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.

Discrete event control and optimization, SSY220, ht2009

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-12 - 2009-10-26
Antal svar: 16
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 48%
Kontaktperson: Madeleine Persson»

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.

15 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»5 33%
Around 20 hours/week»2 13%
Around 25 hours/week»5 33%
Around 30 hours/week»3 20%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- Hard to say, to much administrative time around all the handins.» (?)
- Some variations depending on our prior knowledge about the subjects covered.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- First half of the course was rather easy for me so the working time was not distributed equally.» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

16 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»1 6%
50%»2 12%
75%»5 31%
100%»8 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

- Actually, my courses clashed with one another.» (25%)
- 50% of the lectures collided with the course in Artificial Neural Networks.» (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?

16 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»5 31%
The goals are difficult to understand»2 12%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»3 18%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»6 37%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- Are there any course goals anywhere? Have been looking for these..» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- A course syllabus would have been appreciated. The goals of the course was left for the individual student to figure out for themselves. Not optimal.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Bad to say the least.» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- I do think some of the goals were not covered in the course. Especially the PLC implementation mentioned.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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.

14 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 21%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»10 71%
No, the goals are set too high»1 7%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

- see previous question.» (?)
- Way too low. An advanced level course should require much more than this! (whatever the goals were. I"m referring to the exam)» (No, the goals are set too low)

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

15 svarande

No, not at all»2 13%
To some extent»4 26%
Yes, definitely»2 13%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»7 46%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- No, not at all.» (No, not at all)
- the examination was appropriate considering the lectures, but as stated before, the goals were too vague. So the examination was good, but the goals weren"t.» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

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

16 svarande

Small extent»4 25%
Some extent»5 31%
Large extent»5 31%
Great extent»2 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

- The worst case of teaching and course administration I have encountered.» (Small extent)
- They give a summary of the material. Well enough to pass the exam.» (Some extent)
- Good content in the lectures, but vary unstructured. Easy things were explained throughly (eg. the straight line equation!) while harder things were gone through very quickly (eg. simplex phase 1).» (Some extent)
- The course was a bit different due to the structure. I think that we as students are not used to be able to request lectures. Therefore were there no requests. When I myself was wondering about something I looked it up in the litterature instead of requesting it to be brought up on a lecturer. However, I think the structure and idea behind the course really worked. I felt that the hand-ins greatly helped me to learn.» (Large extent)
- Since there was no course book, the lectures were important.» (Great extent)

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

16 svarande

Small extent»3 18%
Some extent»8 50%
Large extent»4 25%
Great extent»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.18

- There were no course literature, which was very bad. It was hard to find good additional information online on some things (i.e. modular + compositional synthesis). You felt forced to attend lectures as you could else not know what you were supposed to know.» (Small extent)
- The course literature seems scattered and without focused layout.» (Small extent)
- No literature» (Small extent)
- No course book, but additional litterature for the hand-ins helped a lot for the understanding of the theory.» (Some extent)

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

16 svarande

Very badly»2 12%
Rather badly»8 50%
Rather well»4 25%
Very well»2 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- Why don"t just use the upload at studentportalen?» (Very badly)
- The webpage was updated quite seldom and the teacher didn"t inform directly that there were something new. If the webpage is often updated, the teacher musn"t inform, but if it"s seldom updated the students stop visiting it regularly. It was also bad structured. Remove eg. all abbreviations in the titles!» (Rather badly)
- No structure on the web page. Lecturer wanted us to read about the subject before the lecture, but it was very hard to prepare with the material put on the web page, since it was hard to anticipate which document concerend which lecture.» (Rather badly)
- More structure on the homepage is needed. Mostly because the complete literature is on pdf and there is no clear information about what is important to read and what contains what.» (Rather badly)
- Some of the hand-ins seemed unnecessary to the course and writing of the rework required more pages written than often was possible.» (Rather badly)
- Why not use the built-in functions of the student portal to submit the hand-ins?» (Rather badly)
- Concidering the amount of reports and reviews in the course I think it worked rather well.» (Rather well)
- Mostly it worked ok.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

16 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 12%
Rather good»4 25%
Very good»6 37%
I did not seek help»4 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

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

16 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»1 6%
Very well»15 93%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

- It isn"t hard to work with people you are already in contact with.» (Very well)

11. Was the time for the hands-in sufficient?

- Yes, it was sufficient.»
- yes»
- YES»
- It felt like a thight schedule at the start but I think it was sufficiant. The schedule can be kept for the next year.»
- yes»
- Yes»
- Yes, except for some bad deadlines (too close to the last lecture about the subject). But the deadlines were adjusted once - that was very good!»
- yes, definetly.»
- No. Too narrow deadlines. Would instead recommend to have the first deadline much earlier, so the other deadlines did not have to be so close together. »
- I think they took to much time. There was no possibility to study the literature or solve problems during the course because there was always a deadline hanging over your head which you had to work with instead. 10 handins in a 7,5 point course are to many.»
- Yes»
- No, this handin system was a complete mess.»
- To many and to mouch time on report writing»
- No. It would be sufficient, if we have taken only one course. It is difficult to concentrate in the second course.»
- yes»

12. Was the time for the reviewing sufficient?

- Yes, it was sufficient.»
- not always»
- YES»
- Yes»
- could be more, if files were distributed faster»
- Yes»
- Yes, furthermore see 11»
- it depends how much work you put in it....»
- see question 11. Same thing.»
- see above»
- yes»
- No, this handin system was a complete mess.»
- yes»

13. Was the time for the rework sufficient?

- For handin"s it was sufficient, but not for the assignment.»
- yes»
- YES»
- Yes»
- yes»
- Yes»
- Yes, furthermore see 11. It would be good though if several deadlines were not on the same date.»
- i think so»
- see q 11.»
- see above»
- yes»
- No, this handin system was a complete mess.»
- yes»

14. Was the time for the assignment sufficient?

- Yes, it was sufficient. But the rework time for assignment was not sufficient.»
- no»
- YES»
- It could have been shorter without any problems.»
- yes»
- Yes»
- Yes»
- no. but for the next time please think of the tasks you hand out first yourself if there are some trapdoors or stuff one really cannot find in the text. this would have saved us hours of work.»
- Spent very much time on the assignments. This, unfortonately, resulted in a much deeper knowledge of Optimization than of SCT.»
- see above. The assignment was really interesting and felt like an important part of the course, and what you wanted to actually learn. I would prefer to have more assignments and less theoretical handins.»
- yes»
- No, had would like put more time in solving assignment like this instead of meaningless reviews and essays.»
- Yes. It is sufficient»
- yes»

15. How was the course workload?

16 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»4 25%
Adequate»5 31%
High»5 31%
Too high»2 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.31

- The workload was adequate, but it focused on the wrong things. We had almost to exercises to solve, just scientific papers to write. It sometimes felt like a course in writing papers...» (Low)
- it is impossible to read all the material on the webside...» (High)
- Much time spent on handins.» (High)
- Because of the 10 handins.» (High)
- too many reports, specialy with that format, make us have to choose beetween a good report or a satisfactory one» (Too high)

16. How was the total workload this study period?

16 svarande

Too low»1 6%
Low»1 6%
Adequate»7 43%
High»4 25%
Too high»3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- because the other course didn"t have so much work as this one, otherwise it would have been extremely high» (Adequate)
- The course in Artificial Neural Networks (which I know others than me also took at the same time) has a very high workload, so the total workload is high.» (High)
- I took 3 courses, otherwise it would have been ok.» (Too high)
- I did studied Humanoid robotics and also the preparation part of the SCM design project. This was absolutely to much, i think on the average i spent 60h / week to keep up with handins and deadlines.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

17. What is your general impression of the course?

16 svarande

Poor»5 31%
Fair»2 12%
Adequate»6 37%
Good»2 12%
Excellent»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I think that the level is too low.» (Poor)
- focus on report writing and not problem solving» (Poor)
- Feels more like a course in english writing. The control part was mostly repetition from the IDES course.» (Poor)
- Liked the subject. » (Adequate)
- I think the aim should be more on problem solving and how to apply the knowledge learned. Not on writing technical reports on theory and doing A LOT of review work.» (Adequate)

18. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- I think everything seems very reasonable and should be kept for the next year aswell. Just the administration can be made even better which include a more clearer deadlines and course lectures timings»
- the theorectical classes and the more practice ones»
- All contents»
- The model of learning chosen with hand-ins and reviews. I think it should be used in other courses as well so that students can get used to it.»
- assignment»
- Some report writing and the course subjects.»
- The assignment»
- the general structure, skip of the monday morning lecture»
- The assignment were a large optimization problem was solved.»
- The assignment and the lectures.»
- The assignment was good and probably needs to be expanded with more problems.»
- Almost nothing.»
- the assignment »
- The assignment problem from optimization»
- The assignment was good.»

19. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- I cannot think of anything which should be changed for next year definitely.»
- the type or amount of hand-ins»
- Hand in 3 maybe.. make it more to synthesis and modular problem based. »
- The opportunity to request lectures might be removed since it does not seem to work. i belive it is because we as students are not used to this.»
- hand ins»
- Go deeper, so that the course more reflects a course on advanced level.»
- Not writing so many papers! More excersises to solve (not necessarily more excersise hours, but so you have a possibility to practise on your own)»
- More about how to apply optimization in SCT and less repetition form ides. More focus on SCT less optimization»
- The structure of the available course material. A course book would be ideal.»
- Only have 1 theoretical handin or skip some of the review steps. Add one more assignment, maybe solve a problem with supremica?»
- There should be more assignments that you can practice on for calculating LP and synthesizing problems. »
- The course layout»
- all the hand-in»
- Change the hand-in"s, maybe change to one or two more assignments. Extend the material om automata control.»

20. Additional comments

- The excercise classes can be made more understanding and clear with little more effort from the teacher of the excercise»
- the course its a little confuse, it isn"t very well organized»
- Excellent and well described either from lecturer or tutor»
- I would have liked to have a hand-in on automatons instead of the specifcation in hand-in 3. Furthermore, some more about how discrete event control can be implemented into industrial systems. Additionally, some more stuff about the connection between discrete event control and the optimization part should have been good.»
- Perhaps too much report writing. As a physics student, I"ve already got a whole lot of training in this. »
- try to be less confusing :) both of you... Thanks for the course, in gerneral i really liked it but i my oppinion a shift of emphasis would really enhance it.»
- I think it is better that the lecturer decide what to have lectures on than the student. As a student you dont know the subject and thus do not know what you want to learn more about.»
- Please understand that the course layout this course is copyed after is a projcet course and thus set to engage discussion around experimental research and not small theoritcal papers. This layout can never succed like this and I would suggest it to be changed completly. If one prefers this system I think that this course should focus around bigger (or more) assignment and thus cover more advanced algorithms. The essays where actually the worst mess I have ever encountered my whole time as a student. Furthermore, it is hard to put effort into something when the teaching has as dull attitute as it does within this course. If know ambition exists for teaching this course it is suggested no to instead of luring ambitious student to it and wasting there time. As I expect the teachers time aren"t free, I want to stress that mine isn"t either and will conclude this with that.»
- In general, writing scientific papers is good. The course content could be more structured. Like, SCT has more problems in examination point of view, but the number of lectures and exercise classes were less. More time in SCT would be nice and might be helpful for the students.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från