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.

Algorithms, spring 2009, TIN092/DAT600

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-05-11 - 2009-05-31
Antal svar: 49
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 98%
Kontaktperson: Erland Holmström»

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.

49 svarande

<15 hours/week»20 40%
Around 20 hours/week»21 42%
Around 30 hours/week»7 14%
Around 40 hours/week»0 0%
>50 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.79

- Läser detta ovanpå vanligt schema i Fysik 3 vilket innebär kandidatarbete och subatomär fysik.» (<15 hours/week)
- Except the lectures and exercises, I spent around 4-8 hours a week on assignments. I didn"t do any extra problem solving or reading in the book. I had probably done more problem solving if there were recommended exercises. On the other hand, 15 hours/week might turn out to be enough anyway.» (<15 hours/week)
- 15-20» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Relative, depending on the week. But avarage 20/week» (Around 20 hours/week)
- I study very less in normal routine. Only study before exams, and that suffices for me.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Roughly 8h per lab, 3h per ex, 2h per week constructing own algorithms plus all lectures.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- less in the beginning of the quarter, more in the end (as usual)» (Around 20 hours/week)
- very time consuming» (Around 30 hours/week)

2. Attendance on lectures

How many per cent of the lectures did you attend?

49 svarande

<25%»6 12%
25-50%»7 14%
50-75%»9 18%
>75%»27 55%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- Due to my work I was unable to attend.» (<25%)
- Gick på den enda som inte kolliderade med subbatomär fysik.» (25-50%)
- Due to collisions with another course» (50-75%)
- Had two lectures on the same time and mostly I skipped the algorithm lecture.» (50-75%)
- Very good lectures, just that I had much to do in other courses.» (50-75%)
- unfortunately the lectures had a scheduling conflict with another more important class.» (50-75%)
- Krockade med en annan kurs.» (50-75%)
- Monday lecture collided with our Math Mod course.» (50-75%)
- Attended all lectures.» (>75%)
- 100%» (>75%)
- All» (>75%)
- Very good lectures! It was a bit odd at first though, and the reason being that I"m accustomed to algorithmic principles and design methodologies from before. You presented it from the ground up, which I think was/is appreciated for people both new and old to algorithms!» (>75%)
- The lectures are okay, but the material should really be available long before. Especially the exercises with good solutions. It"s no use to do the exercises beforehand only to see that there are no answers. You then have to spend 2 hours on the regular exercise to check if you"ve got it right. A waste of valuable time.» (>75%)
- 100%. Worth it. Enjoyed it! Better then reading the book.» (>75%)

Teaching and course administration

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

49 svarande

Small extent»5 10%
Some extent»6 12%
Large extent»20 40%
Great extent»18 36%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- I missed most of the lectures.» (Small extent)
- The lectures are quite nice» (Large extent)
- Bra föreläsningar. Kul med Kalle och hobbe!! :)» (Large extent)
- Great lectures» (Great extent)
- Only due to the teaching have I learnt. The best teacher I have ever come across.» (Great extent)
- The hand outs helped a lot in taking notes and reflecting on previous topics during the lecture.» (Great extent)
- Very good lectures!» (Great extent)
- Erlands teaching has been really helpful.» (Great extent)

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

49 svarande

Small extent»13 26%
Some extent»17 34%
Large extent»13 26%
Great extent»6 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.24

- The course literature was bit slow to get through. It felt too abstract.» (Small extent)
- Book: Small extent Labs: Large extent Slides: Huge extent Exercises: Great extent Tune a little more exercises over labs. In any case recommended exercises (similar to reading instructions) of the book would be great and up the value of the book.» (Small extent)
- Did not buy the book. Used the web for information.» (Small extent)
- Didn"t touch the book at all, mainly because I didn"t have time to. I"m sure it"s great and will be a good reference literature. The slides are generally good, but the cost criteria slides _must_ be improved to be more stringent. I"ve taken lots of courses in mathematics but had a hard time to understand this material anyway. It must be possible to present it in a better/more stringent way. Perhaps get a review of this material from a mathematician?» (Small extent)
- Only slides, didn"t read the book» (Some extent)
- Lecture notes were good.» (Some extent)
- The slides are really good. I haven"t even opened the book.» (Some extent)
- Har inte haft riktigt med tid att läsa genom boken som jag skulle viljat, men kommer nog skumma igenom under sommarlovet, det är planen iaf.» (Some extent)
- Not too fond of the course litterature.» (Some extent)
- Slides for missing lectures were a godsend. And the book is good.» (Large extent)
- Quite good lab assignments» (Large extent)
- Maybe simplify the slides a bit, atleast a few of them. Take smaller examples of dynamic programming. Too much information on a couple of the slides (the slide of the dp example in particular).» (Large extent)
- I would like to have seen more solved excercises as handouts» (Large extent)
- Didn"t buy the book. Lectures and slides were enough for me, plus some online material.» (Great extent)

5. Was the course literature worth its price?

Do you consider that the course literature was worth its price? As a guideline the student union at Chalmers has set is at 70 sKr/hp.

49 svarande

1 (not worth it)»4 11%
7 19%
13 36%
8 22%
5 (well worth it)»4 11%
Did not buy the litterature»13

Genomsnitt: 3.02

- 500:- or more. That is never worth the price. » (1 (not worth it))
- Interesting but much to many words(american). Not so pedagogic but good as reference material. » (1 (not worth it))
- Not really.» (2)
- Seeing how little time I have had to read, the book has not been worth the money. However it will make a good reference book on my book shelf. However I have more often turned to wikipedia than the book during the course.» (2)
- Is that the best book available? I doubt it. If it is, then it"s time for Erland to write his own book on the subject. He has the knowledge. Time to put it to use.» (2)
- I could probably have done without it but it"s always good to read about different topics before the lectures.» (3)
- Have consulted it a couple of times so i would think its maybe worth it...» (3)
- The book was handy for finding new exercises, but other the labs, lectures and exercise sessions left little time for reading. I"ve not read the book enough to comment about it"s quality.» (3)
- Very verbose book! At times a bit boring (too much background information).» (3)
- Bought it, but didn"t touch it.» (3)
- I love it! I read it for fun!» (5 (well worth it))
- I bought it, but didn"t have time to read it.» (Did not buy the litterature)
- I borrowed it.» (Did not buy the litterature)

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

49 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»2 4%
Rather well»30 61%
Very well»16 32%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- Material such as lecture slides should be available BEFORE the lecture is held! Putting them on the web page several days after, or even over a week in some cases, is unacceptable. "The slides aren"t done until the lecture is held" is simply saying "I"m too lazy to do this in good time".» (Very badly)
- always late handouts, but otherwise god links» (Rather badly)
- The web page is confusing and there are a lot of unnecessary extra "information" that you have to wade through to get to the stuff that matters. Lab 1 is a perfect example on this and i actually pasted it to some friends and they asked me if it was a joke.» (Rather badly)
- Though I"d really prefer not having to hand in as a .tar.gz package.» (Rather well)
- Rather complicated instructions about how to hand in the labs. » (Rather well)
- Getting handouts at the beginning of each class was very nice. Sometimes the handouts/exercise questions were delayed on the website. Website needs a workover to become more structured» (Rather well)
- Bra på denna biten, dock kändes hemsidan lite ouppdaterad och med gammalt innehåll. Står bland annat att man kan skriva inlämningar på svenska.» (Rather well)
- Utskrifter på alla föreläsningar är klockrent! Har inte varit med om det på någon annan kurs.» (Rather well)
- All the tarballing etc feels a bit oldschool, but whatever floats your boat :)» (Rather well)
- Some broken links on the course web page, late publish of labs on the web page.» (Rather well)
- As said earlier, the exercises would be great to have a week before, _WITH_ solutions!» (Rather well)
- * Answers on some more exercices on paper (for us not attending at the lectures) * deadlines in fire would be good * if possible, get the laborations earlier» (Rather well)
- It has worked rather well, but not perfect. Too slow on updating some parts of the web page, like the "Diary&Content" section. » (Rather well)
- Nice to get handouts at the lectures» (Very well)
- Very nice with the handouts given each lecture. Easier to follow the lectures when you don"t have to write everything down at the same time.» (Very well)
- Perfect. We got every handout in the class before the lecture.» (Very well)
- Excellent work, also the lab/ex descriptions where well defined and therefore rarely misinterpret.» (Very well)

7. Was the number of teaching hours sufficient?

If you want more - then tell me of what kind: lectures, exercises, self activity exercises, lab supervision and so on.

- Yes. including the extra questioning hours the teaching hours were sufficient.»
- Yes»
- I do not know.»
- More labsupervisions»
- I think the amount of lectures would have been fine if I"d been able to attend them all. Lab supervision is not something I think should be scheduled, the ad hoc solution worked great and it really is better to try solving problems alone.»
- It was sufficient, but maybe it would be good with some more time for questions about the labs.»
- Yes»
- It would have been nice with a supervised self activity lecture each week, where you could ask about problems from the course literature.»
- I think so. Can be improved.»
- Yes. Nice to have the lecturer hold the exercies.»
- Need much more Lab supervision. Should be atleast 2 hours per week»
- More lab supervisions. The labs took so much time of the course it would therefor be rather good to have more help at the labs. »
- self activity exercises with supervision»
- Yes.»
- I"d like to see more exercises, either if it"s supervised or recommendations.»
- More lab supervision maybe.»
- Yes, the time was sufficient.»
- Perhaps a bit more on greedy algorithms. If you"re going to take the advanced course, greedy approaches are sometimes used in conjunction with approximation (and thus is good to know well!). Although probably the most demanding topic of the course.»
- need more labsupervision»
- The teacher or assistants should have a couple of hours every week booked so that the students know they will be in their offices for questions. Describing a problem in a mail can be difficult and asking teacher during a lecture break may be hard since many wants to talk to him.»
- Yes»
- no it was just about rite.»
- lab supervision is needed more»
- Yes»
- Yes, it"s probably sufficient (haven"t taken the exam yet..).»
- We really need lab supervision. Of course the labs were doable, but if you were on the wrong track it was hard to correct without real supervision (mailing is not enough).»
- I would have liked some scheduled lab supervision. This is something you should really change next year!»
- Some excercises in small groups would have been nice.»
- Yes, I do believe it was sufficient. But don"t have 4 hours in a row next year. As exciting as the subject is, 4 hours is long. »

8. What course content was missing/would you have liked to see more of?

These are the "big" areas that we attempted to cover but you may mention other areas also: complexity (algorithm and problem), upper & lower bounds, algorithm design in general, Greed, Divide&Conquer, Dynamic programming, Backtracking, Intractability (i.e. problem classes like P, NP, NPC), logarithmic complexity.

- I think it was very well balanced.»
- Maybe something more about recursive equations and how to solve those. »
- Divide and Conquer seems very useful, and I would not mind seeing a little more of it. Some of the complexities were very hard to calculate with the tools we were shown, but that may be beyond the scope of the course.»
- Greed, problem complexity, backtracking, logarithmic (esp. pseudo-exponential) complexity.»
- More about how to prove the correctness and optimality of algorithms.»
- More time on the actual solving of sums and recursive functions. This was done very quickliy, and later on we almost always skipped the actual solving and skipped to the answer with the motivation, "now you see that...". Well all of us didn"t.»
- As it feels now, i need to do the exam before I answer this question.»
- I don"t think anything was missing. For more, there is advanced course as well.»
- more intractability»
- More about NPC would be nice, but probably hard to get get the hours for it since it requires additional knowledge of the other stuff in the course»
- The course is fine as it is.»
- Intractability»
- Intractability felt a bit hazy. It would have been nice to somewhere, preferably in the course lecture PDF"s, have clear concise definitions of what P, NP and NPC are. As it stands now it is very hard to find out what exactly they mean since they are vaguely described a bit and a bit there etc.»
- Greed är intressant»
- A little more of greedy algorithms, more on proving correctness and less dynamic programming. In my opinion dynamic programming was the easiest topic hence one lecture would be sufficient.»
- More specific and more difficult examples in class, especially for greedy algs.»
- Algorithm design in general.»
- Greedy.»
- maybe it"s better to repeat some knowledge about data structures.»
- Intractability was a bit shoret mite be intresting to see an exsampel of the algorithm fore and Intractability problem. »
- complexity»
- None»
- I think it"s fairly okay as it is. »
- A bit more proofs would have been nice. I also think "partial" dynamic programming would have been good.»
- Perhaps Intractability? The actual proof making part. But it doesn"t seem to be a priority in this particular version of the course. »

9. What did we spend to much time on?

See the previous question for a list of main areas.

- Dynamic programming was one area that took a lot of time, relatively to how hard it was to learn.»
- Maybe dynamic programming»
- Perhaps Dynamic Programming.»
- Labs with dynamic programming»
- Dynamic programming»
- It all felt like a reasonable amount was spent an everything.»
- DP. But I liked it. Its an important area, so requires more time.»
- Greed algorithms»
- same.»
- Complexity theory»
- Dynamic programming, backtracking.»
- Backtracking var kanske något stort, det blev nästan lite repetivt. Om DP är viktigt, höj gärna svårighetsgraden efter ett tag.»
- The labs and exercises demanded most DP, but greedy and proofs of greedy was what boggled my mind the most. Even more so than the logarithmic cost criteria.»
- No idea.»
- Nothing. I think every part got the time that was needed.»
- Nothing.»
- not too much time for any of them, there are many topics to cover.»
- in genral it was not to mutch time on any thing in particuler»
- complexity»
- I think we spent too much time talking about dynamic programming, it"s not that difficult.»
- Dynamic programming»
- complexity»
- Perhaps solving recurrence equations and dynamic programming. Solving recurrence equations might be good for those who does not have a good mathematical background though.»
- Nothing. As I see it.»

Study climate

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

48 svarande

Very poor»1 2%
Rather poor»7 14%
Rather good»20 41%
Very good»12 25%
I did not seek help»8 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

- We tried reaching someone for help with a lab once and couldn"t find them on Chalmers. Not enough data to really form a view though i guess.» (Rather poor)
- It has been hard to get in touch with course assistants.» (Rather poor)
- Fast response on mails, but not much help/hints from them, and no lab supervision pass.» (Rather poor)
- This might be the part that I"m most disappointed with about this course. Must be a better way then asking questions on the breaks? » (Rather poor)
- The lab supervision meetings were great» (Rather good)
- We didn"t get any response on a question we mailed to our lab supervisor.» (Rather good)
- Used the time during break, also got replies from e-mail reasonably quick» (Rather good)
- The email responses were fast most of the time.» (Rather good)
- The lecture breaks proved to be a good opportunity.» (Rather good)
- No lab supervisions but we asked at the lectures instead» (Rather good)

11. How was the course workload?

48 svarande

1 (Too low)»2 4%
2 4%
20 41%
20 41%
5 (Too high)»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- I would not have minded having one submission per week. Generally Master"s courses are too simple at Chalmers, in my humble opinion.» (1 (Too low))
- Lab 3 was a bit hectic, but overall a good amount of work.» (3)
- As I said earlier, I don"t spend much time during normal days. Although before exams, I study quite much. This has been my practice since my school days, and is always helpful.» (3)
- The workload is quite equal to other advanced level courses on the Signals and Systems department for instance.» (3)
- I had another course taking a lot of time, I would have liked to spend some more time on this course otherwise.» (3)
- Kindof high, but thats prolly relative to what you read/do besides this course» (4)
- Hard to say if it was the course itself, or doing the bachelor"s thesis at the same time..» (4)
- nice» (4)
- The handins dominated. Depending on if we got stuck they could take extra long time. I pity the poor soul who had to work alone!» (4)
- It was too high in the sense that there where little time left for the book, but the workload was still doable.» (4)
- The laborations took too much time from other exersices.» (4)

Summarizing questions

12. How well did the course fullfill your expectations?

48 svarande

1 (not at all)»0 0%
5 10%
8 16%
23 47%
5 (very well)»12 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.87 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I would like to be able to formulate my algorithms more like mathematical functions and less like imperative programs. The pseudo code idea seems awkward at best.» (2)
- It was pretty much what I had expected.» (3)
- En kul och spännande kurs. Hade varit bra med mer tid till den,men går man fysik så gör man...» (4)
- Quite well, this was pretty much what I expected to learn.» (4)
- Didn"t really have any clear expactations but it seamed interesting.» (5 (very well))

13. What is your general impression of the course?

48 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»4 8%
Adequate»8 16%
Good»23 47%
Excellent»13 27%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

- Gillar verkligen Erlands undervisning. Tillhör de bästa föreläsarna jag haft. Engagemang och humor är två bra egenskaper där. » (?)
- I only took it as a prereq. for subsequent algorithm courses. In 7.5hec you can accomplish a lot more than this.» (Fair)
- It was a good and interesting course but I didn"t like the "layout".» (Adequate)
- The submission feedback was a little bit difficult to decipher. Seemed a bit sloppily written, and I though that was unfair since I took great care to express myself as clearly as possible.» (Good)
- Good but difficult» (Good)
- Having a four-hour long lecture on wednesdays was a bit too much.» (Good)
- It"s a good course. Courses in problem solving are always good to have. The theoretical focus is good.» (Good)
- Or at least pretty close to excellent. And it"s much due to Erland himself. He is great. As a person and due to his great knowledge and his ability to teach it. He is among Chalmers top-3 best teachers. » (Excellent)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- No opinion»
- The book.»
- Labs»
- lectures, lecture notes, labs»
- Really great lab assignments, keep them. Don"t change the lecturer!»
- The lectures were good. The lab assignments were good as well.»
- Well prepared lectures. Repetition of important concepts and relations. laborations Handouts on the web. The web-page. Exersises handed out in advance, so that you can try to solve them first. Then you are better prepared.»
- The content of the course»
- Handouts.»
- The lectures.»
- Course layout, assignments.»
- Exercise session»
- The teacher.»
- The lecture notes»
- Very good assignments, although it took some time to get them corrected. Maybe a third assistant next year? The feedback on the assignments were also not very helpful at times. If you reject someone who has provided you with a description of how we went about solving a problem (not simply a solution), then it should not be too difficult to give more elaborate feedback. I suppose this has to do with lack of time, more than willingness not to help though.»
- Spread the lecture slide print outs in the each lecture»
- Handouts on lectures!»
- the hand out slides were vare useful.»
- same type of focus, with a lot of labs/excercises»
- Assignments»
- The theoretical focus, assignments in pseudo-code instead of implementations.»
- The lectures, they were good.»
- Good teacher and good planning»
- The outline of the course. A very well working concept. Just keep polishing it.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- No opinion»
- I think people should be able to work alone. That goes for every Chalmers course.»
- Get a working projector :) And if possible, a room with better air.»
- New examiner.»
- Maybe the last for the last lab shouldn"t be so close to the exam.»
- Would be nice with being able to check solutions from the work you do in the course literature.»
- Handouts published on the web earlier, at least the same day they are handed out in class. Home exersises with solutions or solutions to some recomended exsersises in the book.»
- The webpage. The idea of pseudo code that are forced to be in imperative style.»
- Laboration! must have more time to talk with someone about a solution»
- Maybe a lab less. May benefit the quality of the labs.»
- Make it easier to get in touch with course assistants or otherwise get help with assignments.»
- Fewer, less intense or earlier labs. First lab was released very late which as an effect stalled the workload.»
- Prerequisites for this course is data structures and discrete mathematics. I think too much time was spent explaining these things in class. Let the students read that and spend more time on actual algorithms and the course will probably be more interesting!»
- The rooms and more lab supervision time.»
- Lecture slides on the course home page should be upload earlier than the corresponding lecture.»
- cant thing of any majer thing»
- assignments have to be toned down a little and more guidance on the returns we get, where to improve and where we are going wrong»
- May be power point slides instead of transparencies»
- The exercise material should be given out a week before _with_ solutions. The cost criteria material must be improved. Please get a review of this material from a mathematician! Perhaps someone at Numerical analysis?»
- Add lab supervision. Try to make the questions more clear on the lab as well (sometimes it was hard to understand what was actually asked for).»
- The book (but then I cant sell it).»
- I think the pseudocode could be a bit more readable. You said we should write readable code and use good variables but I feel like you sometimes doesn"t do that.»
- -Erland have this bad habit of saying great things orally that not in his OH slides. I would have liked to have those written down, because sometimes he delivers them so fast that one has no time to write them down. That"s a shame, because it"s great stuff. -Give detailed solutions to old exams!!!!!!! Why, but why - are you terrified of giving out detailed solutions to old exams? That"s just stupid. -Make sure (do it for the May-09 exam) to publish detailed solutions on the course web page of the exam and re-exam that particular year. -The OH-slide-showing machine? :-) Seriously - how hard is it to fix it or replace it? -No 4 hours in a row. -Erland pointing at students to get the discussion going. While I understand why it"s done, there are better ways. And some days you just have to accept that the students don"t want to talk that particular day. »

16. Additional comments

- Erland is a great lecturer!»
- As usual, Erland is dissrespectful of the students. Having a PhD or not, ones personal preferences are just that - preferences! Forcing the student to follow his preferences is nothing but demeaning. If I have a way of writing something, that is equally obvious, efficient, self-explanatory etc, as his way of writing it, I do not appreciate him telling me how to write it "correctly". »
- The fishes and aquarium example was hard to understand. If you can, please try to use some other example for more clarity.»
- God that you try to activate the students on the lectures and exersises. »
- Mera kalle och hobbe !»
- Hur är det med det engelska uttalet egentligen? Snälla, ta reda på hur du uttalar bokstäverna I och J som används så flitigt i kursen. Det gäller även ord som stavas liknande på svenska och engelska men har helt annat uttal. Exempelvis pseudo, omega, ordo, pi, knapsack osv. Det drar åt sig uppmärksamhet, och som utländsk student kan det inte vara helt enkelt att följa med alla gånger. Det är det enda jag har att anmärka på.»
- The workload was too low in week 1, 8 by comparison to the other weeks.»
- i think you should have a mid-term exam that can give bonus points on the real exam»
- More kalle and hobbe! xD More greedy algorithms with proof on the assignments would be great so you are sure how to do that on the exam.»
- -Seriously speaking. It"s my well founded opinion that Erland should have the advanced Algorithms course too. Yes - a double dosage of Erland is what is needed. This will give great Algorithm knowledge. -For the love of God, give Erland a huge increase of salary! He is worth it. »

17. How anonoumous must an enquiry be?

Knowing that the secret numbers look as below it"s quite easy to cheat. The enquiry system can assign each student on the course an individual number/password to the enquiry. This has the added benefit that I can get a list of who has answered the enquiry and who has not (but I cannot connect the person with his/hers answers).
Then I can add one point to the exam myself (and also remind those that forget to answer the enquiry).
Do you think that would be acceptable?

49 svarande

yes»30 85%
no»5 14%
No opinion»14

Genomsnitt: 1.14

- I can see no reason to why it would not be acceptable. » (yes)
- Why not?» (yes)
- However... the list of people who answered should be just that, a list of people without a connection to particular answers. Making people log in means fewer are likely to do so.» (yes)
- Är det såna problem att få folk fylla i denna enkäten? På fysik går det bra så vitt jag vet.» (yes)
- As you mention, I believe that information if a particular student has filled the evaluation or not while keeping that students answers hidden among all evaluations would be a great approach.» (yes)
- How do we know that you can"t see that?» (yes)
- I think the main problem is that you make the enquiry before the exam. If you had a corrected exam in your hand you not only know more about the course, you are also certain that the answers didn"t affect the exam correction :) There are lots of practical problems with this though.» (yes)
- Answering this quiz has nothing to do with my ability to formulate and analyze algorithms.» (no)
- NO! It"s a matter of privacy! And how would this be possible if the exams are supposed to be anonymous? ,)» (no)
- While I think the idea with bonus point for the enquiry is a good idea, which can be futher developed, too much of a control of who wrote what is a VERY BAD IDEA. It will be misused sooner or later. Just leave those things to the FRA, NSA, etc. :-) » (no)
- I think enquiries like this are crap, and I do not understand why you insist on them. Why must education necessarily be "democratic"? If people already know what is best for them, why do they even need education? It is your job to design a good course, not the students". In my humble opinion. :-)» (No opinion)

18. What is your secret number?

Randomly pick one of the random numbers below and bring it to the exam. It"s the answer to one of the questions there.
33861 41207 83407 76213 48794 35992 59023 38223 53756 20792
64002 27881 92658 15949 59538 56863 48146 29827 25123 34565
52072 27878 10113 25855 41896 97437 93391 68636 68444 93644
24967 41440 40421 17903 50991 81241 28958 96613 34132 16871
61037 14598 34582 34032 54148 14570 53041 13717 65751 91278
85954 47083 60204 56578 54986 86258 82709 59518 17306 92428
44501 93821 20540 69632 16043 93590 86480 35118 65307 46963
40568 34909 16321 66564 30007 36213 79170 35062 11903 86741
56346 83930 54322 94640 91937 13591 17306 91765 79529 63516
27993 47306 21898 91583 73801 38414 40548 13003 70315 19397
46028 40465 25998 41305 80533 68825 84130 79273 62796 39590
23490 15870 21501 12740 33208 34871 77533 46041 63941 61384
87269 74856 87066 61034 98811 58714 75958 93071 10556 84410
48543 79670 46842 59234 58347 76431 98531 82093 22010 67176
17344 54753 84862 79472 21505 40189 72563 66014 96866 40140

Comments on this strange idea (optional):

- Different, but a good way to make people actually evaluate the course. Maybe some algorithm problem at the end of the evaluation?»
- Incomprehensible.»
- Good!»
- Silly»
- If a student would not be interested in answering the enquiry they could simply leave as many questions as possible blank or uncorrect, if many students do this the result could be misguiding.»
- A good idéa to actually get people to answer these evaluation forms.»
- Stupid. What happens if i lose the number? Does that mean that I"m not as good at algorithms as the other students or just that i am clumsy?»
- chance guess .0015 hot too high. still don"t see any numbers starting with 0»
- This is an exercise in futility. Entirely pointless.»
- ...what if everyone picks the same number?»
- Why not only one number, I mean it does not matter which particular one we pick, right?»
- The way you put it makes me want to cheat. Apparently I didn"t.»
- Funny»
- Cool»
- Works! »
- It"s okay I think.»
- Would have been smarter to show a number when you submit the answers and not before. In a popup maybe.»
- Always good too get free point :)»
- Great! Love it. Finally somebody daring to think in new ways. Even if it doesn"t work out, your courage is great for even trying it. But mind you - it better be a secret-number-question on the August exam too. Or I will not be happy. Because I"m not doing the exam in May. »
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.87

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.87
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.71

Kursutvärderingssystem från