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.

Software architecture, Lp 1 Ht09, DAT135/DIT540

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-12 - 2009-10-28
Antal svar: 24
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 8%
Kontaktperson: Åsa Samdell»

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.

24 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»5 20%
Around 20 hours/week»7 29%
Around 25 hours/week»7 29%
Around 30 hours/week»5 20%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I spent around 13 hours per week working at the project, but skipped many lectures.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- The other courses took a lot of my time» (At most 15 hours/week)
- And still didn"t learn anything course related» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Almost entirely spent on the project.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- Very uneven, some week Sven-Arne did not want anything particular and some week he wanted a whole FlightSystem... » (Around 30 hours/week)
- Most of the time was spent trying to complete the project there was not enough time to revise lectures or to study other material.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

24 svarande

0%»2 8%
25%»7 29%
50%»7 29%
75%»4 16%
100%»4 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- That would have been a complete waste of time, Sven-Arne shouldn"t be allowed to teach courses with English as main language» (0%)
- I don"t think the lectures give anything. The professor seems to have a hard time talking in front of people and it"s hard to follow.» (25%)
- I felt that reading the course book was more interesting and effective than attending lectures.» (25%)
- The lectures were so incredible non-pedagogic and held so low standard, that after around 3-4 lectures I decided that it was not worth it.» (25%)
- Well, one lecture, Sven-Arne has transformed this interesting subject to a horrible project.» (25%) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Väldigt låg kvalitet! God struktur är ett måste för en föreläsning.» (50%)

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?

23 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»8 34%
The goals are difficult to understand»5 21%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»8 34%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.17

- After seeing this question, I went to the Student Portal, and read the description, which I found difficult to understand.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Because the project took so much time to implement, it was hard to understand what this had to do with the course.» (The goals are difficult to understand)

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.

20 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»18 90%
No, the goals are set too high»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2

- The goals seams reasoanble but the demands in the project-part of the course are way to high.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- .. if the project will be completely changed to something relevant for this course.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

21 svarande

No, not at all»3 14%
To some extent»8 38%
Yes, definitely»3 14%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»7 33%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- dont think that memorizing steps of techniques like atam/cbam etc is a good way of learning.» (To some extent)
- Not sure what is meant by "Give examples of components that are already in use within the software community." I don"t feel I have learned this. "Written an essay based on recent articles on Software Architecture and presented it to the fellow students of the course in a seminar." - We did not do this.» (To some extent)
- It was not an exam that tested your understanding of the course, it was a "random-sample-test".» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

23 svarande

Small extent»16 69%
Some extent»5 21%
Large extent»2 8%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.39

- We had meetings but they were that informative» (Small extent)
- None» (Small extent)
- Barely worth attending lectures. They need to improve, because now its basically just reading the slides out loud. Group sessions were good, but poorly organized and the requirements were not clear.» (Small extent)
- The lectures were very confusing and hard to follow. The logical progression was extremely hard to make out, and examples were scarce and frankly not very good. Looking back at the slides for reminders is non-rewarding as they say nearly nothing by themselves. » (Small extent)
- Sven-Arne is by far the worst teacher I have ever had. He is not a bed person, I"m not saying that, but he lacks the fundamental skills for teaching. I was really surprised that on a master program on Chalmers that the lever of teaching could be so low. I"m very disappointed with the program so far. If I were an exchange student I would seriously considering switching to some other university. » (Small extent)
- went to one lecture, sven-arne is a great guy but he cannot speak english. » (Small extent)
- The lectures felt a bit messy. At times it was hard to follow the red thread.» (Some extent)

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

23 svarande

Small extent»4 17%
Some extent»11 47%
Large extent»7 30%
Great extent»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.21

- Haven"t used it yet» (Some extent)
- The book is extremely wordy. They say very simple things in long, convoluted sentences. This makes the book hard and tedious to read. Also, it doesn"t seem to be aimed at students at all, it is more aimed at business people. The descriptions on how to document architecture, perform the ATAM etc. are overly detailed. The definitions given to different concepts in the book are often absurdly hair-splitting, also they seem to use tables only for tables" sake, and not because they aid in understanding.» (Some extent)
- Although I used wiki allot, to get a understanding what Sven-Arne meant, the course book were also a good source of understanding.» (Large extent)

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

23 svarande

Very badly»4 17%
Rather badly»7 30%
Rather well»10 43%
Very well»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

- Very poorly updated/structured webpage. We never received any database-accounts, the deadlines for the project were not easy to find on the web page. Also, the Fire system was up and runnning but the web site still said "Soon"!» (Very badly)
- It was not easy to understand what each hand-in in the project should contain. You had to collect information from many different places on the home-page. It was really bad that we got the databases the day before the project was supposed to be done.» (Very badly)
- Its deficult to new students at chalmers .......there are no one to guide them about the cousrse how to register and to work initially with there assignments and projects......» (Very badly)
- The meeting weren"t that good» (Rather badly)
- The information about the assignment was scattered across several places so it was hard to grasp exactly what was required to do. All administration not involving the assignment worked well.» (Rather badly)
- Deadline should be clearer, database account should be fixed before the course start.» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

23 svarande

Very poor»3 13%
Rather poor»3 13%
Rather good»7 30%
Very good»5 21%
I did not seek help»5 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.26

- Sven-Arne does not seem to know what he wants exactly. » (Very poor)
- Emails were never answered. Questions gave only unclear and vague answers.» (Very poor)
- Om inte en doktorand kan engelska så skall den absolut inte få vara handledare!» (Rather poor)
- Sven-Arne did not give any help what so ever. The weekly group meetings were nothing but a q-a what to do until the next week (this just because the poor information on the course homepage).» (Rather poor)
- at least one meeting per week» (Rather good)

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

23 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 4%
Rather well»10 43%
Very well»12 52%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- I could not speak swedish in order to have a better communication.» (Rather poorly)
- Everyone worked, more or less» (Very well)
- Incredible work by everyone in the group. Very happy with the result.» (Very well)
- Although there were a small language barrier between us swedes and the exchange students, the cooperation worked very well.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

23 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 4%
Adequate»15 65%
High»5 21%
Too high»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.34

- Some weeks were very hectic and some week there were almost nothing to do. I felt like 1 week to implement the first system was to short of a time. Two weeks would have been much better better.» (Adequate)
- It"s was good, not too much not to little» (Adequate)
- Unfortunately, out of 6 students in the project group only 3 contributed meaningfully. One student was interested, but lacked skills, and two more students were not motivated. As a result, we could not complete the project.» (Adequate)
- But very uneven, the first 3 weeks we just did some diagrams, in week 4-5 we sat an average time about 60-70h/week with implementation, and its implementation problems. This had nothing to do with this course. » (Adequate)
- There was a lot to do with the project.» (High)
- Insane if you don"t have any _good_ knowledge about how to design web-applications or connecting applications with databases and clients etc in java. Databaes are for example a big part of the project but not a demand for the course.» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

23 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 4%
Adequate»7 30%
High»13 56%
Too high»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- A project in this plus problem sets and labs for algorithms.» (High)
- Both obligatory courses (this one and Algorithms) required substantial work from the very beginning, but many new students were not familiar with the environment yet, and struggled with accommodation/access cards/getting e-mail to work etc.» (High)
- One interesting course done bad (Software Architecture), and a really hard course (Algorithms)» (Too high)
- in combination with the algorithms course, the workload was too high.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

23 svarande

Poor»8 34%
Fair»7 30%
Adequate»4 17%
Good»4 17%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.17

- I sadly felt the course was very woolly, unsubstantial and hard to understand. The impression I got from the subject of SW Architecture is basically that it consists of a bunch of fashionable but meaningless phrases like "view", "viewtype", "viewtype style", "architectural style" and so on.» (Poor)
- A badly planned, poorly executed course with an "random-sample"-exam that did not test your understanding of the course» (Poor)
- The project given didn"t fit in the scope of subject area» (Poor)
- The project has nothing to do with the course, the lectures sucks. In the end you just end up memorizing lots of words that you don"t know the meaning of.» (Poor)
- The course is supposed to be about software architecture but the project concentrate more on java programming.» (Fair)
- I like doing projects, you learn a lot but mostly programming and not so much the architecture» (Fair)
- A interesting topic but a not so well executed course :(» (Fair)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The project»
- The project.»
- The practical project.»
- Some kind of project, but with more connection with the course. Maybe take a look at the textbook example of "Objektoriented Systemutveckling"(TDA592), where there were weekly assignments that corresponded with the teaching that of last week.»
- The project of software architecture should be review rather than implementation emphisis should be on study and analysis of different architectures»
- the project was fun»
- The project could be smaller and to focus on the design rether than the implementation.»
- Nothing»
- Lecture notes and all the course related material.It is very reasonable for learning the ideas of software architecture.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- More focus on the architecture part, maybe smaller projects to try different architecture and define the goals clearly to show what the differences are and why/when they are used»
- Lecturer, project»
- Relate the project to the lectures content. Improve lecture quality with more real world examples and references.»
- Dålig engelska och struktur hos både föreläsaren och handledaren. Detta kan nog inte avhjälpas på ett år och de bör därför bytas ut tillsvidare.»
- more pictures of architectures.»
- Give more examples during the lectures! It is impossible to understand the concepts of the subject otherwise. In the lectures it was basically said for instance, "Yeah, views are something that you can use while doing architecture". Ok, but what ARE views? Please give more examples! Also, it was hard to understand the "progression" of the lectures - where they are coming from and where they are heading. Having slides that clearly show what the subject is all the time would help. During the project, it was very unclear what we were supposed to do for each week. If we were to plan it out by ourselves, fine, but please say so from the start, and what the end result should be! Aren"t those exactly the kind of projects in real life which often end up as failures, those where the developers have no idea what the customer actually wants? Also, working with the project was, without exaggeration, easily 95% coding and 5% "architecture". If the core of the course is architecture and the comparison of different architectural approaches, then why have us code a system of such magnitude? Why not just handing us diagrams and documents or similar and let us reason about and focus on the architectural questions? We used information from the book and lectures only in a few paragraphs in the project report, everything else was completely done using knowledge from previous courses. Finally, the book was not especially good. See above commentary about that.»
- The lectures. Firstly, lecturer"s presentation skills should be improved. Secondly, the presentation content should emphasize applicability of each subject to real life. I don"t mean stories about large projects nobody ever heard of, although they are interesting sometimes. I mean examples, and better using the products most people know and use.»
- is not bad, but has nothing to do with this course)»
- Project should be reviewed »
- let someone else do the lectures»
- Try to help and interact with new students early in campus»
- The assignment. It did not focus on the course content at all. The assignment should have focused on software architecture but instead we were suppose to suppose to spend about 1-2 weeks with the SA and then spend the rest of the time coding. Sure coding is a very good thing to know and we need to practice it. However this is a course about SA, we should practice SA related things in the assignments in my opinion. The assignment did not help me broaden my understanding of the topics discussed in the lectures, which I think it should have. Why not have an assignment that makes us design the architecture of a system from scratch.»
- Project.There should be atleast two projects without any implimentation.»
- I have to say the lecturer. I don"t know if it was the language barrier, but the lectures were poor.»
- Sven-Arne should not teach this course. Phu Phung should also be replaced, when he lacks allot of knowledge in this filed. The project should either be replaced with something that correspond with the course(not web-development or distributed applications, there are already better courses about these things) or taken away completely. It did not give me any insights in software architecture, just more knowledge in implementation-problems and there solution (which is not bad, but has nothing to do with this course)» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Some other teacher who knows English. Different project with focus on architecture or weekly exercises instead.» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

16. Additional comments

- Interesting subject, just a shame that the project and the lecturer did not use that. The project != the course goals»
- I"ve talked to allot of people, both Swedish students and exchange students, and they all say the same, Sven-Arne should not be teaching. After the summerbreak I was looking forward to starting on the SET-master program. But after this course, which is a fundamental course in software development, I"m not sure any more. If this is what Chamlers has to offer at their highest level of education, then maybe Chalmers isn"t the school I thought it was. »
- For the project, we were expected to know a lot about databases, webprogramming and datacommunication. Courses that are not mandatory and many have not taken them. We ended up spending a lot of time on the project which led us to missing lectures and having a hard time cathing up to the exam.»
- A would have really liked to have some exercise or assignment that allowed my to apply what we learned in the lectures. Maybe rework the assignment to allow this or add some new component to the course.»
- Overall the course was good.The enviornment was very good and i learned a lot.»
- The project was not that relevant to the course. Make the course more like the product line course. Where experience industri people teach and makes things relevant.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från