Visa resultat

Simulation of Production Systems, MPR271

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

60 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		1		1%
Around 20 hours/week»		13		21%
Around 25 hours/week»		20		33%
Around 30 hours/week»		17		28%
At least 35 hours/week»		9		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- This course needs lots of practice.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- To much work and to few instructors» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

59 svarande

0%»		1		1%
25%»		4		6%
50%»		9		15%
75%»		25		42%
100%»		20		33%

Genomsnitt: 4

- more than 90%» (?)
- Took to many courses in paralell with this one to be able to attend to the lectures. The one I attended to could been given in a higher paste.» (25%)
- <25%. Did not find the lectures to be useful» (25%)
- had another course concurrently» (50%)
- More close to 85-90% is my guess!» (75%)
- Not all were productive though» (100%)
- but it was the worst experience so far at chalmers except of Anders Skoogh he is one of the best» (100%)
- Some of the guest lectures was given to us in the other courses.» (100%)
- The teaching part is very important and I felt very satisfied with it.» (100%)
- I missed 2 or 3 occasions» (100%)
- I was late in few lectures» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		4		6%
The goals are difficult to understand»		1		1%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		15		25%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		40		66%

Genomsnitt: 3.51

- doesn"t matter you have to learn it anyway» (I have not seen/read the goals)

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

56 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		47		83%
No, the goals are set too high»		9		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.16

- I had a head-start as I did my bachelors-degrees project using AutoMod» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- Somewhat a little difficult to me.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- adding a knowledge test was unnecessary since the project was enough even more than 7.5 credits.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- The project work is too big, make it smaller for next year. It takes too much time, so less time is spent on the other course» (No, the goals are set too high)
- but this isn"t quite fair, cause i am an ERASMUS student, thus my background can"t be the same as of the swedish students - which means it is not your fault» (No, the goals are set too high)
- I considered the course goal was high based on my academic background» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		3		5%
To some extent»		16		28%
Yes, definitely»		30		52%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		8		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- the project work was related to the goal but the knowledge test did not mean anything, it just wasted out time and enegry.» (No, not at all)
- It seems as if there is not need to get a written exam. Since we know that it will never test the students knowledge on coding!» (No, not at all)
- The questions on the "dugga" was not that relevant. Why should we be grade if we now the different levels of communication or not?» (To some extent)
- The presentation had almost nothing to do with the course.» (To some extent)
- Good to have an assignment rather than just a written exam to make sure that you were able to do the programming» (Yes, definitely)
- Maybe it assessed it to much... The examination part was very time consuming» (Yes, definitely)
- results aren"t available so far» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		8		13%
Some extent»		22		37%
Large extent»		26		44%
Great extent»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- Anders lectures have been of great help for the project work» (?)
- not at all, the teacher is not able to transfer knowledge in english language and needs to improve his english abilities. the assistants were of no help and sometimes were even trying to mislead us. » (Small extent)
- Because bertil have to be exchanged, He should not be involved in the student"s learning processs. Anders was great he is one of the best at chalmers.» (Small extent)
- the main lecturers could be much more better. the classes were boring.» (Small extent)
- I learned more from the programming by myself.» (Some extent)
- A bit too much propaganda for the simulation benefits in companies. Though good guest lecturers. » (Some extent)
- I think I"ve got pretty good knowledge from previous courses» (Some extent)

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

Small extent»		9		15%
Some extent»		24		40%
Large extent»		24		40%
Great extent»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.35

- GSWA is very basic.» (Small extent)
- the manual was a good help but since the project was not the main goal so we had to read the slides which were not clear enough and full of mistakes (language and concept)» (Small extent)
- The getting-started maual is good but far too describing often. Could be compressed to half the number of pages with even more contents. » (Some extent)
- Almost completly used the AutoMod help files, although the lectures was useful for other information» (Some extent)
- The slides have been helpful in some cases but they don"t messaure up to the lessons them selves.» (Some extent)
- Most learning was through trial and error, or asking at lab sessions.» (Some extent)
- GSWA is very good to understand automod.» (Large extent)
- Skip gswa and use the build in help instead.» (Large extent)
- The GSWA and AutoMod help have been used frequently» (Large extent)
- great that all lecture notes got published on the web.» (Large extent)
- "Getting started with Automod"!!!! Would have been impossible without that manual» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		1		1%
Rather badly»		3		5%
Rather well»		42		70%
Very well»		14		23%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- nothing was on time, since the large part of the course material was the slides, we had to have access to them on time not a few days left to the exam (for some of the slides this happened) » (Very badly)
- Slides, etc came up fast which was good, but there was a lack of information regarding the presentations, that led to confusion.» (Rather badly)
- Bad organization on the homepage. And some unclear » (Rather badly)
- Too long until overheads was put on the homepage» (Rather badly)
- Use folders in the future for diffrent material. Etc. Automod lecture slides, Guest lecture slides, project etc.» (Rather well)
- Some of the slides were uploaded a bit late» (Rather well)
- Use folders under hand out...» (Rather well)
- I would have liked it more if the results came up on the homepage (duggan..) (written 2007-12-30)» (Rather well)
- Some of them were put up very late.» (Rather well)
- Svårt att överblicka utdelat mtrl. Det går att dela in filerna i undermappar...» (Rather well)

9. Do you consider that the lectureres have an adequate knowledge of the English language, in order to give good and informative lectures?

60 svarande

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

Bertil Gustafsson.....»		19		31%
Anders Skoogh.....»		21		35%
Åsa Fast.....»		6		10%
Jonas Laring.....»		9		15%
Rolf Berlin.....»		6		10%
Hans Sjöberg.....»		5		8%
Björn Johansson.....»		7		11%
Ulla Blomqvist.....»		5		8%
No opinion»		20

- 2,4» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Bertil: 1 Anders: 4» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Bertil needs to further improve the english for the next year, the others were good. » ()
- The grading did not work so: Anders 4, Bertil 1.5 , Jonas 4, Ulla 1.5» ()
- Bertil: 2 (vocabulary could be a bit bigger, othervise ok. Anders: 4» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Bertil 1 Anders 4 Jonas 4 Rolf 3 Björn 4 Ulla 3» ()
- I skiped the lectures but Bertil Gustafsson should improve his english. The others that i have heard is good enough.» (No opinion)
- Bertil: 3 Anders: 5 Jonas: 4 Rolf: 4 Björn: 4 Ulla: 2» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh....., Jonas Laring....., Rolf Berlin....., Björn Johansson....., Ulla Blomqvist.....)
- Anders: very well - 5 Bertil: well but sometimes a little slowly :-) -4» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Anders was great. Bertil have to be exchanged» (Anders Skoogh....., Jonas Laring.....)
- Bertil could speak english ok, but sometimes to slow to be good in a class. Anders english worked really good.» ()
- 3 BG, 5 AS, 4 UB» ()
- Anders Skoogh 4 Bertil Gustafsson 2» ()
- Bertil=3 Anders=5» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- i think all of them have enough skills.» ()
- Bertil:1, Anders:4, Jonas:3» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh....., Jonas Laring.....)
- I almost only attended to lectures given by Anders and Bertil. I think Anders speak great english, but his lectures has to low paste. Bertil need to prepare better to give the lectures, not on the powerpoints that is excellent but on the oral presentation.» ()
- Bertil Gustafsson is terrible at english and is not suitible for teaching. The other was ok.» ()
- Did not attend on all lectures, however Bertil gets a score of 1.5-2» (Bertil Gustafsson.....)
- At the moment I don"t know which lectureres who had which lectures but Bertil and a couple more lectureres have a lack of knowledge in their English. Anders was probably the one with the best English knowledge. » ()
- 2» (Bertil Gustafsson.....)
- it was understandable from everybody that I attended, the level of the english knowledge differed, but no problems to understand and follow any of the lecturers» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh....., Åsa Fast....., Jonas Laring....., Björn Johansson.....)
- A grade of 4-5 to eweryone» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh....., Åsa Fast....., Jonas Laring....., Rolf Berlin....., Hans Sjöberg....., Björn Johansson....., Ulla Blomqvist.....)
- doesn"t seem to work...but all teachers were good» ()
- It looks like Bertil"s English is not as good as other lectureres. But it is enough for me to understand the lectures.» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Anders 5 Bertil 3» (Bertil Gustafsson....., Anders Skoogh.....)
- Ulla Blomqvist was really difficult to listen to. I didn"t have any problems at all to understand Bertil.» ()

10. Examination form

59 svarande

Not good»		1		1%
Acceptable»		15		25%
Quite good»		34		57%
Excellent»		9		15%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

- Way to big. To many hours hade to be put on the examination» (Not good)
- The Project was excellent! Fun and you learned a lot. The presentations however, did not add much value. Scrap them.» (Acceptable)
- Remove the presentation» (Acceptable)
- The project work tend to start quite late in the course, considering the "size" of it.» (Quite good)
- The presentations of the scientific papers are time consuming and unnecessary!» (Quite good)
- Maybe it"s possible to divide the project into two parts one where you have to build up a model with your own code, and another part where you receive a working model and improve it. Many groups lost a lot of time during the improvement part when the had to deal with problems from the early coding. It"s a basic course and you improve during the whole period.» (Quite good)
- A project like this is the best way to make you remember what you"ve done. I"ve learned a lot.» (Excellent)
- But the project work itself is too big in my opinion... there was hardly time for my other course» (Excellent)

11. What is your opinion on the "Knowledge test"?

Not good»		3		5%
Acceptable»		20		33%
Quite good»		32		53%
Excellent»		5		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.65

- I believe it was not necessary at all. Bertil said it is supposed to examine the knowledge of programming, but it was 90% the matter of memorizing the slides!» (Not good)
- Irrelevant questions.» (Acceptable)
- The test was ok, but it should have been held in week 6. No lectures regarding the knowledge test have been held week 7 and the time could have been spent on studying for the other course.» (Acceptable)
- More extensive than expected.» (Acceptable)
- The lecturer said that you did not have to study to this exam becaus it was easy enough for everyone to pass. I studied, and had not passt a question if I had not.» (Acceptable)
- Duggan should have been earlier, somewhere around läsvecka 5 or so.» (Acceptable)
- Guess it served its purpose.» (Quite good)
- It was a bit harder than I thought» (Quite good)

12. What is your opinion on the "projekt home work"?

Not good»		4		6%
Acceptable»		5		8%
Quite good»		31		51%
Excellent»		20		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- they handed the assignments very very late so we had so little time to work on it. also it was better to model a real factory so that we could learn more through working on a real project.» (Not good)
- start with the project work earlier. » (Acceptable)
- Inresteing, but the project consumes too much time.» (Quite good)
- Too hard» (Quite good)
- We should have been able to start working earlier.» (Quite good)
- Interesting, but too big» (Quite good)
- The task it good but the Project PM is a bit messy though. Try to formulate the questions in a better way for example.» (Quite good)
- Takes a little bit to long time to performace» (Quite good)
- The task is a bit big, considering the late start. If we could have started the second week it would be much better.» (Quite good)
- Well, the workload is quite large. And the software (Automod) is somewhat, hmmm, "living its own life" sometimes.» (Quite good)
- The extra tasks were very bad explained» (Quite good)
- but too hard doesn"t have to be that hard and still provide great knowledge» (Quite good)
- Didn"t need to be so demanding. Can fulfill the goals of the coarse despite some easier project.» (Quite good)
- see above, the project was great, but a little bit to much work» (Excellent)
- It gave a handin experience about how the simulation of a real world production system could be done.» (Excellent)
- But should have been hand out sooner like 2 week, you can at least start with the conceptual model» (Excellent)
- Parts of the project home work could have been done handed out earlier.» (Excellent)
- Very intresting and fun using automod to simulate a factory. Although i think that one lecture should be used to explain how automods breakdown procedures work. (instead of writing it in the code you can write subroutines, which i believe would make the machines breakdown only when they are in use, not every hour or so)» (Excellent)
- As mentioned before, probably the best examination form that I have had» (Excellent)
- Should start earlier. It feels like a lot of time was wasted in the start of the course. Is this a economical issue? with the lab hours needing teachers?» (Excellent)
- It should have been given a little early .» (Excellent)

13. What is your opinion on the article study?

Not good»		27		45%
Acceptable»		23		38%
Quite good»		9		15%
Excellent»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

- We dont have time.» (Not good)
- Kind of pointless.» (Not good)
- To much time spended on this part compared to what we learned from it. Interesting but not adequate enough.» (Not good)
- It gets messy with 20 articles and with the seminars etc. Well, of course its good to know different application for DES, but it could be said on a regular lecture.» (Not good)
- That shit gave me nothing but problems to keep up with the importent parts of the course.» (Not good)
- WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!» (Not good)
- added no value.» (Not good)
- It didn"t feel meaningful at all. It felt like it"s only mandatory because the students should practice giving presentations. We know that stuff by know, I promise...» (Not good)
- Not good at all, no connection to the rest of the course. Should have been in the same group as the project. » (Not good)
- Seem to be unnecessary» (Not good)
- Useless. Ofcourse it gave an understanding on what other fields of application AutoMod can be useful for, but still.. On the other hand, it didn"t take more then an afternoon to complete it so no harm done really.» (Not good)
- This part of the course was realy bad. Almost veryone I talked to agreed that this was a think that just had to be done. Some of the articles were interesting but most of them were very boring. All this is probably because it was so late in the course. If it had been done earlier it might been a better thing.» (Not good)
- it was better to be optional, becuase we really had enough hard work to do on project.» (Not good)
- But why?» (Acceptable)
- This part should have been earlier in the coarse and not the last week, it"s full as it is...» (Acceptable)
- Kind of interseting, but the repsentations could also have been held earlier during the period» (Acceptable)
- Quit cursory articles in general. Big words but no conclusions. I would say 9 of 10 had the conslusion that Simulation is a tool.» (Acceptable)
- too much, stole time from the project» (Acceptable)
- One of the first times I had a reason to read a wholy scientific article. Interresting, and occupied a reasonably amount study time to pass.» (Acceptable)
- Always good to practice speaking in front of people.» (Acceptable)
- But hard to understand what the author ment.» (Quite good)
- interesting, but the reports are just additional work and the slides are useless» (Quite good)
- gave an overview of how the simulations were used in various reallife projects and what its strength were.» (Quite good)
- Didn"t see the link in some instances to DES» (Quite good)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		4		6%
Rather poor»		14		23%
Rather good»		25		41%
Very good»		15		25%
I did not seek help»		2		3%

Genomsnitt: 2.95

- Poor, poor, poor! With regrds to the size of the group, the number of teachres was low! It took very long time to get help and move on from different problems.» (Very poor)
- we had junt Anders» (Rather poor)
- should be some kind if tlist to sign up on for help since sometimes all assistans were downstairs or upstairs and that lead to extra waiting time.» (Rather poor)
- A lot of people, and not so many to ask. But I guess it would have been a lot easier if the extra laboration on mondays for us attending the S2 Master had"nt been occupied of a lot of other students. There were many students there from the other master, and they got an extra opportunity once a week.» (Rather poor)
- It was hard to get help and the PPU-lab was often cramped with students, making it hard to even find a place sometimes.» (Rather poor)
- Too few instructors in the lab.» (Rather poor)
- Often very long wait time to get help during sessions. » (Rather poor)
- Worked well except in the PPU lab when presentations where to be done. Perhaps more than one could check up on the groundmodel.» (Rather good)
- More supervisor wouldn"t do any harm.» (Rather good)
- We got the help that we wanted but i know that others have a hard time.» (Rather good)
- too few supervisors» (Rather good)
- the instructors were very much helpful.» (Rather good)
- Can be better» (Rather good)
- It could be better if there were more instructors, to sort of reduce the MTTR of us students....» (Rather good)
- in the computer site, we sometimed waited for more than 15 mins to get our answers.» (Rather good)
- Sometimes it was hard to get hold of supervisors in the lab...but it is not easy when there are so many students» (Rather good)
- The labs sometimes felt understaffed.» (Rather good)
- accept at the labsessions, there was too few teachers .. you could sit there and have your arm raised the whole session and not get any help» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		2		3%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		14		23%
Very well»		43		71%
I did not seek cooperation»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- The support from my group mate was zero» (Very poorly)

16. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		1%
Adequate»		19		32%
High»		27		45%
Too high»		12		20%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

- Low in the beginning and very high in the end.» (Adequate)
- Too slack in the beginning and a little too much in the end. A more even load would have been good.» (Adequate)
- It was a fun course, so the work wasn"t all that bad!» (Adequate)
- Nothing in the beginning and alot in the end.» (Adequate)
- The workload could have been more even over all studyweeks, not concentrated (project, exam, article study...) to the last 3 weeks.» (Adequate)
- it was adequate but not well-distributed through time. it is related to what I said in question 12.» (Adequate)
- Too much woork in the end as a result of the late start of the project task.» (High)
- Beacuase of the late hand out for the project work» (High)
- The project took a lot of time, on the other hand I thought it was fun so it didn"t matter to me.» (High)
- High but good, will probably remember this for a long time» (High)
- At least when you had a rather though course in parallel.» (Too high)
- Very high!!!» (Too high)
- It was to little to do the first weeks. Move the oral presentation» (Too high)

17. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		17		28%
High»		32		53%
Too high»		11		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- There is an old jungle-saying: Keep away from the S2 department and feel good.» (Adequate)
- Digital Control is a tough course..» (High)
- Digital Control !!!!!!» (Too high)
- FEM and simulation of production sysatems id quite heavy to study simultanius, might be better to have this course in another study period?» (Too high)
- I have been very stressed, especially in the end. But that has mostly to do with the high level of the digital control course.» (Too high)
- Due to the fact that there has been another course» (Too high)
- It was crazy!!!» (Too high)
- Other coursse was fucked up» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

18. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		1%
Fair»		4		6%
Adequate»		10		16%
Good»		39		65%
Excellent»		6		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

- because of worst teacher on chalmers so far and to much to do.» (Fair)
- Good tools are presented but the "filling" lectureres on other topics could be compressed. For example the ergonomi lecture colud have been made in 10 min with that content. » (Adequate)
- You get an insight in the "real world" which was very positive.» (Adequate)
- I can go to» (Adequate)
- Most of the lectures was crap. The project was good.» (Good)
- Fun course. Course-PM should be clearer regarding examination etc. You should be able to go check the course-PM and find all info you need there.» (Good)
- It was good to work with one big project that was close to reality.» (Good)
- A fun and very practical course.» (Good)
- But still could be better.» (Good)
- Could perhaps be better if Bertils english was to improved (no offence! it was not as bad as it sounds)» (Good)
- Never had a course like this in my country! Thanks for the "real case-impression" of the project work! I am really happy being able to handle automod, now, which is very useful for my further studies!» (Excellent)
- One of the best» (Excellent)

19. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

20. What should definitely be changed to next year?

21. Additional comments