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.

Fusion Energy, RRY115

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-06-01 - 2010-06-15
Antal svar: 22
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 57%
Kontaktperson: Tünde Fülöp»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

Your own effort

1. Please describe your background (educational, work experience, previous environmental courses.)!

- Elektroteknik, Miljöteknik, Sustainable energy futures»
- Chemical and Process Engineering, focus on separation technology and process simulation, work experience: in the field of mechanical and chemical eng. (e.g. Magna Steyr, Wacker Chemie)»
- MPAPP, Engineering Physics »
- Engeneering physics and master program nuclear engineering»
- Engineering physics Bachelor»
- teknisk fysik, applied physics. Kurser i miljöfysik och subatomär fysik som gav intresse för fusion.»
- Physical Engineering»
- Kf and MPNUE, i.e., not that much knowledge about electric and magnetic fields, but basic courses in wave physics, quantum physics, nuclear science and some environmental courses. »
- Nuclear Engineering»
- Bachelor"s degree in Electric Engineering Currently a student at the Nuclear Engineering Master"s programme.»
- B.Sc in Electrical and Electronic Engineering»
- Have attended some courses about plasma physics and "general physics", but none in nuclear nor radioactivity sciences.»
- Physics. »
- Bachelor in Teknisk Fysik 1 years study at the masters programme in applied physics»
- I am from Electric Power Dept.»
- Bsc in Electrical and electronic engineering Msc student in Nuclear engineering »
- BSc in EEE MSc in Nuclear Engineering»
- PhD student.»
- Engineering background, related to mechanic and energy systems.»
- Electric Power Engineering»
- energy conversion, energetic, internal combustion engines, power plants and also the course about energy production and transportation...»

2. How did you find the difficulty level of the course in relation to your background?

22 svarande

Too easy»5 22%
Suitable»16 72%
Too difficult»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 1.81

3. 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.

22 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»11 50%
Around 20 hours/week»7 31%
Around 25 hours/week»3 13%
Around 30 hours/week»1 4%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.72

- more when there uptil the oral exam» (At most 15 hours/week)
- The recommended readings were quite helpful and well selected.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- I worked a lot because I did not know what was the level asked for.» (Around 25 hours/week)

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.

4. How understandable are the course goals?

22 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 13%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»4 18%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»15 68%

Genomsnitt: 3.4

5. 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.

20 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 15%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»17 85%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

6. Should the course cover more or fewer topics?

22 svarande

more»1 4%
reasonable»18 81%
fewer»3 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.09

- It shouldn"t cover more topics as such, but maybe go into deeper "technical" details in those covered.» (reasonable)

7. Which subjects are particularly difficult?

22 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

basic notions»1 4%
plasma physics»9 40%
ignition criterion»3 13%
tokamaks»2 9%
stellarators»5 22%
plasma heating»4 18%
diagnostics»14 63%
safety»2 9%

- without physics background higher workload, but reasonable» (plasma physics, diagnostics)
- also some of the plasma confinement» (plasma heating, diagnostics)
- Safety issues were rather difficult to understand in only one lecture -for me at least- since i was not familiar with radioactive emissions, dose units, and so on... What had to be known about the stellarator topic to PASS the course (even with top-grade) was pretty OK, but understanding everything that had been presented during the guest lecture was quite a tough job!» (stellarators, safety)
- No subject felt particularly difficult, although the total amount of reading was much. » ()

8. Which subjects are particularly interesting?

- confinement, ICF, stellarators and heating»
- stellarators, heating systems, tokamaks»
- the physics behind a working fusion reactor»
- plasma physics, tokamaks/stellarators.»
- Stellarators»
- Tokamaks, Stellarators, Plasma Heating»
- Plasma physics and diagnostics»
- Plasma physics, ignition criterion, diagnostics. (the physics)»
- Tokamaks»
- Safety»
- tokamaks»
- Tokamaks.»
- Plasma Heating»
- all of them are interesting »


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

22 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»0 0%
75%»14 63%
100%»8 36%

Genomsnitt: 4.36

- did not attend thursday sessions and missed one or two lectures.» (75%)

10. To what extent has the lectures and discussion sessions been of help for your learning?

22 svarande

Small extent»2 9%
Some extent»4 18%
Large extent»12 54%
Great extent»4 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- The discussion session on Thursdays is a very good and helpful idea.» (Large extent)
- Did not attend the discussions, but the lectures were great!» (Great extent)

11. If there were more lectures, would you actually attend more?

21 svarande

yes»15 71%
no»6 28%

Genomsnitt: 1.28

12. How much did you understand already in class?

22 svarande

(almost) everything»2 9%
most of it»10 45%
part of it»8 36%
a bit, I got an idea»2 9%
(almost) nothing»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- most when studying to the oral exam.» (part of it)
- I usually understand new things when I get some perspective, after lectures. » (part of it)

13. What is your opinion about Tünde"s lectures?

- As always she talk"s too fast. But they are very interesting and she tells us in a way that makes us understand.»
- overall very good lectures and structure, in some cases you spent a little bit too much time on easier topics and too less on complicated ones »
- Good.»
- good»
- good, a few times maybe to complicated.»
- Good»
- OK»
- Very good»
- The lectures are well structured and easy to follow. The content is always relevant.»
- Excellent»
- Pedagogical and pretty easy to follow (notably thanks to the "repetition part")»
- Very good! Sometimes a bit "hand waving" about physical principles though. »
- very good»
- Easy to understand compared to others»
- very good»
- best»
- See above.»
- Great lectures, Tünde succeeds to catch our attention, making the lectures much easier to follow even if the subject is difficult (regarding my background).»
- Excellent»
- very good»

14. What is your opinion about István"s lectures (inertial confinement)?

- Good and interesting, although not as easy too listen to as tünde.»
- not optimal structure of the lecture»
- Good, nice with a different topic.»
- not so good»
- hard to follow and complicated»
- Good»
- OK»
- Over-all good. I personally think there could have been more information on the slides, sometimes it was hard to understand the content in retrospect. This was of course complemented by the lecture notes, but I still felt that more specific slides would have been welcome.»
- Good, although too quick on the basics. »
- good»
- Bit difficult»
- good»
- good»
- Clear, but more difficult than all the other lectures (except guests).»
- Too difficult, I didn"t manage to follow regarding my lack of physics background.»
- nice»
- good but rather difficult»

15. What is your opinion about Thomas" lecture (heating)?

- Very interesting and a good structure. Some parts was hard to understand and some very easy.»
- managed it very well to explain the basics of the heating systems»
- Good.»
- did not attend»
- good one. interesting»
- Not so good»
- Good»
- Very good»
- Interesting and relevant lecture. Good with some repetition of the previous topics as well.»
- Excellent»
- Good! »
- very good»
- Good»
- good»
- good»
- Easy to follow. Good level.»
- Was OK regarding my background.»
- very Good»
- very good and very clear»

16. What is your opinion about Dirk Hartmann"s lecture (stellarators)?

- An advanced lecture but also this one very interesting. Hard to understand things that were totally new to me.»
- too many slides - too short time to explain everything, was in my opinion the worst lecture (although I´,m much more interested in stellarators than in tokamaks)»
- Very interesting.»
- good»
- greate and there should be more about stellarators in the course...»
- Not so good»
- OK»
- Very interesting»
- Good.»
- good»
- Lots of technical and numerical facts...»
- Good, although I don"t really remember.»
- very good»
- Difficult»
- good»
- good»
- Clear, but somewhat higher level.»
- Was OK regarding my background.»
- good»
- a bit difficult to follow»

17. What is your opinion about Marco Cecconello"s lecture (diagnostics)?

- It was a bit messy.»
- parts got very complex, also too many slides for the short time (general: maybe you should change from 90min lectures to 120-135 min for future guest lectures)»
- Very interesting.»
- very much information in a short time...»
- maybe the most difficult one.»
- Not so good»
- OK»
- To much information»
- The lecture was poorly planned and the content sometimes felt too advanced.»
- A bit too dense to be digested in a single 2h lecture, although very interesting»
- Too technical. »
- very boring, many unnecessary details»
- Very difficult»
- good»
- good»
- Perfect for me!»
- Cabbalistic.»
- A bit high»
- difficult to follow»

18. What is your opinion about Gergely Papp"s lecture (safety)?

- Didn"t attend.»
- very good lecture with good structure»
- Good.»
- ok»
- ok»
- Good»
- OK»
- Very good an interesting»
- Good structure and content. Easy to follow and interesting.»
- good»
- Good. »
- Good»
- good»
- good»
- Good and clear lecturer, but tooooo long lecture about something totally uninteresting.»
- Good lecture, easy to follow.»
- good»
- very good»

Course organisation

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

22 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 4%
Rather well»8 36%
Very well»13 59%

Genomsnitt: 3.54

- To many small "sugestet reading papers"» (Rather badly)

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

22 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»4 18%
Large extent»13 59%
Great extent»5 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- The lecture notes and the McCracken & Stott book are good if one missed a lecture (they help to get the overall picture), but the other recommended readings are more useful to understand the "details"» (Some extent)
- did not look in the any book because all other material... slides and compendium were very good!» (Large extent)

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

22 svarande

Small extent»2 9%
Some extent»4 18%
Large extent»12 54%
Great extent»4 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

Study climate

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

22 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»4 18%
Very good»16 72%
I did not seek help»2 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- question hour is a very good idea» (Very good)

23. How was the course workload?

22 svarande

Too low»2 9%
Low»4 18%
Adequate»10 45%
High»6 27%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.9


24. What is your opinion about the oral exam?

- A good way to test the students. Although some may be more happy than others. Just 4-6 questions means that it is a big risk someone get"s questions one cannot answer. And at the same time the other way around.»
- preferable compared to a written examination, fair examination maybe one or two more questions on the exam»
- Very good, friendly atmosphere. »
- pretty good»
- Tünde was to kind handing out to many points for rather bad answers.»
- very good in the way that you felt the need to really learn everything in the course. But in the end it tested very few parts of the course and depended alot of what you had written on your paper.»
- Before the exam it was a bit unclear how detailed answers that were wanted.»
- Good form of examination, but alot of information to learn.»
- The possibiity to have notes was a good decision, it felt rather hard to memorise tokamak parameters for example.»
- Ok. Oral exams tends to test oral abilities to some extent, not only knowledge. »
- Good»
- its good but its very hard for me because i am not use to with the oral exam .»
- Did not take it yet.»
- A bit stressful but went well.»
- Appropriate»
- good because it takes less time than a written exam»

25. What is your opinion about the term paper?

- A great way of testing one"s skill.»
- good that everyone can choose the topic himself and focus on the most interesting one»
- Good.»
- ok»
- It was good, could have been a little more pages though since 10 pages is very little if one wanna build upp a report.»
- very good to dig in to a special area. Could be an earlier deadline.»
- Good.»
- The suggested topics were good. The aim at 10 pages seemed resonable. I learned much more by doing the termpaper than I would have done studying the same topic for an exam I believe.»
- Would be a good idea to post a "term paper example" on the course webpage, so that one has a better idea about what it should look like, or what is expected»
- Good to get an chance to get some deeper understanding of a topic. »
- Good»
- good »
- Ok. Good solution.»
- Interesting but could focus on more specific points to avoid repetition from the lectures.»
- Good»
- very good because it gives time to work on search and the subject»

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

22 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»9 40%
Yes, definitely»10 45%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»3 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

Summarizing questions

27. What is your general impression of the course?

22 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»3 13%
Adequate»3 13%
Good»11 50%
Excellent»5 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

- The course aim was really to low for a advanced course.» (Fair)

28. Did the course meet your expectations?

22 svarande

Yes, completely»9 40%
Yes, almost»7 31%
Somewhat»5 22%
No, not at all»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 1.9

29. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The good guest lectures - stellarators and heating.»
- lecture notes to get an overview, links to the literature, »
- the oral exam and the content of the course»
- The course»
- most things, the compendium and guest lectures.»
- Tokamak»
- all»
- Almost everything.»
- Plasma Heating»

30. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Not so much focusing on Tokamaks and more guest lectures.»
- a little bit less about the general worldwide energy/fuel situation, therefore more about e.g. impurity removal/divertor technology, additional installed coils or instabilities.»
- To get higher grade, there should be some more mathematical work, (not just simpel derivations). Maybe a hometask with wome simpel calculations on i don"t know, tokamaks for instance?!»
- set a higher level and demand somme basic physics/mathematical knowledge and take the course to a higher level.»
- maybe the oral exam but i don"t know how and it shouldn"t change much.»
- Diagnostics»
- nothing»
- Better course material. Shorter safety lecture.»
- Plasma Diagonostics»

31. Did you get interested in learning more about fusion energy or plasma physics?

22 svarande

yes, much»11 50%
somewhat»7 31%
not more than before»4 18%
no»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.68

32. Additional comments

- Great course!»
- The course is fine as it is, but it might be an idea to have more smaller hand-ins rather than a termpaper or oral exam so that more topics can be explored further. I believe this would increase learning even further but it would also require that the students spend more time on the course.»
- It would be nice to have some recommended exercises or some project/lab of some sort. »
- I really enjoyed learning about Fusion. »
- Very good course, very interesting, it is definitely a good start! But as mentioned before, the course is very difficult to follow for people without any physics background, despite the great efforts put in Tünde"s lectures.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från