Visa resultat

Wireless networks, SSY145, VT2009

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

36 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		8		22%
Around 20 hours/week»		10		27%
Around 25 hours/week»		10		27%
Around 30 hours/week»		6		16%
At least 35 hours/week»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.55

- There was an exponential increase in the number of hours per week, especially when there was a deadline for submission of reports or presentations !» (Around 25 hours/week)

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

36 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		2		5%
50%»		8		22%
75%»		19		52%
100%»		7		19%

Genomsnitt: 3.86

- Collision with another course.» (75%)
- Some of the lectures were of no use to attend.Or the could have been made more intrusting and improved to be attended» (75%)
- Skipped for 1 hour as there was a master thesis ppt which was much worth the time.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		3		8%
The goals are difficult to understand»		3		8%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		17		47%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		13		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- after selecting the course I never remember the goals...» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Disappointing to see that: -the course goals are out-dated and don"t match to what was taught. For instance: Prerequisites: Passing grade in Probability theory has no reference to the actual course content. This can easily be observed that the people from Networking have little idea about communication engineering. ! To list a few other out-dated items (those that were not part of the teaching ): Aloha ! WiMax ! No quiz ! LTE was the prime focus but the course goals did not seem to mention this. This can be misleading ! The pattern of exam was based on review questions ! and the course goal doesn"t talk about this approach ! Overall, very disappointed. » (The goals are difficult to understand)
- the course course doesn"t correspond to the course content.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Technically we knew what we would have to expect for the exam, but not in very detail till the last part of the course (especially for the project).» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- But no learning of goals achieved because of the catagorization of lectures.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- However, "Goals" and "real lecture" doesn"t match, I believe.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

35 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		5		14%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		28		80%
No, the goals are set too high»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 1.91

- What is mentioned in the course website doesn"t match what was taught !» (No, the goals are set too low)
- I don"t feel that the course goals applies on the course content, and especially not the course prerequisites. » (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- hard from a computer science background. maybe easier from a computer engineering» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Not, to pass the exam, but to achieve the expected and desired knowledge. Most of us didn"t have the background at all and I, personally, needed a intermediate knowledge between OFDM and LTE (something about GSM and UMTS for example): I mean, the overall knowledge of the 1G and 2G before getting down into details of the newest and exciting 3/4G! I didn"t realize if that was just my problem, of my different background or a more commonly feeling.» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		1		2%
To some extent»		14		40%
Yes, definitely»		6		17%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		14		40%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- The exam questions were good. I think, the exam hall should be called a "discussion room" !! It was a sad feeling when writing this exam that most of people were discussing on the answers ! Given that the second part of the question paper was multiple choice questions: Majority of the people writing the exam were discussing. Thus, the examination for this course should be renamed as "discussion" of what we learnt ! Remedy: Use mulitple choice questions in the class like the way Erik Ström used to do. Even though, we sit closer, the questions and answers are well arranged (mixed up) and needed to be answered within 10min ! While in the examination hall, given 4 hours to a question paper that can be finished with 2hours, gives ample time for people to discuss ! Sigh !» (To some extent)
- This was all about memorizing!» (To some extent)
- The knowledge of the review questions" answers could help a lot in achieving a good preparation, but if assigned before (as the first set about the communications" fundamentals).» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		8		22%
Some extent»		13		36%
Large extent»		12		33%
Great extent»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.27

- start with the basics, you go to fast into details.» (Small extent)
- If we don"t have the right background, it"s very difficult to follow with interest the lectures and extrapolate from them the information required to understand the whole topic.» (Small extent)
- What is the aim of this course ? Mug up the answers for the review questions and vomit the same in the exam ? I was expecting to learn by some kinda implementing some interface of a real network, atleast something with a lab !» (Some extent)
- I appreciate if teaching lecture covered "computer networking" as a basic/review of wireless network.» (Some extent)
- Really liked the idea of having some guest lecturer and getting the test of real world scenario.. thanks a lot» (Large extent)

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

Small extent»		7		19%
Some extent»		11		30%
Large extent»		14		38%
Great extent»		4		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

- see comment above. I have also to add that the idea to have so many guest lectures is exciting and is really appreciable the organization behind them! But we needed a wider technical knowledge before, I believe.» (Small extent)
- Learnt a lot of jargons ! Superficial explanation !» (Large extent)
- Everything. This is really good. Maybe not for intro courses, but like this one. It is really good to get this kind of teaching» (Great extent)
- All lectures by guests are grate! Tommy"s lecture was interesting.» (Great extent)

8. To what extent has the supervised self-studies been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		6		17%
Some extent»		7		20%
Large extent»		20		58%
Great extent»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

- Supervised self-studies ??? » (?)
- I don"t understand this question. What does "self-studies" mean? If you intend something, please state clearly on the syllabus AND course memo. Would you please sentense next year?» (?)
- Supervised course element do not exist.» (Small extent)
- what is this?» (Small extent)
- The supervised organization was useful for the project, but not at all for the remaining content of the course. Instead, the guest lecture from the Communication Department was really interesting and I believe that it"s very important to improve the english faculties in correctly writing and speaking of an engineer. Sometimes, during the course, it was so difficult for me to understand classmates speaking or their written sentences.» (Some extent)
- Learn the topic that was given to my group :) that way, the learning was good. » (Large extent)

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

Small extent»		4		11%
Some extent»		14		38%
Large extent»		14		38%
Great extent»		4		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I didn"t buy the book. It was too expensive and it refers only to some part of what we had to learn. » (Small extent)
- Goldsmith overall! Then, of course I know the course was about the most recent evolution of the technology, so there is no literature the can comprise all our topics in one book. But, it"s not possible to learn a lot only from the written projects by the other groups and this is for a number of reasons: they are provided just in the last week before the exam, people worked hardly for long time on their topic and it"s known that it"s so difficult to explain clearly and understandable technical knowledge to unknowledged people.» (Large extent)

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

Very badly»		3		8%
Rather badly»		8		22%
Rather well»		16		44%
Very well»		9		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

- I hate ping pong» (Very badly)
- they have never updated the homepage with new activities going on.» (Very badly)
- Practically no one has ever before seen the ping-pong system that we were expected to use. It was cumbersome and annoying and provides nothing that the more familiar student portal can"t.» (Rather badly)
- I prefer the student portal more than ping pong. » (Rather badly)
- Initially started off with student portal and just when we all thought of looking it up there, it was moved to pingpong ! The administration seem to be very good in some aspects while very bad in others. For the good things, Manne/Nima clarified things when approached ! For the bad things, the presentation dates, they seemed to vary without much notice ! Logbook - pingpong already had a section on logbook ! Did not make much sense to again create a pdf and uploading the same as assignment ! » (Rather badly)
- Difficult to find information, things came too late... Lots of trouble with putting the groups together in the beginning.» (Rather badly)
- The information comes quite late. The lecture notes were uploaded several weeks later than actual lesson date. Review questions and qnswers are too late as well. And no answer to the review questions from project work.» (Rather badly)
- I would have preferred to be able to study the lecture review questions a lot earlier.» (Rather well)
- The use of the ping-pong was helpful.» (Rather well)
- worked ok. some things was a bit confusing. like where to upload files/submissions on pingpong.» (Rather well)
- Here I want to appreciate the teaching staff about the administration and smoothie running of ping pong.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		1		2%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		14		38%
Very good»		18		50%
I did not seek help»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- Opportunities are enough perfect. The amount of information itself is quite less, unfortunately.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		2		5%
Rather poorly»		4		11%
Rather well»		14		38%
Very well»		16		44%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- I think random project-groups are the worst idea ever. Sure, one should be able to work with anyone but getting to know new people takes time and this time could have been used for learning about wireless networks. If I knew that there would be random groups I would never have picked this course. I"m absoluty certain that I would have learned more about wireless networks if I could have worked with people I know and trust. And learning about wireless networks is what this course should be about.» (Very poorly)
- Group work is not always the easiest thing.» (Rather poorly)
- As in most other courses in the MPCOM masters program, you get assigned with people who have little or no idea of what to do, and all you can reasonably do to alleviate the problem is to take a double work load. Again.» (Rather poorly)
- let students form their own groups.» (Rather poorly)
- Cultural differences made communication difficult, but otherwise it worked well» (Rather well)
- It was nicer if we didn"t split other task in the early stage. We didn"t have enough opportunity to discuss common study outcome each other, unfortunately. It"s what I learned.» (Rather well)
- Very well in my group, but really poor or nothing at all with other people in the class!» (Rather well)

13. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		6		16%
Adequate»		26		72%
High»		3		8%
Too high»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.97

- I think the projects could have been carried out better if there wasn"t an abundance of hand-ins. Hard to focus on the content when there were both planning presentations and progress reports to prepare for, with minimum time inbetween.» (Adequate)
- I felt it"s ok because project is not too tough requiring no implementation.» (Adequate)
- The subject is huge and if it is not supported properly by understandable lectures, learning all these topics becomes quite impossile!!» (Too high)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		5		13%
Adequate»		18		50%
High»		11		30%
Too high»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.27

- I realized the workload was too high just during the presentation workshop week, where i didn"t understand almost at all from the presentations of the other groups (except 4 or 5). But, during the course, I"ve concentrated almost exclusivelly on the project, without understanding that we could spend less time on it and more on learning the rest! The project was not expected to provide a really detailed information about the topic, but just a good knowledge of it and of its overall working. At least this is what is possible to do in 2500 words. I think it"s a good length, but the limited target of the project was not completely clear at the beginning.» (Low)
- Only because I took 3 courses. » (High)
- I suppose the study workload including other courses.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		6		16%
Fair»		6		16%
Adequate»		6		16%
Good»		16		44%
Excellent»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.05

- This course is quite frankly bullshit. Manne masters english below the level of an eight year old child. This is in no way an exaggeration. The progress report is simply idiotic for such a short project, all it accomplishes is slow down the actual work progress in order to file bureaucratic garbage. If the project necessarily has to stay in the course, at least clear up the course PM to reflect what is actually expected, there was in no way, shape or form any demands to include a list of references in the project return, prompting a return.» (Poor)
- the teachers seems dedicated, however the design of the course was not very good from a learning perspective. The course project did not work out very well, the reason i take a course like wireless networks is to learn about wireless networks, not how to work in group.» (Poor)
- Difficult to say what the goal was, what were we supposed to learn? Sure it"s good with some general information about new technology and some connection with the real world, but the actual content was very fuzzy. What should the exam test?!» (Poor)
- I also add.. Too much deadlines! The planning report and the logbook seem unuseful! Having a programming session at the beginning of the course could be a nice idea, but maybe it would be better if you plan private discussions with each group and then show just the result of them in class to stimulate the cooperation between different groups. With regard to the logbook, instead, I don"t know if it"s useful for you, examinators, but it seems a bad thing to ask people to write what they have done for the project, maybe overwriting something that someone else in the group has stated in his/her logbook. This seems in contradiction with the finality of the group project (that is the cooperation between members). And it"s also true that everyone could invent all his work! How can you evaluate his work from his own words??!» (Poor)
- In general, there was way too much focus on the telecom side of things, me being from the networking area, this course was a disappointment. » (Fair)
- All we have to do in this course is to learn by ourself. Few of the lectures given by some guest lectures are useful for learning others are so called lectures. What we expect in this course is that we will be given the lectures on many techniques and standards but insded those topics are given to us to do by ourself in the form of project. Projects are good, we had learn much by the project but only for a specific topic that is assinged to us. We are just left with one week to read all the other 44 topics, which is infact at some extant is impossible. Instead if we are given the lectures on each topic and then we will have a final presentation of the project by each groups which were assinged a specific topic, that might have much more learning expect. » (Fair)
- Seems like lectures have a hidden propaganda to promote Ericsson ! Surprised that other companies were not invited ! Qamcom seemed to only support Ericsson ! We are here for the technology and its creative genius, and don"t want to be biased by just one company and its internal business model.» (Fair)
- The project but the points of the project should be published before the exam.» (Fair)
- It is different from the other courses since the examination data is generated by the students. This is a welcome change. But not very effective, because now 1 week before the exams, I feel that I only know about my project topic and very very very little about other topics. » (Adequate)
- I was expecting better guest lecturers» (Adequate)
- Good work Manne!» (Excellent)
- I had having fun! I get used to reading IEEE materials and papers. Learning "System" was fun! Also mainly two masters programm having different culture was mingling. It"s fantastic! However, I felt I needed to learn more backgroud knowledge about wireless network to be sustanable engineer. What is "Wireless network", BTW?» (Excellent)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

18. Additional comments