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.

MPSTR-Structural systems 09, VBB122

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-29 - 2009-11-16
Antal svar: 32
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 47%
Kontaktperson: Björn Engström»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Väg- och vattenbyggnad 300 hp

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 per week over the entire study period.

31 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 3%
Around 20 hours/week»5 16%
Around 25 hours/week»11 35%
Around 30 hours/week»10 32%
At least 35 hours/week»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- I have no idea. Honestly.» (?)
- Projektet var väldigt stort» (Around 30 hours/week)
- The project for the course was demanding and took a lot of effort. » (Around 30 hours/week)

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

31 svarande

0%»1 3%
25%»0 0%
50%»3 9%
75%»14 45%
100%»13 41%

Genomsnitt: 4.22

- No perception whatsoever» (?)
- worked a lot with the project som didn"t have the time to attend alll lectures» (50%)
- I´,d like to attend 100% but due to the project work you sometimes didn´,t have time to attend.» (75%)
- I did not attend some of the teaching, because much time was required for the design project.» (75%)
- A lot of material is given in class, but in total I may only have perfectly understood and remembered half of it» (75%)

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. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- describe the realisation process of buildings concerning conceptualisation, design, construction, and the operation period including inspection, maintenance, structural assessment, repair, strengthening and demolishing.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»4 12%
60-80%»20 62%
80-100%»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

- It seems to be much general assessments.» (60-80%)
- The course gave a good introduction to the whole process.» (60-80%)
- Didn´,t put as much effort concerning repair, strengthening and demolishing, but did participate and attended at the lectures given about the subjects.» (60-80%)

4. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to
- describe typical requirements on buildings with regard to needed safety, performance, durability and efficient use of resources.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»1 3%
40-60%»4 12%
60-80%»14 43%
80-100%»13 40%

Genomsnitt: 4.21

- The course gave a thorough examination of safety and structural performance. Durability and efficient use of resources were introduced but are discussed more in other courses. I think the course should focus even more on the structural issues and even less on durability, etc. » (40-60%)
- It would be interesting to get even more information about safety.» (80-100%)

5. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- describe how typical buldings are composed of structural systems and systems for climate protection and in-door comfort.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»6 18%
60-80%»14 43%
80-100%»12 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.18

- The course focused on structural systems and only introduced the concepts of climate protection and indoor comfort. » (40-60%)

6. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- use a systematic approach to solve open problems in conceptual design, including analysis of risks and uncertainties and service life considerations.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»3 9%
60-80%»17 53%
80-100%»12 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.28

7. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- describe the mechancial behaviour of typical structural systems for buildings concerning actions, load transfer and stabilisation , and need for movements,

32 svarande

0-20%»1 3%
20-40%»2 6%
40-60%»1 3%
60-80%»13 40%
80-100%»15 46%

Genomsnitt: 4.21

8. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- determine design load combinations for critical sections of structural systems.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»6 18%
60-80%»9 28%
80-100%»17 53%

Genomsnitt: 4.34

9. To what extent have you reached the following goal?

The student should be able to:
- perform preliminary design and preliminary sizing of structural systems.

32 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»12 37%
60-80%»11 34%
80-100%»9 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- Hard to separate "preliminary sizing" from more detailed calculations.» (40-60%)
- kan inte betong så bra. Vi behövde inte räkna på det i vårt projekt så jag lärde mig aldrig det.» (40-60%)

10. How understandable are the course goals?

32 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»17 53%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»15 46%

Genomsnitt: 2.46

- Very clear! It is very good that you describe the learning outcomes for each lecture.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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

31 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 3%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»28 90%
No, the goals are set too high»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.03

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

The examination consists of the individual "dugga" on actions and load combiantions, and project work with oral presentation and a slide show with written notes.

32 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»22 68%
Yes, definitely»10 31%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

- In the power point presentation its difficult to show all the work you have done, especially when you have limited slides.» (To some extent)
- The grading of the "dugga" were a litle bit unfair. If you wrote just a litle detail wrong, then you lost one point wich almost corresponded to a half grading step.» (To some extent)
- Det är svårt att betygsätta hela gruppen på en presentation och en liten rapport. Tycker det borde vara någon form av individuell betygssättning. Kanske att alla i gruppen fick betygsätta varandra för att man som lärare skall se arbetsbelastningen i gruppen och hur gruppen tycker att de andra i gruppen har jobbat. Det va ju trots allt vissa som bara gled igenom projektet.» (To some extent)
- As always with a project it is hard tp know if it is a good group or if it is a good student.» (To some extent)
- The project work doesn"t show one"s implication on the project. It is a global notation and doesn"t show if everyone has understood at least the part on which he has been working.» (To some extent)
- The dugga was a good test. » (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

32 svarande

Small extent»1 3%
Some extent»8 25%
Large extent»15 46%
Great extent»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

14. To what extent has the contact with your external supervisor been of help for your learing?

32 svarande

Small extent»6 18%
Some extent»15 46%
Large extent»8 25%
Great extent»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 2.25

- I had expectet more of the meetings with our supervisor.» (Some extent)
- Vår handledare gav inte så mycket feedback» (Some extent)
- The supervisor, although much experienced was not very good in communicating his ideas to us. It seemed like he was not very comfortable in english yet it was a very nice interaction. We learned alot, but it could have been better!» (Some extent)

15. To what extent has the course material and links on the course home page been of help for your learning?

32 svarande

Small extent»2 6%
Some extent»11 34%
Large extent»15 46%
Great extent»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.65

- Since we do not have any experience of service life considerations etc from earlier courses, the information presented in the lectures is the only way to solve the "problem" we know.» (Large extent)

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

32 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»17 53%
Very well»15 46%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

Study climate

17. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help from your external supervisor?

32 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 3%
Rather good»15 46%
Very good»15 46%
I did not seek help»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Didn" give much answer on our questions. Basically said that everything will work for our structure.» (Rather good)
- Our external supervisor would reply to our emails within a day, which was extremely helpful.» (Very good)
- Our supervisor was excellent and willing to help.» (Very good)

18. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help from the teachers?

32 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rahter poor»2 6%
Rather good»12 37%
Very good»15 46%
I did not seek help»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

- I did not have many questions.» (Rather good)
- did give much better answers then our supervisor. Eventough you understand that the teachers had their favourite materials.» (Very good)

19. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked in the project team?

31 svarande

Very poorly»3 9%
Rather poorly»4 12%
Rather well»10 32%
Very well»14 45%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- Unequal workload due to different ambition with the coarse. It is hard to carry up the work with the project when not all members participate in the same extent. The project is also quite big, overlapping two coarses, so the workload gets really tough. » (Rather poorly)
- It was a bit difficult to coordinate times to meet. Some students preferred to associate a higher importance to social events.» (Rather well)
- One member barely attend the meetings (and only once with the supervisor). It is hard to work with someone that doesn"t have the same schedule.» (Rather well)
- The group work went OK...however there was not a large division of tasks, especially at the beginning of the task. Early on we were just working together all of the time.» (Rather well)

20. How much of your available time for studies in this study period did you spend on this course?

It is assumed that 50% of the time is used for Structural systems and 50% for Material performance.

32 svarande

less than 20%»0 0%
20-40%»4 12%
about 50%»6 18%
60-80%»21 65%
more than 80%»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

- The project took much more time that anything else.» (60-80%)
- 60%Structural systems 40%Material performance» (60-80%)

21. How was the course workload?

32 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»13 40%
High»16 50%
Too high»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- I believe it greatly depends on the scope of the design project and the cooperation within the group.» (High)

22. How was the total workload this study period?

32 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 3%
Adequate»9 28%
High»13 40%
Too high»9 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

- I had three courses» (High)
- The total workload was too high. The combination of lectures, project work, assignments, laborations, dugga, and other small presentations is too much. I dont know if the poorly teamwork in my group made it more difficult but i didnt have time to go on all the lectures and there were to little time for individual studies which resulted in bad results on the duggas and a lot of stress. » (Too high)
- Specially the material performance course had to much assignments to go through» (Too high)

23. To what extent were there connections between the two courses in this study period?

30 svarande

Very small extent»2 6%
Rather small extent»7 23%
Rather high extent»18 60%
Very high extent»3 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

- I did not attend material performance» (Very small extent)
- The connection between the two courses in the project were quite unneccesary. It only made the organisation (different groupmembers in the courses) more complex. It could as well be divided into two induvidual projects.» (Rather small extent)
- the connection with the other course were very good» (Very high extent)

Summarizing questions

24. What is your general impression of the course?

32 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»2 6%
Adequate»5 15%
Good»22 68%
Excellent»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

- I felt that some lectures were too general and perhaps there should be more time set aside to work on the design project. » (Good)
- A very good start of the master programme. The course gives a good overview of the dimensioning process.» (Good)
- Good to have this kind of course in the beginning of the master programme» (Good)
- The course gave a very good insight into different aspects that need to be considered for the selection of structural systems for buildings. The part of the course that dealt with loads and load combinations was very interesting and since a number of International students were not previously familiar with snow and windloads, that part provided an opportunity to learn the basic concepts. » (Good)
- One of most interesting coarses I"ve read at Chalmers.» (Excellent)

25. What is the remaining value of the course in the future

31 svarande

Very small»0 0%
Rather small»4 12%
Rahter high»21 67%
Very high»6 19%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- For me it is rather small, since I am more interested in building performance.» (Rather small)
- ...I hope» (Rahter high)
- good introduction course in the Master program» (Very high)
- The scope of the course is rather very high as far as the selection of the structural system for buildings is concerned. Since we learned how to consider different aspects for choosing the best alternatives, it was quite informative.» (Very high)

26. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Everything was fun and learning, especially the load combinations.»
- THe project work»
- The project»
- The design project is a fantastic and challenging way to bring all the fundamentals together. This project should without a doubt be preserved. »
- the lectures were very useful for us and helped much for the project work. the evaluation part of the project work is also very important to keep. Most important, keep the first study trip, that was both fun and interesting»
- Project »
- The load calculations and some detailing parts. The guest lectures were interesting and gave a wide spread of the structural system parts.»
- The study trips, specially the first one»
- The overall format of the course was rather good. It would be far better if only the concerned teacher deliver the lectures and not the guest speakers. The lectures by the concerned teachers are far more helpful than by the guest speakers.»
- The dugga and lectures regarding loading were good.»

27. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Nothing in this course, but in the material performance.»
- The grading system of the "dugga"»
- can think of nothing»
- Perhaps, some time should be set aside for the design project instead of having lectures. »
- can"t think of anything specific, but still the course isn"t perfect»
- Dugga»
- We could have a report to give about the implication of every member in the project work. It might not weight in the final grading, but it helps detecting really bad group organizations and it can reward people that put more effort in the work.»
- The number of students per group should be reduced to 3 so as to avoid difference of opinion. The swedish students somehow don"t like their ideas to be opposed! »
- I am not sure how it can be done, but a clearer idea of the final requirements of the project would be good. It could be a never ending project. »

28. Additional comments

- Even if its hard to check, look over the workload distribution in between the group members.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från