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.

Artificial Intelligence, Lp4 VT-10, TIN171/DIT410

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-05-17 - 2010-06-20
Antal svar: 51
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 54%
Kontaktperson: Victoria Ewers»

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.

50 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»7 14%
Around 20 hours/week»11 22%
Around 25 hours/week»14 28%
Around 30 hours/week»12 24%
At least 35 hours/week»6 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.98

- Could not give the effort I wanted, mostly because of the nature of the project.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Was writing my bachelors thesis at the same time.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- spent 30-40 houres per week, nearly as a 15p course» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

50 svarande

0%»1 2%
25%»8 16%
50%»17 34%
75%»12 24%
100%»12 24%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- Did not attend lectures not applicable to our project.» (50%)
- It collided with the mathematical modelling course, I was therefore not able to attend all lectures. I did however attend all group mentoring time-slots.» (50%)
- If the course tries to force use to read the book what"s the point with the lecturer» (100%)

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?

50 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»11 22%
The goals are difficult to understand»7 14%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»21 42%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»11 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- Supervisors and the course website have different takes on what is deemed important» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- Very hard course to make concrete, when the goal in some way is to show how hard an unspecific project is» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- The main goals were quite clear. However it was not clear what to expect from the oral exam. In the briefing we were told that we should prepare to answer questions about the project and understand everyones answer, and especially be prepared to answer questions about the parts you contributed. During the exam we did not get a single question about our own parts, but were instead told to elaborate the assignment answers and parts of the project written by other members. The elaboration also included changes to the questions. We were not prepared for this. The process of the oral-exam definitely caught us off-guard and it felt a lot like being set up.» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- The goals are easy to understand, but they don"t describe what this course actually contains.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Actually, I don"t think they could be clearer. They give some guidance, that"s all.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- I only look at course goals when deciding to choose / not choose a course, never during the course. Is there a better way to evaluate if goals are fulfilled, rather than having a question about the formal course goals, that NO ONE remembers by the end of a course?» (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.

39 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 2%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»34 87%
No, the goals are set too high»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

- Maybe asking to do improve what have been done by the scientific community is not possible for some area in the scope of the course.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- I think it was a bit too much to both gain broad knowledge about all the AI topics and make an in-depth project about one of the topics in addition. The focus on the project was compromised by this. It"s hard to both get a grasp of the large field of AI and make a really successful project and research in depth about an area in just one 7.5p course.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Though it"s a good course it aims very high, a project with out a concert goal is hard in in this course the student should create the goal himself» (No, the goals are set too high)
- It was very hard to do a project without having any prior AI-knowledge.» (No, the goals are set too high)

5. The project gives you depth in one area. The assignment was to complement this, giving you a broad understanding of AI. How well did it succeed?

48 svarande

Very well»6 12%
OK»31 64%
Not well»11 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Even though it was a hard assignment, it was definately reasonable.» (Very well)
- I learned things outside of our project area. But I don"t think it provided much understanding of AI in general, but demonstrated the algorithms. Much of it felt like the Machine Learning course.» (OK)
- AI is to broad and the project too short» (OK)
- The project was fun and the assignment made us look a little into the other fields, but I would like to learn even more about areas other than my project. Some of the assignment questions were difficult to understand though.» (OK)
- The assignment had deadlines at the same time as we had to work hard on the project to meet the deadlines for it.» (OK)
- I think it would be hard to improve it. Maybe there could be one or two more lectures. Maybe one after the assignment.» (OK)
- 4 members per group, 4 assignemnt areas. Obviously everyone only does one part each, and thus only learns this part.» (Not well)
- Some of the assignment seem so hard to understand and finish (The Machine learning part)» (Not well)
- The assignment was really good.» (Not well)
- In my opinion, go the broad OR the narrow way. Not both.» (Not well)
- I think focus should be more on the kind of stuff you learn during the assignment. I fell now that I know very little of the other areasa of AI rather than my project, because jsut figuring out the answers for the assignment was not enough to learn about that area.» (Not well)
- Didn"t really have the time to read the book when the workload is so high» (Not well)

6. To reduce individual effort on the assignment we chose group-wise rather than individual submission. Was this a good idea?

50 svarande

Yes»42 84%
No»8 16%

Genomsnitt: 1.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Good if your group works well together. Mine didn"t.» (Yes)
- Otherwise the project would have to be replaced with labs or other assignments because no one would have time to work on it» (Yes)
- It would have been too hard.» (Yes)
- It would have taken too much time to solve the entire assignment alone, and I don"t think I would have learned more from doing it alone.» (Yes)
- The projects are ambitious enough so that everyone in the group had something to do!» (Yes)
- I think it works ok. Saves some time and in the end.» (Yes)
- All the parts of the assignment required a lot of time reading on the subject. It was nice to be able to divide the work between group members.» (Yes)
- it"s a proven smarter way of teaching!» (Yes)
- Definitely not. Maybe groups of 2 persons would be good. Smaller personal projects would be the best (at least for me). The 4-person idea doesn"t work, unless all 4 of them are Swedish friends. I had high expectations and realized that I could not work well this way.» (No)
- individual would have been better» (No)
- The idea is good, however it might result in people knowing very little in some areas which one person has not studied. It also leads to people tagging along on their groupmates without doing very much work.» (No)
- See comments on course goals.» (No)

7. Would you have preferred a traditional examination to our take-home assignment? Why?

50 svarande

Yes»8 16%
No»42 84%

Genomsnitt: 1.84 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- You take-home is far too ambigous. There"s just too much overhead in developing some of the things, that I have had no time to learn any AI.» (Yes)
- I think the course became a little bit too heavy with both project and assignment. It was not that trivial, and took about one week 100% to finish.» (Yes)
- My motivation for take-home/traditional exam would be the same as in question 5. Either go the broad way (with the exam) or go the narrow way (with a project only).» (Yes)
- I would have knows better about the topics i guess.» (Yes)
- No, I think it is more important to think the answers through, rather than just learning the quick answers for a written exam.» (No)
- Again, AI is to broad and the course does not focus on anything, meaning that you could just make something up at the exam and it would not be entirely wrong» (No)
- The assignment was a good idea and gave people the time to study all areas of AI.» (No)
- Fun with a project for once (3rd year bachelor student)» (No)
- That would take to much time on study, instead of doing the project.» (No)
- Traditional exams are major stress factors.» (No)
- Then there would have been even more work not having to do with the project!» (No)
- The finalization of the project would"ve suffered a lot from it.» (No)
- way to much with project and exam, the assignment was accaptable » (No)
- The course"s form does not apply to a traditional examination.» (No)
- Traditional examination sometimes focus on remembering stuff rather then understanding. I think the assignment was ok.» (No)
- At present this course allready take up moste of the time aloted and more cant see hao adding more would help» (No)

8. Should we drop the assignment/examination? How would we then get some breadth?

49 svarande

Yes»11 22%
No»38 77%

Genomsnitt: 1.77 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The assignment is good for students to read the book and get a whole view of AI. However, some of the questions are hard to answer, which may takes so much time.» (Yes)
- The question are very scholar and not very interesting, focussing deeper in the project would be more interesting. Then attend to part of the other group presentations could give some notion in other subjects.» (Yes)
- The course could focus only at the field of the chosen project, then one could take the other AI course if wanted.» (Yes)
- Take a pick, is this a project course or a breadth course.» (Yes)
- I like doing projects. I also find it interesting to write reports. But, when combining it with assignments, planning reports etc, there is not much time for doing a really interesting project. Perhaps the course should be split in two, one with AI-basics and a number of assignments and programming tasks immediately followed by project only-course» (Yes)
- I am leaning towards yes. A possible solution is to make one or more other courses prerequisites (or recommendations) for this one. There is for instance CIU026 "Artificial Intelligence 1", that uses the same book and everything. Would it be possible to have that as prerequisite or recommended?» (Yes)
- design labs for the different areas and let students do the labs that are not coverd by their project» (Yes)
- Does every course have to have a wide span? I would like the course to focus more on the project, and less focus on learning the basic of AI.» (Yes)
- Is the bredthe the importent part? and if yes I would sugest writing a opposition to projects in the outher fields.» (Yes)
- I think that a general (covering) AI-course should be required in order to attend this course.» (Yes)
- Drop the project, have an examination.» (No)
- Individual assignments, and each group chooses of among 3-8 predefined projects.» (No)
- but balance it, NLP is worth more than 1/4 of the score.» (No)
- You should have students do the assignment first thing, prior to choosing a project. That way you can actually make a qualified project selection AND you would have some knowledge to get you started. I feel this would improve the course a LOT.» (No)
- More focus on breadth/assignment! Maybe the projects could be smaller, if students could use frameworks etc so they would be able to focus on actual AI techniques.» (No)
- I think the assignment had too specific and hard questions. The idea is good, but if the point is to get breadth I think the questions should reflect this better.» (No)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 1.71

Teaching and course administration

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

50 svarande

Small extent»18 36%
Some extent»24 48%
Large extent»8 16%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

- The supervision sessions were unfortunately of no help whatsoever. » (Small extent)
- Lectures were very interesting, however they were not very helpful for our project.» (Small extent)
- Mostly learned from reading on my own.» (Small extent)
- Our group tutor wasn"t in the field of our project.» (Small extent)
- NLP was fun» (Some extent)
- Lectures were good, but only one for each area of research isn"t enough.» (Some extent)
- Not very many lectures and with a schedule that collided with other things.» (Some extent)
- The supervision hours were good.» (Large extent)
- The course wouldn"t work witheout the supervision» (Large extent)

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

49 svarande

Small extent»10 20%
Some extent»21 42%
Large extent»13 26%
Great extent»5 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.26

- I never got the book, since I was told it had very little on the subject of my project.» (Small extent)
- Had to find the limited information in the subject on the internet» (Small extent)
- Needed it for the assignment» (Some extent)
- Mainly for the assignment.» (Some extent)
- The book is good, but we only used it for the assignment, since we chose quite a difficult project area that wasn"t part of the book.» (Some extent)
- The course book is great!» (Large extent)
- The book is good, but I didn"t have time to read more than the first 6-7 chapters.» (Large extent)

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

50 svarande

Very badly»3 6%
Rather badly»11 22%
Rather well»30 60%
Very well»6 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- At the moment, the "To do this week" is for week 4, and says we"re in the middle of the project. Deadline is tomorrow. It"s poorly updated and poorly structured. Almost all information is found in "News". Instead of being sorted under a category, whatever is thought of is sorted by date. Feel"s like this is a "first time" for this course, or else there"d be a lot more guidelines and more headsups, and a lot less "news".» (Very badly)
- Would be good to use a RSS feed for the update. Student don"t visit the web page every day, so it can easily happen that you miss some impotent message with short notice. Over all it is hard to find information on the web page.» (Very badly)
- The webpage is hard to get efficient info, but having a supervisor is quite good.» (Rather badly)
- The course website is very confusing, with a lot of the material only being linked to from the "news" section. Very difficult to locate the materials you seek. Also, the "what to do this week" section was not updated beyond week 4.» (Rather badly)
- The website is a bit messy, could be more organized.» (Rather badly)
- The homepage is very messy, and it"s hard to find.» (Rather badly)
- Not enough detailed information about supervisions, demo sessions, project report and the oral exam» (Rather well)
- Could be hard to find things on the web page, like the doodle links. Also, I don"t think it should be possible for everyone to edit the doodle polls..» (Rather well)
- Some information was lacking from the homepage, such as details about demo sessions, oral exam, etc.» (Rather well)
- Course website was frequently updated and was functional, thats nice. Doodle booking and google discussion groups also worked well.» (Rather well)
- The web page was a little bit hard to navigate.» (Rather well)
- It panned out ok. » (Rather well)
- It"s all in threre, yet very tedious to read.» (Rather well)
- Thing to some extetnt the overconcretness of the handaouts limited out thinking but it was good to not have to waste time on thnking about what was expected.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

49 svarande

Very poor»1 2%
Rather poor»9 18%
Rather good»19 38%
Very good»18 36%
I did not seek help»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- We received a supervisor from a field not really related to our project which led to much frustration since we could never really get any help on our topic. The supervisor constantly tried to steer the project in the direction of his field of interest, which was also frustrating.» (Rather poor)
- more concrete feedback on project please» (Rather poor)
- Our handler was either not very knowledgeable in our area or just not especially helpful.» (Rather poor)
- Asking: good. Answers: Confusing as hell and sometimes contradictive. Feedback on assignment (both when we failed and passed): Nonexistent.» (Rather poor)
- As stated before, our group tutor was not an expert of our project field.» (Rather poor)
- Supervision and mail contact with supervisor worked well.» (Rather good)
- Weekly supervision was great, if it wasn"t for them, my group probably would have gotten no work done what so ever.» (Very good)
- Nice with the supervision-meetings!» (Very good)
- The supervisions were great, and we got a lot of feedback there.» (Very good)

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

50 svarande

Very poorly»4 8%
Rather poorly»7 14%
Rather well»16 32%
Very well»23 46%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- My group really did not work out well, my own efforts included. Of course, this is something us students are supposed to learn how to handle.» (Very poorly)
- We were only three students in my project group. One that only wanted the grade 3, one that was sick for a few weeks and I. In the end I did about 95% of the project, 50% of the assignment and definitely more than a third of the report.» (Very poorly)
- 2 out of 4 people didn"t work that much...» (Very poorly)
- I am not satisfied with myself, but the 4 person group idea "tied my hands".» (Rather poorly)

14. How was the course workload?

49 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»18 36%
High»26 53%
Too high»5 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Some assignment questions was incredibly hard to answer with only the book as help. Even while searching the internet it was hard to find good information. This is mostly about the planning part of the assignment.» (High)
- It depends on how much each group would like to spend on the project, but if you would like to actually accomplish something the workload is rather high.» (High)
- I don"t know if our project was hard, or if we just were bad, but we had to put almost 100% on this course from week 4, which left the other course somewhat suffering.» (Too high)
- Since 2 out of 4 people wasn"t working at the project, the workload was too high for the rest of us.» (Too high)
- 30-40 hours weeks» (Too high)

15. How was the total workload this study period?

50 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»11 22%
High»22 44%
Too high»17 34%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

- I followed 3 courses this period.» (High)
- I studied at 150% pace so it was only to excpect» (High)
- I"m working 25-40/week hours with my bachelor thesis.» (Too high)
- Did the course in parallell with my bachelor-thesis, so there wasn"t really enough time to do both to a satisfactory degree.» (Too high)
- Had two project courses = ALOT of work» (Too high)
- Because of the AI project, we had almost no time for our other course. Please start using smaller labs instead of a large project. This way we would have learned enough from all areas instead of too much from one :).» (Too high)
- 2 project courses at the same time takes up too much time...» (Too high)
- We did our bachelor project meanwhile. That added up to a lot of hours, spending > 60h/week in school.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

16. What is your general impression of the course?

50 svarande

Poor»2 4%
Fair»13 26%
Adequate»14 28%
Good»19 38%
Excellent»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- The course is too short to allow for the project to really grow» (Fair)
- I had high expectations, because my diploma thesis was on AI and I am particularly interested in this area. I can say that I didn"t manage much.» (Fair)
- I felt the expectations of us as students were very high even though we had no prior experience in the field whatsoever.» (Fair)
- I had just taken the Machine learning course, and this course felt very similar. Maybe put more emphasis on how AI differs from machine learning? I felt I had to "close my eyes and see if something emerges from the simulations."» (Adequate)
- The way to submit was very formal. And most of the feedback we got from the teachers was mostly about practical details in the submission and very little about the work done. The opposite would be much more educating.» (Adequate)
- A project is a good idea, but I think that it"s too much with an additional assignment.» (Adequate)
- some interesting areas.» (Adequate)
- It wasn"t quite what I expected, maybe we picked the wrong project?» (Good)
- It was a fun course but I would like more breadth and AI theory.» (Good)
- It felt like the teachers and administrative personel really wanted to help the students explore the subject of AI. The fact that there were 110 people taking the course really wasn"t noticable. Good job!» (Excellent)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Weekly supervision.»
- This course is a lot less "gentle" than other courses on Chalmers. Finaly we"re not daddled around with "it"s gonna be OK" constantly in the back of our heads. I like this - not being treated as a child.»
- The group project»
- The possibility to choose any project we want.»
- Mandatory weekly supervision sessions»
- The assignment»
- Basically everything. It was a good course.»
- The project, good supervision.»
- Supervisions»
- The ability to choose project ourselves. It"s always more encouraging when you can do something you really are interested in.»
- The book is good, and the assignment was great for learning.»
- The assignment layout.»
- The assignment. It was the only thing that gave breadth to the course as the projects were very narrow. Also, the way we were allowed to take some time to come up with a project of our own was nice.»
- the project.»
- work in team»
- The lectures should be kept, but since our projects were so specialized, it was hard finding useful knowledge from them, therefore labs instead of projects would be nice.»
- Skip the breath and focus on the project.»
- The oral exam»
- Administration structure worked well.»
- Give more help from the start. I think the faster people are on the right (not holding hands, not pointing directly) track the easier they can understand the problem and narrow down the discussion.»
- The group assignment - no written exam.»
- Assignment, and possibly smaller projects if possible»
- supervission»

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Better information on website. What is the exam sessions for example? I can"t find any information about it on the website.»
- Don"t force people to buy the book! Some might have other resources for getting at the course material, an no one should have to buy the book just to get a look at the exercises. So, for the assignment, rather than referring to exercise X in chapter Y of the book, give the full questions as a separate handout.»
- Course home page, possibly also the literature. The book is the heaviest one I ever bought, and we"ve only got one or weeks before we choose our project. This is not reasonable unless you have some mail correspondanse with students prior to the course.»
- The questions in the assignment.»
- Be less strict on the submission protocol. Remove the assignment and make presentations with 1/3 or 1/4 of the class to compare our projects instead.»
- Don"t force the students to study on the easter break, because that is basically what you did with your schedule.»
- The 4 person-groups»
- Perhaps a bit more lectures and perhaps more "hands-on"-project suggestions. I follow the logic that if every group invents their own project, they should be more passionate about finnishing it. However, some of us do not want to take the time to really invent something good, and then it might be better to just select a predefined project from a list so one is able to get to work.»
- Remove the assignment and make the course about only one of the main AI subjects (which is chosen like this year). If one want to study the other ones, there exists another course at Lindholmen. But this perhaps makes the grading too hard?»
- Having an easier assignment(i.e. more general questions about the different areas), and doing that one individually»
- As mentioned the course needs to be sorted out, either it is a project course or a breath course.»
- Maybe shorten the time to deliver project proposal, so that project work can start earlier.»
- Doing a project could be a lot of fun. However, it is difficult to select a good project without any prior knowledge of ai. I think it would be a good idea to put the assignment before the project, so that everybody knows a little about each area. Also, it might be better to have a list of good projects that students must choose from.»
- Split the assignment in two parts, one to complete early in the course and one to complete later. This reduces the work load a bit in the later part of the course.»
- The supervisors attitude. It is not inspiring to only hear sighs all the time and that "you are not serious" and the only smile you get during the course is when you struggle with an answar on the oral exam.»
- The project took a lot of time, especially coding parts that are unrelated to AI. I think it would be better if the project was smaller and instead of the written assignment students would spend one week on each of search, NLP, planning and ML. During these weeks there could be a lecture and a programming lab where students did some practical experiments related to the subject.»
- I would have preferred 3 labs, on ML/NLP/Planning, so that we learn equally much from each part. With the project, we learned alot, but it also contains much project work, e.g. report writing. With regular labs, this is avoided. This together with a written exam would be great.»
- We need some kind of system to remove people that doesn"t work at the project.»
- In my opinion, go for a broader, introductional approach to AI. I would personally have liked more in-depth in all of the areas, rather than just in one project.»
- Either easier projects with more help, perhaps only allowing a set of well-defined standard problems, or adding a theoretical AI course as a prerequisite.»
- Less time-consuming assignment, more focus on the project!»
- Teach peopla about all of AI! It is not OK to have finnished a course but not having grasped all of the areas. Perhaps also consider using another lecturer. Prasad has a very angry and sometimes ignorant approach.»
- handin»
- Add a general AI-course as a prerequisite to this course.»

19. Additional comments

- Some project topic could more stick to the AI subsection.»
- Supervisors should take more notes to not confuse the students or themselves on what has been said and decided»
- I"m happy I took the course.»
- Really fun course, especially since we basically could do any project we wanted to.»
- maybe require a "traditional" course in AI as a prerequisite? I got the feeling that we knew too little about it to be able to start the project.»
- The oral exam worked quite nicely to find out who has actually been working and not. »
- What is the point of having a supervisor when he/she says nothing during the meetings and P is doing all the talking? What is the point of a supervisor when sometimes when he/she tells you something P will contradict that next week? If there are to be supervisors, let them do their work!» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 1.71
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.58

Kursutvärderingssystem från