Visa resultat

Modelling and simulation, ESS101, ht2009

Your own effort

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

45 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		7		15%
Around 20 hours/week»		16		35%
Around 25 hours/week»		5		11%
Around 30 hours/week»		12		26%
At least 35 hours/week»		5		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.82

- The literature sucked we had to use internet and alot of time figuring out almost all aspects of the course. The teaching assistents didn"t help at all and there so called "practice solving exercises" were a joke!» (Around 30 hours/week) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

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

45 svarande

0%»		1		2%
25%»		1		2%
50%»		9		20%
75%»		20		44%
100%»		14		31%

Genomsnitt: 4

- The lectures was often the same as written in the book, so after a while I didn"t attend these. Though still attending supervision and exercice sessions.» (25%)
- Mostly the lectures and not the PSS:s» (50%)
- The teaching was very poor.» (50%)
- Paolos lecture were a waste of time.» (50%)
- The lessons was to hard and to theoretical to gain knowledge from. Paulo did not explay why he did things and if someone asked him to explain more he looked offended and asked "why are you asking this" or said "you should know this ny now". His powerpoint slides seemd copied from someone else (which he once said) and he just jumped back and forth between them very fast.» (50%)
- more like 85%» (75%)
- The lectures was somewhat boring... Bet credit to mr Falcone that he seemed to care a bit more in the end. However, the course assistants were not very helpful. It seemed like non of them really cared about this course.» (75%)
- Reading slides can be done at home aswell. After some time I realised that going to the classes was a waste of time.» (75%)
- The layout of the teaching should be changed. In practice only straight reading from powerpoints.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		11		24%
The goals are difficult to understand»		3		6%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		17		37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		14		31%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

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

38 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		2		5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		31		81%
No, the goals are set too high»		5		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

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

No, not at all»		6		15%
To some extent»		16		41%
Yes, definitely»		7		17%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		10		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.53

- exam did not test the relevant parts of the course» (No, not at all)
- Four out of five questions were on the last 2/5 of the course. That"s not acceptable!» (No, not at all)
- The exam were very fair and possible the only thing that the course administration did right.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		21		46%
Some extent»		14		31%
Large extent»		9		20%
Great extent»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.77

- I got the impression the teacher thought he was wasting his time.» (Small extent)
- none, lectures was the worst i have been to. excersises as well.» (Small extent)
- The lecturer and TA:s could do a better job of providing the simple explanation. All to often the topic of the day was a convoluted mathematical proof using new annotations. Lecturer needs to improve his handwriting drastically since several letters look like other letters.» (Small extent)
- Paolos arrogance showed in everything he did. He came late, run over the time and weren"t prepared on the lectures. Using old powerpoint slides that some one else have done and switching between them forward and backward did the lecture unbearable. » (Small extent)
- Paulo is the big issue here. He is arrogant to questions. He often comes late and does not know when we have a break. Really bad writing and he did not write clearer after several people asked him. He does not know the chalmers rules about examination. He said calculator was approved but refused to write it om the front of the exam. This means it is forbidden (se rules on exams for info). This meant problems for all who did not know it was accepted and he put us in aposition where we could be accused for cheating.» (Small extent)
- He comes late to the lectures and does not care for breaks.» (Small extent) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Not at all. The worst examinator during my chalmers time so far.» (Small extent) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- More examples would be good. PSS more prepared by TA:s, better organized PSS» (Some extent)

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

Small extent»		5		11%
Some extent»		21		46%
Large extent»		16		35%
Great extent»		3		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- The course literature are were bad! There is no solutions or pointers to help out. Internet and fellow students were the only thing possible to be able to pass this course.» (Small extent)
- poorly written book, with almost no relevant examples of applying the theories presented.» (Some extent)
- A few more exercises would be good. But most of all some solved examples on print.» (Some extent)
- Well.. You really need to improve the learning material until next year. More specified solutions to each and every task and most important, correct answers.» (Some extent)
- The course literature is bad, but way more better then the teaching.» (Some extent)
- Ok book but could have been more explaining.» (Some extent)
- Good literature.» (Large extent)
- The course book was pretty good, and the exercises helped a great deal.» (Large extent)
- It was the only help for my learning, I read the book twice because the lectures did not contribute to anything.» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		7		15%
Rather badly»		10		22%
Rather well»		21		47%
Very well»		6		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.59

- Course book was good. Did not like the lecture notes. It would have been better if the teacher wrote more on the board. Especially if he was explaining the notes with words it would have been better if he wrote some of that down on the board.» (?)
- Horrible course administration. Bad and confusing information, TA"s were not of much help either.» (Very badly)
- catastrophic, nothing worked as it should. Suddenly we were informed about a mandatory excersice the next day, so people who did not attend that lecture didnt get this info. » (Very badly)
- TA"s very unstructured. » (Very badly) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Unupdated information from last year and pretty unstructured. Not the worst course ever but could be better.» (Rather badly)
- booking of oral presentation was illogical on the course web page, and long waits after the booked time.» (Rather badly)
- No complaints about the material on the web page. But the excersises need new and more complete solutions. Also the co-operation between the Phd-students and the examinator should be better. They never had the same opinion about anything. One of them said one thing, and the others said something different. This happened several times when we discussed what we were supposed to do with our hand-in-assignment. For example they said we were going to have an oral representation, but when we show up well prepared, there is no presentation. We were just supposed to show what we had done so far. » (Rather badly)
- There were misses with booking on the oral exams.» (Rather badly)
- Faulty information about a mandatory lesson. And those who did not know this got a huge assignment compared to what they did on the lesson. The solutions on the web page had a lot of errors in them. That is embarrassing.» (Rather badly)
- Handouts should be available in their final form a few hours prior to the lecture so that those that print them can take notes properly. I assume they are provided so that we don"t need to take notes so hectically.» (Rather well)
- Some information (esp. about the mandatory computer exc) was not so clear» (Rather well)
- Worked without problems.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		11		25%
Rather poor»		14		31%
Rather good»		14		31%
Very good»		4		9%
I did not seek help»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

- I felt that there were no one to ask, because the teachers were so bad at explaining.» (Very poor)
- Asking Paolo a question could result in getting subtly ridiculed in front of the class.» (Very poor)
- The teaching assistents were very badly prepared on their practice solving exercises, couldn"t and nor wanted to answer questions. Comments like "I haven"t used this software in over five years and haven"t done this exercise my self" and thus misleading us are something that CAN"T be tolerated!» (Very poor)
- The examinator doesn"t seems to like questions.» (Very poor)
- Extremely bad! As written, paulo did not respond well to questions. He asked why people asked and said we should know this. He did not explain well. We are here to learn. If i ask, I want an answer. I do not want to know that I am bad at this. A teacher is a teacher. Also the ta gave wrong answers and did not explain how solutions were made.» (Very poor) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- too many student, but two assistants.» (Rather poor)
- Please be more clear about what will be teached during each Problem solving session etc. It got better in the end of the course though. And put mandatory excersises in TimeEdit, so a big part of the group don"t miss it. » (Rather poor)
- When asking questions in the lectures I think Paolos to some extent ignorant position killed a lot of the questioning. All though Roozbeh had a very open way of welcoming student both in supervision sessions in contact by mail or at his office.» (Rather good)
- There where not enough time to get help on all supervision time slots.» (Rather good)
- Good idea with supervision sessions, maybe not so many needed.» (Rather good)
- But we seldom got the correct answer. Also Paolo asked "You"re supposed to know this?!", "What do you mean?" all the time.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		2		4%
Rather well»		14		31%
Very well»		29		64%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- Working alone on the hand in assignment was excessively challenging. » (Rather poorly)
- I only cooperated with one person during the course» (Rather well)
- That was the only way of knowing anything!» (Rather well)
- We learned everything from each other.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		2%
Adequate»		17		37%
High»		19		42%
Too high»		8		17%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

- The most work was put on the hand-in» (Adequate)
- Working alone on the hand in assignment was excessively challenging.» (High)
- It got much more difficult at the end of the course, and therefore ofcourse even higher workload!!» (High)
- Almost all time was put on the hand-in assignment. There were no time to do the calculations» (Too high)
- Because you had to learn so much by yourself, it took a lot of time. Poor teaching. » (Too high)
- The workload were too high because of bad lectures and the teaching assistents.» (Too high)
- why did we have to do this special report on the computer assignment , when the other just had to sign a paper and then could leave????? We hade a MANDATORY laboration in the other MANDATORY course in MPSYS!!!!» (Too high) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		2		4%
Adequate»		21		47%
High»		16		36%
Too high»		5		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.54

- I have two other courses as well, all examinators seem to forget that we have more then their course to think about» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		15		33%
Fair»		5		11%
Adequate»		11		24%
Good»		11		24%
Excellent»		3		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- Bad lecturer and the administration was a total catostrofy!!» (Poor)
- The examiner did not show respect to the student in: go over the breaktimes, doesnt write readable on the blackboard even if we tell him. He came over an hour late in the intermideat reports...» (Poor)
- the worst management i have ever seen. » (Poor)
- It is an interesting subject but a disastrous course...» (Poor)
- The general idea of having a course in modeling and simulation is quite interesting. However, the course was presented in way that was lower than my expectations.» (Poor)
- I think the course can be very good. Because the content is good. But Paolo has ruined the whole course.» (Poor)
- Paolo must be the worst teacher I have ever had and the arrogance both from him and the whole course administration are unheard of!» (Poor)
- I believe that this is interesting, but this course is destroyd due to bad teaching.» (Poor)
- It is an important and course. Unfortunately the lecturer was not good at all» (Fair)
- Excellent course. Horrible teaching and layout.» (Adequate)
- The course in itself is very good. I think that the hearings could be much better though. It was very hard to follow. Both the content and to see what was written on the black board.» (Good)
- It was generally a good course! And, It gave me insight into many things.» (Excellent)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

16. Additional comments