ENKÄTER

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics, MTF235

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-03-16 - 2009-03-23
Antal svar: 44
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 83%
Kontaktperson: David Söderblom»
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.

44 svarande

At most 10 hours/week» 9 20%

Around 15 hours/week» 14 31%

Around 20 hours/week» 17 38%

Around 25 hours/week» 4 9%

At least 30 hours/week» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- Was completely preoccupied with formula student» (At most 10 hours/week)
- Average amount of work» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

44 svarande

0%» 2 4%

25%» 1 2%

50%» 7 15%

75%» 17 38%

100%» 17 38%

Genomsnitt: 4.04

- Very interesting lectures» (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?

43 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals» 4 9%

The goals are difficult to understand» 1 2%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 19 44%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 19 44%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

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.

40 svarande

No, the goals are set too low» 6 15%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 34 85%

No, the goals are set too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

- Maybe there could have been more theory behind the course» (No, the goals are set too low)
- The course in general was a little bit to easy.» (No, the goals are set too low)

Teaching and course administration

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

43 svarande

Small extent» 3 6%

Some extent» 9 20%

Large extent» 20 46%

Great extent» 11 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- The book did not cover much so you had to search for information by yourself, in other books and on the internet.» (Some extent)
- The book were good and nice to read» (Large extent)
- The Barnard book is good but it is in many cases not advanced enough.» (Large extent)
- Good book, easy to read but maybe to poor details at some sessions.» (Great extent)
- The slides provided were mainly just pictures of old cars so Barnard was the main source of information for me when studying.» (Great extent)
- Read the entire book. It was a good book and you learned a lot.» (Great extent)

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

44 svarande

Very badly» 1 2%

Rather badly» 4 9%

Rather well» 23 52%

Very well» 16 36%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- Some presentations have not been put on the portal.» (Rather badly)
- Some lectures were missing. Slides didn"t have text on it.» (Rather badly)
- Some lecture notes never appeared on the web page.» (Rather well)
- Not all lectures were uploaded to the courese homepage.» (Rather well)
- The course assistents did a very good job with the administration.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

44 svarande

Very poor» 0 0%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 9 20%

Very good» 30 68%

I did not seek help» 5 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- Some of the assistents were always available and helped very gladly.» (Very good)
- Thanks David for patiently answering all our questions when we visited you at your office!» (Very good)
- Easy to get hold of Lennart as well as the teaching assistants» (Very good)
- You could get helped at any time.» (Very good)

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

44 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 0 0%

Rather well» 8 18%

Very well» 36 81%

I did not seek cooperation» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

- Sometime cooperation between students in the same project group can be difficult if they have different goals/interest/grade demands.» (Rather well)
- The cooperation within the group during the assignment worked very well.» (Very well)

9. How was the course workload?

43 svarande

Too low» 1 2%

Low» 10 23%

Adequate» 27 62%

High» 5 11%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- This depends how much effort you put into the project. The workload in the project between the group members are usually not even.» (Adequate)

Summarizing questions

10. What is your general impression of the course?

44 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 3 6%

Adequate» 13 29%

Good» 23 52%

Excellent» 5 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- I now feel that I have an overview of vehicle aerodynamics design.» (Good)
- Really interesting subject. A very good lab and with interesting lectures.» (Excellent)

11. What is your impression of the lectures?

43 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 4 9%

Adequate» 15 34%

Good» 20 46%

Excellent» 4 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- Didn"t attend » (?)
- too many pictures and videos wind tunnel and wheel/ground lectures were very good» (Adequate)
- some slides could be clearer» (Good)
- Especially Lennart lectures were nice but even the others were professionally made.» (Excellent)

12. What is your impression of the guest lectures?

44 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 2 4%

Adequate» 8 18%

Good» 24 54%

Excellent» 10 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- The guest lecture of CFD didn"t help anything. The guest lecture from volvo and the guy from Jaguar was very interesting.» (Adequate)
- Great idea to invit people from Lotus, Volvo, etc.» (Excellent)

13. How would you rate the project work?

44 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 0 0%

Adequate» 7 15%

Good» 25 56%

Excellent» 12 27%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- Interesting but perhaps a little bit to short» (Adequate)
- Helped a lot for learning. Was fun to have a practical assignment as well!» (Good)
- Project was really amazing.» (Excellent)
- Probably the best project/laboratory work so far (not only counting the master program)» (Excellent)

14. What did you think about the project layout?

How would you rate the project layout with pre-study, wind tunnel laboration, report and presentation?

44 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 0 0%

Adequate» 10 22%

Good» 23 52%

Excellent» 11 25%

Genomsnitt: 4.02

- The pre-study was good. You we"re prepared and knew what data results you wanted. But you shouldn"t have to listen to all those presentations. Split the class into two halves instead and only demand that you should attend to your own class.» (Good)
- The project layout was good, but one thing that can be a problem is the grading. Now everybody in a group gets the same grading. Usually some do very little work and some others do almost the whole project by themself. This is not so fair. I can understand that it may almost be impossible to grade individually, but it is still a really big problem.» (Good)

15. How would you rate the wind tunnel laboratory work?

44 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 1 2%

Adequate» 7 15%

Good» 22 50%

Excellent» 14 31%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- two hours in the tunnel is not that much time to full develope an adequate test in it, so that would be good if the project instead of doing in three days for al the groups were spread into one week sothat students would have more time to enjoy the test» (Fair)
- Definetly keep this part to next year.» (Good)
- A bit short of time for further tests.» (Good)
- One of the better labs I"ve done on Chalmers.» (Good)
- More time in the wind tunnel would be appreciated! Very fun and educational to make some "real" tests.» (Good)
- maybe more technical explanations or comments» (Good)
- However 2 hours are too short because we haven"t enought time to test several configurations.» (Excellent)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The lab.»
- wind tunnel project, guest lectures»
- The windtunnel project»
- Wind tunnel»
- Wind tunnel and guest lectures»
- All the wind tunnel laboratory work with maybe some extra tasks to perform»
- The laboration is a good part of the course»
- The laboratory work was pretty interesting, since the opportunity to work with a wind tunnel is few and far between in a student"s life.»
- project is really nise. Maybe it is possible to add even some more work in a wind tonnel.»
- Guest lectures»
- Project!»
- The windtunnel experiment»
- Wind tunnel assignment.»
- Guest lectures»
- The lab and the teaching assistants which did a good job!»
- The laboratory work in the wind tunnel.»
- the project work»
- wind tunnel lab work»
- the guest lectures, the project work»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Maybe include some CFD design tasks. would make the course complete.»
- more help for exercises, maybe a full correction on the home page would be good»
- Lectures from Phd students.... Especially Betz dserivation and cfd lecture»
- The book is not very helpful and say some very basic notions about aerodynamics.»
- It has to be a lot harder, and much higher workload»
- Due to the numerous guest lectures a lot of things were repeated and repeated since some topics were overlapping as far as the content is concerned. For instance I can"t hear the definition of Cd or Cl any more!»
- Exam looked like the exam on wind tonnels. I think that is not good. There was a completely new question about blockages and it has too many points for it. This question was not discussed so well during the lectures to give so many points for it.»
- The visit to Volvo-windtunnel should be back!»
- More good examples of good design approaches. »
- Remove Betz and Jones equation. No one uses it and it only confuses people.»
- Exercises are too easy (I think).»
- The grading of the project!»
- the course book »
- Not much. Presentations could be more descriptive.»
- more details in the slides, write the units and the name for the variables (formulas). It is quite difficult to understand for foreign people without these information»
- Talk more about CFD.» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Remove the Scania guest lecturer. He wasn"t allowed to answer a single question because there were a person from Volvo in the room. What a joke! Nothing we asked were really secretes either.» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

18. Additional comments

- Very interesting subject.. But 22 points on windtunnels and wheels in the exam did not justify the purpose of exam.. it was more like exam about windtunnels and effect of rooling tyres in aerodynamics»
- 10 point of the exam was about blockage, that doesn"t really correspond to the lectures..»
- It can be reasonable to add some words to slides, because cars are nice, but without words slides looks poor and makes it impossible to prepair to the exam with the help of slides. »
- Really good and interesting course!»
- I am very happy to have followed this course.»
- Add a lecture about how it really is to solve a problem with CFD. Maybe some slides that shows how the software works? Maybe adding some post processing assignments? Analyzing the results.»
- A excellent course! Maybe the best course so far.»
- It could be better if all slides could follow a plan given at the begining of the lecture and make difference between 2 parts (I, II...) with references to the book.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från