worked. It would have been good if there was some teaching of the more advanced functions in CATIA.»
- hade varit bra med lite handouts om de tillhörande funktioner såsom kenetisk analys»
- Det var svårt att förstå hur grävmaskinen skulle se ut, vilka mått som gällde och så. Det kunde vara tydligare. Infomationen borde också vara lite bättre samlad. Man hittade lite information i en beskrivning och lite mer i en annan. Läste man bara i en beskrivning så missade man viktig information.»
- presentation of the slides (the teacher is just reading the slides without making any comment on it)»
- I found it difficult to know what to do in the end of the course (add tasks)»
- I think it was difficult to understand understand the purpose with some of the lectures. An overwiev of, for instance, nurb-curves was mixed with very in-depth mathematich formulas with no explenation of derivation and/or what use we would have from this.»
- Skip the exam, make some of the lectures mandatory instead and include more extra tasks as madatory and set up clear goals for each of them.»
- en dugga istället för tenta. då tenta kändes lite onödigt då det viktiga i kursen var det praktiska arbetet.»
- The scoring system for extra tasks. Fewer+more important perhaps? More time/higher requirements from the examinators in order to promote learning. Smaller group. Working Smarteam :) More guidance in how to apporach CAD modeling, not just going through all the tools. How are you supposed to think when modeling something real.»

17. Additional comments

- I prefer no written exam for this course as i learned most of the stuffs in the literature by implementing it in the project and so i see no point in having the written exam again, also people who finish extra task get more grades that is more than 3 in that case.»
- Take the course to an advanced level and provide the support needed for the students and dont leave them to themself with the online help (and individual help by teachers).»
- Learn tips to do smart/good 3D drawings...»
- Poor plannin of the course schedule since we never got to see the rapidprototyping model, was it even created? Also the fact that we never had the chance to learn the PLM system.»

18. What master program do you attend?*

58 svarande

Product development»40 68%
Systems, control and mechatronics»5 8%
Automotive engineering»9 15%
Engineering design»0 0%
Advanced Engingineering Materials»0 0%
other»4 6%

Genomsnitt: 1.74

- I like CAD and was intrested in Catia but this was a poor course showing what it could do. The reason to my low grade and lack of motivation depended on bad exercises with almost zero help and difficult to show your project. Other courses became more important and the opportunity to get higher grade was neglected. The exam should then be used to give a higher grade to and mirror the course content better.» (Systems, control and mechatronics)
- Too much ppu stuff like RDnT, it should be a cad course right???» (Automotive engineering)
- Industrial design engineering» (other)
- Inustrial Design Engineering» (other)
- Industrial Design Engineering» (other)
- industrial design engineering» (other)

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från