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.

Engineering Ceramics 2009, KKE012

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-11-23 - 2010-01-23
Antal svar: 13
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 30%
Kontaktperson: Sven Karlsson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

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.

13 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 7%
Around 20 hours/week»5 38%
Around 25 hours/week»2 15%
Around 30 hours/week»3 23%
At least 35 hours/week»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3

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

13 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»2 15%
75%»2 15%
100%»9 69%

Genomsnitt: 4.53

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?

13 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»1 7%
The goals are difficult to understand»1 7%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»2 15%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»9 69%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

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.

13 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 23%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»10 76%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.76

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

13 svarande

No, not at all»2 15%
To some extent»3 23%
Yes, definitely»5 38%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»3 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

Teaching and course administration

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

13 svarande

Small extent»2 15%
Some extent»1 7%
Large extent»8 61%
Great extent»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- Sometimes the lecturer just read out what was written on the slides.» (Large extent)
- surface chemistry lecture was useless» (Large extent)

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

13 svarande

Small extent»2 15%
Some extent»1 7%
Large extent»3 23%
Great extent»7 53%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- SAMPLE EXAMS» (Great extent)

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

13 svarande

Very badly»1 7%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»4 30%
Very well»8 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

Study climate

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

13 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»3 23%
Very good»10 76%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

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

13 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»1 7%
Very well»12 92%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.92

11. How was the course workload?

13 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»2 15%
Adequate»5 38%
High»5 38%
Too high»1 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.38

12. How was the total workload this study period?

13 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»2 15%
Adequate»7 53%
High»4 30%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

13 svarande

Poor»1 7%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»3 23%
Good»7 53%
Excellent»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- The question at the exam are more for momorising the hole book, like a kind of small details...., too many questions, should be reduced» (Poor)
- The final objectives could be more clear for the students. Sample exams are useful in this case, so it is better to be presented earlier.» (Adequate)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Processing, sintering and phase diagrams in eramics»
- Lab1-7»
- Practical labs»
- Labs but with more elaboration. »
- focus on interesting.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Instead of basic concept of material science, lecture should be involved about how those properties affect in ceramic.»
- Old exam papers should be given to all students in order to help them study.»
- Perhaps introduce a lab in testing mechanical properties»
- surface chemistry lecture»
- some of the instructors couldn"t deliver the course information clearly. »
- study method »
- Chemistry part needs some changes. The main problem is that students WERE NOT so sure that they do not need to know this part in deep.»

16. Additional comments

- Thank you IVF for giving us the opportunities to leran some pratical know-hows.»
- The course was very interesting.The way it was run and the the in which it was managed to keep us attentive into the class,serving coffees and sandwiches and other delight,was excellent.I didn"t feel boring at all during the course.I cannot exactly say what to be preserved for next year and what should be changed.But if somebody starts studying from the very beginning this course can be covered for exams.In the end,hats off for Sven Karlsson and his hardworking and helpful team.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från