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.

Advanced Chemical Reaction Engineering, KBT115

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-21 - 2009-11-10
Antal svar: 17
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 42%
Kontaktperson: Derek Creaser»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Klass: Övriga

1. What type of student are you?

17 svarande

Master student»14 82%
Exchange student»3 17%
Other»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.17

2. If you are a Master student - are you?

14 svarande

Swedish»11 78%
International»3 21%

Genomsnitt: 1.21

3. Gender?

17 svarande

Male»14 82%
Female»3 17%

Genomsnitt: 1.17

Your own effort

4. 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»7 41%
Around 25 hours/week»1 5%
Around 30 hours/week»4 23%
At least 35 hours/week»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

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

17 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»0 0%
75%»8 47%
100%»9 52%

Genomsnitt: 4.52

- More like 90%, but 100 is the closest...» (100%)

6. Were the course goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

17 svarande

No, the goals were set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seemed reasonable»17 100%
No, the goals were set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

7. Did the assignments and project assess whether you have reached the goals?

17 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»7 43%
Yes, definitely»9 56%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- The assignments were very relevant. However, the project groups were not small enough to force everyone to participate enough.» (To some extent)
- The assignment were good but the project become too much of a matlab struggeling problem.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

8. How was the subject coverage of the lectures ?

17 svarande

They covered too little material»1 5%
About right»16 94%
They covered somewhat too much material»0 0%
They covered much too much material»0 0%
Don"t know/did not attend»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- There is room for more material in the course.» (They covered too little material)

9. How large part of the lectures offered did you attend?

17 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»2 11%
75%»7 41%
100%»8 47%

Genomsnitt: 4.35

10. To what extent did the lectures help your learning?

17 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»2 11%
Large extent»13 76%
Great extent»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3

11. What do you think of the lectures of Derek Creaser?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»0 0%
Good»8 47%
Excellent»9 52%

Genomsnitt: 4.52

- At a few lectures in the beginning of the course, you seemed a bit unprepared, but in average a good level of teaching. Good for interaction with the class.» (Good)
- Some powerpoints had a lot of equations, perhaps shortened it some, and us additional lecures with only calculation examples.» (Good)
- He give me comprehensive explanation on every subjects in the lecture. This help me much to understand about the subjects» (Excellent)

12. 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

- Since the written course material is quite brief, with many correlations and little text, the lectures are very important.» (Large extent)

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

17 svarande

Small extent»1 5%
Some extent»7 41%
Large extent»4 23%
Great extent»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- I have focused on the lecture notes (hand-outs and my own). The written material contains little more than the lecture hand-outs.» (Small extent)
- A course book is really needed, used Vogler and Levenspiel, liked Levenspiel better.» (Some extent)
- » (Great extent)

14. Did the course literature and handout material adequately cover the course content?*

17 svarande

No, it was inadequate.»4 25%
Yes, it was adequate.»12 75%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 1.75

- Calculations examples were some times difficult to follow.» (No, it was inadequate.)
- Yes, but too brief. I could however have read more in my book from the basic course...» (Yes, it was adequate.)

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

17 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»6 35%
Very well»11 64%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- Both course material and news were easy to find.» (Rather well)
- Very good updates on the lecture notes and material early in the course. Slacked off a bit in the middle but not too bad.» (Very well)
- Good job....» (Very well)

Course Project

16. What was your project topic?*

17 svarande

Water-gas Shift (WGS)»7 41%
Preferential Oxidation (PROX)»5 29%
Methyl ethyl ketone Production (MEK)»5 29%
Other»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.88

17. What is your general impression of the course project?*

17 svarande

Very Negative»0 0%
Mostly Negative»1 5%
Mostly Positive»13 76%
Very Positive»3 17%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- More assistance is needed early in the project. The code that is given is hard to grasp as it is a very big program. When sufficient assistance was given the project was completed with relative ease.» (Mostly Positive)
- The simulations take the course closer to reality. Too much of the MATLAB code was given to us. It would be interesting to see different modelling strategies from the other groups, but perhaps they don"t have enough MATLAB skills for that.» (Mostly Positive)
- Only me and another were skilled in Matlab in my group therefore we had to almost all the work. The rest where just watching us, Matlab should perhaps not be used since many of the exchange students have never used it. Would be great to run CFD simulations, or comsol multiphysics on this project instead. Or why not run it In HYSIS for the MEK project as Jan Rodmar suggested.» (Mostly Positive)
- I can understand how to assessment some model and understanding about model quality. I think the topic is up to date and meet the actual problem nowadays.» (Very Positive)
- Finally a course project where you get to (have to) think for yourself!» (Very Positive)

18. Did the course project contribute to your understanding of transport limitations and reactor design for catalytic reactions?

17 svarande

No, not at all.»1 5%
A small contribution.»3 17%
A large contribution.»13 76%
A very large contribution, ie much better than lectures etc.»0 0%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.7

19. How well did collaboration work within your project group?

17 svarande

Very poorly.»3 17%
Reasonably well.»9 52%
Very well.»5 29%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- Because of limited experience with MatLab from some parts of the group, resposibility shifted towards the students that came from Chalmers.» (Very poorly.)
- Perhaps it is better to group people after their prior knowledge and not their nationality?» (Very poorly.)
- The international students in the group have not contributed at all. In my opinion some of them lack preknowledge of the very basic chemical reaction engineering. » (Reasonably well.)
- The group members had very different pre-knowledge. Some could not help very much with the project due to lack of knowledge of MATLAB and basic reaction engineering. But the will to collaborate was good, even if it dident work so well in practice.» (Reasonably well.)
- It is nice to meet people from other part of the world and working together to solve the problem. They very nice people.» (Very well.)

20. Did use of MATLAB in the project hinder your progress? If yes please explain why in comments, i.e. was information about starting program poor or was it a lack of MATLAB experience

16 svarande

Yes, very much.»4 26%
Yes, to some extent.»4 26%
No, not so much.»4 26%
No, not at all.»3 20%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- for 2 reasons. 1) MatLab experience was very limited in parts of the group 2) The program is very big and takes a while to fully understand. Some more documentation, perhaps on the course homepage, about what each program does might help.» (Yes, very much.)
- Had to wait a long time to get help in Matlab, the project Derek provided was functioning well. More time should have been spent explaining the program and tasks.» (Yes, very much.)
- the bvp4c solver was the soure of most of the troubles because it was a bit hard to understand how it works and it also gave som numerical problems» (Yes, very much.)
- actually its my fault because of lack of MATLAB experience, it would be better if there is quick lecture of MATLAB is given in the start of project.» (Yes, very much.)
- in the beginning i think we need to make a new program and analyze the model, may be need more clear instruction on the beginning of the project especially using the MATLAB program. Some part of program still did not meet our purpose, over all I think it is a good way to learn about MATLAB.» (Yes, to some extent.)
- For me (and many other swedish students) MATLAB is not a problem. But the international students have had large troubles even understanding the basic code.» (Yes, to some extent.)
- lack of matlab experience+ poor information about starting program» (Yes, to some extent.)
- lack of matlab experience» (Yes, to some extent.)
- some numerical problems...» (No, not so much.)
- It did not hinder the group since some knew MATLAB. But some group members did not know MATLAB at all so they could not help with that part.» (No, not at all.)

21. Was the objective for your project clearly defined?

17 svarande

No, not at all.»1 5%
Yes, it was adequate.»16 94%

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- Could have been much better.» (No, not at all.)

22. How was the quality of instruction and help that you recieved for the project?

17 svarande

It was very poor»0 0%
It was poor.»2 11%
It was good.»10 58%
It was very good.»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.17

- Too little assistance early in the project. This was better later so I"d say it went from poor to good.» (It was poor.)
- Some groups got a lot of help while others had less help, should have been two teachers attending project sessions.» (It was poor.)

Study climate

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

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 5%
Rather good»4 23%
Very good»12 70%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- The assignment were a bit difficult coulnt not really get the help I wanted. » (Rather poor)

24. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students work?

17 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 5%
Rather well»4 23%
Very well»12 70%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- Some group members did not have the propper chemical reaction engineering background nor the report writing skills that were needed» (Rather poorly)
- Well, except for the project group.» (Rather well)

25. How was the course workload?

17 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»12 70%
High»4 23%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.17

- Between low and adequate. There is room for more material in the course.» (Low)

26. How was the total workload this study period?

17 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»5 29%
High»9 52%
Too high»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Taking 2 project courses at the same time can be tough.» (High)
- High, but that is my own fault, since I am taking an extra course.» (High)
- Preliminary plant design required way too much time, it was scheduled 2 lectures 6 exercise hours a week.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

27. What is your general impression of the course?

17 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»0 0%
Good»11 64%
Excellent»6 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.35

28. Level of information/concepts presented in the course was:

17 svarande

too low»1 5%
reasonable»16 94%
too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.94 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- There is room for more.» (too low)

29. Do you think the course should cover more or fewer topics?

17 svarande

more»4 23%
reasonable as it is»13 76%
fewer»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.76 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- May be topic about slurry reactor or fermentation is a good topic.» (more)
- I would like more material on reactions in porous materials.» (more)
- i wouldnt mind have one more topic if its possible but then the project probably needs to be smaller, otherwise would the workload probably be too large» (reasonable as it is)

30. What should definitely be preserved next year?

- More material»
- The 3 assignments should be preserved.»
- Over all the subject was cover much about heterogeneous reaction, may be a little bit about slurry reactor will be nice. »
- The project»
- nothing»
- The projects »
- The assignment were very good. They made you sit down and start working with the course at an early state of the periode.»
- assignments»
- Keep the course as is»

31. What should definitely be changed next year?

- nothing»
- Some additional documentation about the MatLab files would be welcome.»
- No changing is proposed. The lectures and all the topics have meet the purpose of this course.»
- nothing»
- Add additional lectures or calculation exercies scheduled along with the lecturs , two lectures is a bit to few. These exercies should be at least on per every course area, with propper calculation examples.»
- There should be some control of the pre-knowledge of the students. It"s hard to work in a group when there are members who can"t do any work due to lack of knowledge. »
- Let people form their own groups. This will inherently result in people with the same ambitions ending up in the same group.»

32. Additional comments

- It was good course , and i would recomend it to others»
- Hot chocolate is better than cold :)»
- Excellent!»
- I heard a rumor that this course is easy to pass, and therefore attracts som students who wants a degree with minimal effort. This is mainly because there is no written exam. The assignemnts can be done, sitting next to somone better and the project by just being present in the group. In my opinion, there seem to be som people like that in the course, who lack even basic preknowledge and are not willing to learn (not present on the lectures). This course has given me a lot, and for most people theis system without a mandatory written exam is good. But it irritates me that some people can pass the course with seemingly no understanding at all of even basic concepts of chemical reaction engineering. I would therefore like a mandatory written exam or a preknowledge test. A preknowledge test could be introduced after about 2 weeks (before the project starts). This could cover basic chemical reaction engineering, and force those who lacks in preknowledge to either study hard or drop the course. I hope this would prevent people who do"t belong in the course from e.g. being a burden in their project groups. It scares me when someone, several weeks into the course, clame to have never seen an arrhenius equation or can"t put up a simple mole balance...»
- it was very good course»
- Some assignments were to difficult for instance nr 2 in multiphase fluid fluid. Liked the reactor stability part very interesting not that difficult either, a perhaps task 3 was somewhat difficult on assignment 2. »
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 1.85

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 1.85
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.42

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från