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.

Wastewater Engineering (BOM095), BOM095

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-10-27 - 2008-11-19
Antal svar: 18
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 58%
Kontaktperson: Britt-Marie Wilen»
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.

17 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»4 23%
Around 20 hours/week»6 35%
Around 25 hours/week»3 17%
Around 30 hours/week»2 11%
At least 35 hours/week»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

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

17 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»1 5%
50%»0 0%
75%»10 58%
100%»6 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.23

- The only time I didn"t attend a lecture was due to illness not to choosing not to attend.» (75%)
- ~85-90%» (75%)

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?

17 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»2 11%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»9 52%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»6 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- didn"t really take much interest in them» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- To be honest I don"t remember reading them or focusing on them.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- I feel what knowledge we need to know could have been clearer in light of the third question on the exam paper. I felt there was little clear structuring in the course of how to tackle the question.» (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.

16 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»16 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- I felt the level at which we are expected to be suited me personally fine.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

16 svarande

No, not at all»1 6%
To some extent»11 68%
Yes, definitely»4 25%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.18

- the calculation part is too difficult, compared with example exam...» (To some extent)
- The theory part is definately a good indication of our understanding and the questions did challenge our understanding. I feel the practical part could have related to methods taught to a greater degree.» (To some extent)
- But the last question was not fare. no exampels simmarar to this question had been done and was thus a bit to difficult» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

17 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»3 17%
Large extent»12 70%
Great extent»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- Thomas part at least and Johans excercises...BMW not so much since she is sweet but gives the impression of being uncertain» (Large extent)
- Teaching was good. Hand outs were always given and lecturers spoke clearly and with interest. The most beneficial part of the course came from worked examples, especially the handouts covering designing a activated sludge reactor and nitrogen removal. Maybe this could be expanded into other areas next year as it helps give a clear method of workings.» (Great extent)

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

17 svarande

Small extent»2 11%
Some extent»6 35%
Large extent»9 52%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

- havn"t read» (Small extent)
- Really good with the lecture slides» (Small extent)
- I found the literature online MUCH more helpful than the H and W book, which I thought was very hard to understand and tiring to read.» (Some extent)
- I don"t like the Viessmann. Maybe you can find another book?» (Some extent)
- especially BMW excercises that Johan went through» (Large extent)
- The question and answer booklet was useful in what it covered but I felt sometimes it narrowed too much on a specific question as opposed to more generic questions which limited its use.» (Large extent)

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

17 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»5 29%
Very well»12 70%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- exept aswers to exam» (Very well)
- Except that Thomas didn´,t follow BMW structure on the webpage» (Very well)
- Everything was made available as we needed it and the literature posted on the student portal was especially useful to the assignment and overall understanding. On the other hand, I felt the recommended coursebook was one of the worst I"ve had. Examples are unclear and in non SI units, the texts are rambling and EXTREMELY hard to read and take anything away from it. » (Very well)

Study climate

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

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»5 29%
Very good»12 70%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Should have needed more time for feedback or help with the assigments. Sometimes BMW doesn´,t answer the question but is still talking for 10 minutes and that is very frustrating» (Rather good)

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

17 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 5%
Rather well»10 58%
Very well»6 35%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

11. How was the course workload?

17 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»10 58%
High»5 29%
Too high»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- I felt the course workload worked well, other than in regards to SWMM. This particular part of the course seemed to swallow time like a black hole! It was not entirely conducive to a group work atmosphere as everyone had to carry out ever step to have an understanding of what was going on. Also, the advice that we received was sometimes poor and contradictory.» (Adequate)
- I felt quite pressurised at the end when we were doing to project and trying to study for the exam. We got the project early but didn"t have all the information we needed to actually get started properly until quite late in the course. » (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

17 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»8 47%
High»6 35%
Too high»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- As always high at the end with several projects at the same time» (Adequate)
- high during some weeks» (Adequate)

Course content

13. How did you find the lectures?

17 svarande

very poor»0 0%
rather poor»1 5%
rather good»6 35%
very good»6 35%
excellent»4 23%
no comment»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- thomas lectures was better but could have been more enthusiastic. BMWs lectures where boring (no offens) and thus hard to follow. repeted herself to much» (rather poor)
- Some teachers are better than others.» (rather good)
- Great introduction to the course, and a very comprehensive overview given to wwt. » (excellent)

14. How did you find the exercises?

17 svarande

very poor»0 0%
rather poor»0 0%
rather good»8 47%
very good»6 35%
excellent»3 17%
no comment»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- More excersises during lectures in the process part.» (rather good)
- Exercises are mentioned above as too specific sometimes which limited understanding of the general method and theory.» (rather good)
- With Johan on BMW part» (excellent)

15. How did you find the SWMM assignment?

17 svarande

very poor»1 5%
rather poor»5 29%
rather good»5 29%
very good»3 17%
excellent»3 17%
no comment»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- Unfortunately I did not enjoy this part of the course at all. Very stressful and confusing.» (very poor)
- to many in each group. cant sit 4 with 1 computer. so divided the work instead of doing it together. was hard to do changes in the model when you didn"t know how the model was built.» (rather poor)
- Although the overall concept of the assigment was intersting I found the actual computer work rather uninteresting and not condusive to group work. » (rather poor)
- To big assignment to be easily handled and understood to all in the group.» (rather poor)

16. How did you find the wastewater treatment plant design assignment?

17 svarande

very poor»0 0%
rather poor»1 5%
rather good»9 52%
very good»7 41%
excellent»0 0%
no comment»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- Theres some small details that are not said and has to be corrected after the delivery of the project» (rather good)
- As I said before it would have been good to get all of the information and start working on it sooner.» (rather good)
- See above» (rather good)
- alot better than the "drinkingwater assignment". not as overwelming» (very good)
- The problem was quite open and we had difficulties because we don"t have prior experance in designing WWTP » (very good)
- The problem was quite open and we had difficulties because we don"t have prior experance in designing WWTP » (very good)
- The only improvement I feel is that instead of having work sessions, we have appointments with the lecturer so we arent all battling for the lecturers time and also, it provides an incentive to get results to discuss.» (very good)

17. How did you find the weekly assignments?

17 svarande

very poor»0 0%
rather poor»0 0%
rather good»3 17%
very good»9 52%
excellent»3 17%
no comment»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 4.23

- Really good idea, interesting to do. It may be too much to ask but a small amount of feedback would have been good when you only get 1 credit just to know if you"ve done something wrong or just missed something out, just one line.» (excellent)

Summarizing questions

18. What is your general impression of the course?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 5%
Adequate»6 35%
Good»8 47%
Excellent»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- If the examination and particularly the Britt Marie part was good I would have answered excellent, I think the exercises that Britt Marie showed us were totally different compare to what I saw in the exam! maybe I can say a damn difficult examination.» (Good)

19. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Rpojects in SWMM and WWTP»
- Weekly problem assignment»
- the comment to the assignment 2 before the exam»
- was nice that the handouts was printed. not neccesarily in color (economical reason)»
- Weekly Assignments, Trip to WWTP»
- weekly assignments»
- Weekly assignments»
- I think work more on SWMM»
- Group assignments and individual assigments »
- Group assignments and individual assigments »
- The worked exercises.»
- that the book is the same as in the drinking water course. »

20. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- the importance of the exam. I think is easier and more importante lo learn with problemas and projects than with exams and theoretical questions.»
- Ansewers to the practice exam MUST be given in English and not in SWEDISH!!!»
- decrease the difficulty level of the exam»
- try to make the lectures more intresting»
- the WWTP assignment, not so complicated the excercise compendium from BMW»
- the assignemnts. I think that in most groups the work was divided so that all students did not work with both assignment in order to finish them in time. Also because it is useless to be 3-4 people around 1 computer (SWMM)»
- no idea»
- SWMM assignment»
- Project assignments are unclear and hard to know when to start and how to do. And I hate the way the presentations are made. Together with the ones in the Drinking water course they are probably the most pointless presentations I ever did at Chalmers. »

21. Additional comments

- Overall I really enjoyed the course and found it very interesting. The trip to the WWTP was good too.»
- The study visit could have been earlier in the course to help more to the assignment.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från