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.

Gas turbine technology, MTF171

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-11-03 - 2008-11-15
Antal svar: 17
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 56%
Kontaktperson: Tomas Grönstedt»

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.

16 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»3 18%
Around 20 hours/week»6 37%
Around 25 hours/week»6 37%
Around 30 hours/week»1 6%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

- the workload for the different tasks is not proportional. The 3rd task consumes as much time as the other 2 tasks together. » (Around 30 hours/week)

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

16 svarande

0%»1 6%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 6%
75%»3 18%
100%»11 68%

Genomsnitt: 4.43

3. Which master program do you follow?

16 svarande

Sustainable engineering systems»6 37%
Applied Mechanics»7 43%
Automotive engineering»0 0%
Erasmus»3 18%

Genomsnitt: 2

- None of the above, I follow Sustainable energy systems» (?)
- Sustainable ENERGY systems, the master program is focusing on energy systems and energy technology» (Sustainable engineering systems)

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.

4. How understandable are the course goals?

16 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 18%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»6 37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»7 43%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- The industrial gas turbines need to be more focused.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

5. 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

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

16 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»5 31%
Yes, definitely»10 62%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- Exam does not always show how much you know. Therefor it is good to have the opportunity to prove yourself on home tasks. Thumbs up for giving bonus points for them ,) » (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

7. How do you rate the efforts of the lecturer?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»1 5%
Good»12 70%
Excellent»4 23%

Genomsnitt: 4.17

8. How do you rate the efforts of the course assistant?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»3 17%
Good»9 52%
Excellent»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

9. How do you rate the course book?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 5%
Adequate»1 5%
Good»12 70%
Excellent»3 17%

Genomsnitt: 4

- It is a very good and dense book, but too expensive.» (Good)
- expensive» (Good)

10. How do you rate the lecture notes?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 5%
Adequate»5 29%
Good»9 52%
Excellent»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Figures were no clear on handouts. Excellent though that the handouts were given in each class!» (Fair)
- Some lectures, like L.6 and L.8 were more time consuming to learn in than the others» (Good)

11. How do you rate the design tasks?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 5%
Adequate»1 5%
Good»12 70%
Excellent»3 17%

Genomsnitt: 4

- The 3rd task is more a computational exercise than really a gas turbine challenge.» (Adequate)
- Too much work on desin task 3» (Good)

12. How do you rate the written exam?

16 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»3 18%
Good»11 68%
Excellent»2 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

- Question 1 was not very clear.» (Good)
- 4 hours is a lot of time» (Excellent)

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

17 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»8 47%
Very well»9 52%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

Special events

14. How do you rate the first industrial lecturer (Martin Nilsson)?

15 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»7 46%
Good»8 53%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.53

15. How do you rate the aircraft aerodynamics lecture (Henrik Ekstrand)?

16 svarande

Poor»1 6%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»6 37%
Good»8 50%
Excellent»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- To many equations. Slides fill to the brim with equations... not good. Similar to glass of whiskey.» (Poor)

16. How do you rate the second industrial lecturer (Anders Lundbladh)?

13 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 7%
Adequate»4 30%
Good»8 61%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.53

17. How do you rate the study visit at Rya Verken?

14 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 7%
Adequate»4 28%
Good»7 50%
Excellent»2 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

- The transport of students should be provided by Chalmers, otherwise it becomes too much time consuming for people who use the mass transit system.» (Fair)

Study climate

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

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»3 17%
Very good»13 76%
I did not seek help»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.88

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

17 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»5 29%
Very well»11 64%
I did not seek cooperation»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- I think that having 4 in a group is excessive. The tasks are fair for 2 students. » (Very well)

Summarizing questions

20. What is your general impression of the course?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»1 5%
Good»14 82%
Excellent»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 4.05

21. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Given out handouts with larger figures.»
- The guest lectures.»
- Design tasks and visit to Rya»
- The assignments are good (as they are)»
- maybe a little more about stationary gas turbines. i got the impression that the course was strongly influenced by volvo aero. but i think this depends on the feld you come from.»
- Course book, course layout»

22. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Have more hand in exercises e.g. hand in weekly 3 problems that are similar to the problems on the exam. And only two persons per group to much to have 4 persons. »
- The tasks should be more adequate to the different background off all the students and the 3rd task should be more Gas Turbine and less IT.»
- Update reading instructions on web page»
- Maybe trying to move the assigments earlier, i.e. get started directly and not having a "honey week", so more time can be spent studying for the exam.»
- vide supra»
- More indepth study on industrial gas turbine technology, in accordance with the broader aims of this course, since it now incorporates students with little or no interest in aircraft propulsion. It was, however, a nice change to hear about something other than industrial powerplants!»
- Design task 3 should be adapted to Excel instead of Matlab (if possible)»

23. Additional comments

- Maybe at some point some teacher could actually perform a calculation so one can show how it is done»
- Good course!»
- thanks!»
- Thank you for what turned out to be an interesting course! I might have learnt something.»
- Maybe it would have been better to get the solutions to the problem in the book earlier in the course.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från