ENKÄTER

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

Antenna Engineering, SSY100, MPMPE, VT2010, SSY100

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-05-17 - 2010-05-31
Antal svar: 16
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 25%
Kontaktperson: Sheila Galt»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Elektroteknik 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 over the entire study period.

16 svarande

At most 15 hours/week» 4 25%

Around 20 hours/week» 5 31%

Around 25 hours/week» 2 12%

Around 30 hours/week» 4 25%

At least 35 hours/week» 1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- At first I tried a lot to cope with the course, but further on I realized studying or attending lectures and tutorials and reading course book are not helping to understand this course AT ALL» (At most 15 hours/week)

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

16 svarande

0%» 0 0%

25%» 0 0%

50%» 5 31%

75%» 6 37%

100%» 5 31%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Was not optional.. I would have attended to 100% if i could» (50%)
- It was almost waste of time to attend lectures since they are uncomprehending and teachers speech is sometimes so difficult to follow. » (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?

16 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals» 2 12%

The goals are difficult to understand» 0 0%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 8 50%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 6 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

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.

14 svarande

No, the goals are set too low» 0 0%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 11 78%

No, the goals are set too high» 3 21%

Genomsnitt: 2.21

- Too much know by heart» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

15 svarande

No, not at all» 1 6%

To some extent» 1 6%

Yes, definitely» 7 46%

I don"t know/have not been examined yet» 6 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

Teaching and course administration

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

16 svarande

Small extent» 3 18%

Some extent» 9 56%

Large extent» 4 25%

Great extent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.06

- Teaching is not helpful at all because course materials do not follow a logical consequence.» (Small extent)

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

16 svarande

Small extent» 5 31%

Some extent» 6 37%

Large extent» 5 31%

Great extent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- Probably one of the worst course books ever during my studies. I can"t understand why they have decided to use this book, or I can understand why per wants us to use it....» (Small extent)
- Course book is not easy to understand and the materials are being presented with a difficult language and sometimes there is no link between the concepts in a very same chapter.» (Small extent)
- Course book is very confusing.» (Small extent)
- as the book is the only thing allowed for the exam and it describe a different approach from other texts we are limited to the comprension of this theory.» (Small extent)
- Their are many errors in the book and I wonder why there there is no errata for the book ...its makes it really hard to read, because u spend half and hour on an equation and finally u realize its a MISPRINTING.... u lose ur motivation of reading the book... PLEASE BRING THIS POINT UP» (Small extent)
- The book is not good. It is badly structured and important formulas are in text and not as equations. It is also hard to understand sometimes since concepts aren"t presented in a good way.» (Some extent)

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

16 svarande

Very badly» 0 0%

Rather badly» 2 12%

Rather well» 10 62%

Very well» 4 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- An assignment to be handed in the same day as the exam!?!!? So not good and the assignments were handed out to close to the deadline» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

16 svarande

Very poor» 1 6%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 7 43%

Very good» 6 37%

I did not seek help» 2 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- while asking for a vague point in the lecture,teachers keeps on repeating what he has said and demonstrated which was not sufficient to grasp.» (Very poor)

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

16 svarande

Very poorly» 2 12%

Rather poorly» 2 12%

Rather well» 4 25%

Very well» 8 50%

I did not seek cooperation» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- I think most of student (at least the ones who attended the lectures) did not follow the lecture so they did not have any idea or comment at all.» (Very poorly)

11. How was the course workload?

16 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 0 0%

Adequate» 8 50%

High» 5 31%

Too high» 3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

12. How was the total workload this study period?

16 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 0 0%

Adequate» 9 56%

High» 7 43%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- Would have been too high if the other course had not been very easy...» (Adequate)

Course-specific questions:

13. Please rate the lecturer Jan Carlsson

16 svarande

catastrophic» 0 0%

poor» 2 12%

medium» 5 31%

good» 6 37%

excellent» 3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- Think that they should not use power point that much. There is a lot of slides that they just need to show, because it"s good to have seen it. But I don"t think that it will do any difference in that case, I can"t understand by just looking at it... » (medium)
- The was far more better than the main lecturer.at least his language was comprehensible.Unfortunately, lectures which he was the sole lecturer was too few and these few ones were interrupted by the main lecturer every now and then that was so destructive in process of concentration and learning,» (good)

14. Please rate the lecturer Per-Simon Kildal

16 svarande

catastrophic» 1 6%

poor» 4 25%

medium» 5 31%

good» 5 31%

excellent» 1 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- Absolutely waste of time attending his lectures.» (catastrophic)
- same as before... » (poor)

15. Please rate the lecturer Jian Yang

15 svarande

catastrophic» 0 0%

poor» 3 20%

medium» 1 6%

good» 9 60%

excellent» 2 13%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- He was not teaching in a unified manner.» (poor)
- same as before... » (good)

16. Please rate the assistant Ahmed Hussain

16 svarande

catastrophic» 1 6%

poor» 4 25%

medium» 6 37%

good» 5 31%

excellent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- I get the felling that he shouldn"t lead the tutorials... He couldn"t answer questions that where broth up. » (poor)

17. Please rate the assistant Elena Pucci

16 svarande

catastrophic» 2 12%

poor» 1 6%

medium» 5 31%

good» 7 43%

excellent» 1 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

18. Please rate the assistant Ashraf Uz Zaman

14 svarande

catastrophic» 1 7%

poor» 1 7%

medium» 2 14%

good» 6 42%

excellent» 4 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

- His tutorials were the rare ones that were good, both to follow and understand.unfortunately his tutorials were too few.» (good)

19. Please rate the assistant Xiaoming Chen

16 svarande

catastrophic» 3 18%

poor» 4 25%

medium» 4 25%

good» 5 31%

excellent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- Just copying from his hand-written notes, no extra piece of information he could give.» (catastrophic)
- very helpful...» (good)

Summarizing questions

20. What is your general impression of the course?

16 svarande

Poor» 3 18%

Fair» 6 37%

Adequate» 3 18%

Good» 3 18%

Excellent» 1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- I"m very disappointed about the course. » (Poor)
- The worst course I had in this master program until now.» (Poor)
- One of the worst courses so far at Chalmers, unfortunately. First of all, it feels like there are way too many people involved. Both lecturers and teaching assistants. The lectures are 100% Powerpoint based which in my mind is a very negative thing. When you"re presented with a Powerpoint slide full of equations you haven"t seen before the understanding is probably close to 0%. I would much rather see one single dedicated lecturer and much less use of Powerpoint and more derivations and calculations on the blackboard. The tutorials are completely catastrophic. The teaching assistants are simply not good at explaining or calculating problems in a way that"s easy to understand. Many tutorial sessions consisted of the teaching assistant coming in to fill up the blackboard with hard to understand equations while almost not saying a word. The problems also feel a bit weird and not representative of the kind of problems you can expect in the exam for example. I also think the textbook should be changed. It is natural that Per-Simon prefers to use the textbook he"s written himself but I"m pretty sure that from an objective point of view it has no benefits over an international grade textbook like Balanis for example. My main complaints about the current textbook is that it very much feels like a "work in progress", with references not being correct, lots of mistakes, blank pages, lack of examples, lack of problems and what not. Some parts are also not explained very clearly.» (Poor)
- I was expecting a course more focused in the antenna design within a system. but the coursed is more focused in the characterization.» (Fair)
- The topics were good, but the lectures were not interesting and the tutorials were hard to follow. The tutorials did not provide any further understanding in the subject, the solutions to problems were just copied from a paper onto the blackboard.» (Fair)
- I like this course but the workload for this course is rather high (we must study and remember many things)» (Good)

21. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The labs. They are a really good experience and an oportunity to see in reality and work with concepts and elements that most of the times we study just in theoretical lectures.»
- Jan Carlsson, Labs were somehow helpful»
- Labs are the only good way of learning antennas.»
- the laboratories.»
- Labs were good»
- The home assignments which give extra point for student are good. They encourage student to study more.»
- JanCarlsson and Ashraf TA and Elenna TA»
- The labs were good and gave good insight into practical work.»
- assignments and lab 3»
- Labs»
- The tutorials by the phd students have been very helpful to understand the theory. They should be preserved. It would be quite useful to have some additional lectures only to solve questions about exams.»
- lab-3 (New microstrip patch antenna lab)» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

22. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Tutors,book should be revised and changed basically.»
- so many assignments»
- Course Book.»
- the book and also the concept of the exam.. Not so much know by heart stuff!»
- The workload of this course is rather high. It is better if the workload is reduced»
- TEXT BOOK... please modify this or publish errata for the book... its bad litrature»
- The assignments could be handed out immediately at the beginning of the course, that way the students can decide themselves how close to the deadline they want to start working on them.»
- the compendium is not very helpful. rather the book of balanis is helpful. moreover, the tutors for exercise were not well prepared, they should be changed or trained next year»
- Different textbook, less Powerpoint, one single lecturer and at most 2 teaching assistants»
- The workload is really big, It would be recommendable to divide the subject into two courses and treat more deeply some topics in order to understand more properly the theory.»

23. Additional comments

- Timing was not kept at all, sometimes main lecturer continued teaching and even passed breaks which were so exhausting.Main lecturer should have more respect for the other assistants.There should be a review in every material which are handed out for obvious mistakes. »
- All teachers and TAs are good. They are very pleased to answer the questions of student.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från