Visa resultat

Quantum Mechanics, FKA081

Your own effort

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

27 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		0		0%
Around 20 hours/week»		3		11%
Around 25 hours/week»		4		14%
Around 30 hours/week»		10		37%
At least 35 hours/week»		10		37%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Two weeks: 27/9-3/10: 18h+8h (HW4) 10/4-10/10: 26h+10h (HW5) So there was quite some variation in the homework difficulties.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- I spent a solid amount of time every week on the hand in problems, atleast around 30 hours. Aswell I went to lectures, and read the chapters concerning the course.» (At least 35 hours/week)
- I didn"t expect that I would have to study this much on the course before I started the course. » (At least 35 hours/week)

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

27 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		3		11%
75%»		8		29%
100%»		16		59%

Genomsnitt: 4.48

- Since my work schedule collide with the lectures» (50%)
- I missed two weeks in the middle of the course.» (75%)
- More then 75%.» (75%)
- Only missed one tutorial session due to illness.» (75%)
- With a few exceptions. The teaching was overall good and it would be very hard to understand the home problems (and probably final) without this context.» (100%)
- Missed two lectures due to travel.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		7		25%
The goals are difficult to understand»		2		7%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		10		37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		8		29%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- I have not looked up the goals, I feel they are irrelevant since one rarely understands them until after the course is passed. Why do you keep asking this question on all the evaluations?» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- I think the biggest problem is that they are not reflected in the course. From course homepage: - Aim and content of the course: ... Scattering theory. Geometrical phases ... - The following topics will make up the 64p exam: General principles, LaGrangian, Hamiltonian What is meant by general principles? The only touch of Lagrangian in the course was when Stellan went through the earlier exam problem...» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- The goals are pretty clear, I trust the topics that are to be covered by the final exam is the clearcut goals?» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

23 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		20		86%
No, the goals are set too high»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

- With goals inferred implicitly from homework.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- By taking this course I learn a mathematical formalism I didn"t know before. I would say that my physical understanding of the world has not increased after the course, and I think it should have. I believe the reason it has not increased is the large amount of work needed to grasp the mathematical formalism.» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		4		17%
To some extent»		15		65%
Yes, definitely»		2		8%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- the exam PhD level» (No, not at all)
- The examination was definetly not appropriate for the course. Focus was on parts of the course that was not spent so much time on were as important parts was completely skipped on the exam. Things that was hardly mentioned during the course was given too much focus.» (No, not at all)
- Way to difficult and too many problems in only 4 hrs. » (No, not at all)
- I think many of the questions on the exam were hard to relate too anything we did in class. For example the question with bound singlet states from electron-positron pair. I had no idea how to even begin.» (To some extent)
- It did seem to cover less angular momenta addition than in the old exams and focus a lot on the harmonic oscillators? By the way, I didn"t have enough time. Going from five-hour exams to a four-hour exam and increasing the number of problems might not have been such a good move...» (To some extent)
- The hand in problems was very good, most of them. Gave a good picture of what you had to learn and made you make a real effort early in the course, which I expected would pay of during the final exam. But NO. The examination was probably the worst final exam I have ever written, having the fact how much time I spent on the course, in mind. There were to many tasks, to little time, and to much information to handle in 4 hours. Also the examination started by errors and corrections on the exam which I find disturbing and stressing, and more errors occurred during time which made you really wonder. All this could of course boil down to me not have learned anything in the 7 weeks that have passed. Though I find it unlikely, partly since I have performed well on the hand ins. Also during the last week I have practiced on the old exams, and performed well. I am dissapointed.» (To some extent)
- The exam was too difficult/too many questions to be answered in just four hours. I would have needed at least an hour per question. » (To some extent)
- I feel that the knowledge asked for during the exam was the complement to that asked for during the hand-ins. This is not very good, since it then don"t measure how well I have understood the handins which constitute the main bulk of the time I put on the course.» (To some extent)
- The examination did not match the study guide on the web page (only on some points). Cant imagine why such a focus on the properties of matrices and higher order harmonic oscillators could be representative for the course... » (To some extent)
- There was not enough time to complete the exam.» (To some extent)
- The exam questions felt strange and difficult to identify what to do.» (To some extent)
- Hard exam» (To some extent)
- The exam was considerable harder than the previous exams, the hand-in problems and the material presented at the lectures.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		2		7%
Some extent»		12		44%
Large extent»		10		37%
Great extent»		3		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- The homeworks have been most important for me. The lectures were disorganized at times.» (Some extent)
- With teaching I mean the lectures and practice hours. I believe to some extent they were helpful, though alot of times the structure was very "jumpy" and the steps were unclear. A clear lecture plan would help alot and motivate students to attend all the scheduled hours.» (Some extent)
- would like more structure at the lectures. it was very difficult to make good notes» (Some extent)
- Stellan is too disorganized to make the lectures really good. Bad disposition in both spoken word and written chalk.» (Some extent)
- I didnt really like the problem sessions that much. It often felt like Stellan was unprepared and that often led the tempo being low. It also feels unnecessary to always go over the Hand-ins, I think it would be better to present solutions online instead.» (Large extent)
- However, the lectures could be more structured. To have a clear objective of what we wish to show would be helpful to keep up with the train of thought of the lecturer.» (Large extent)
- Good and inspireing lectures!» (Great extent)

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

Small extent»		3		11%
Some extent»		6		22%
Large extent»		9		33%
Great extent»		9		33%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- the book "Sakuri" not help me to understand the course.» (Small extent)
- I have not had time to read much in the book, so I really don"t know.» (Some extent)
- some chapters are messy» (Some extent)
- Sakurai was hard to read in the beginning but i appreciated it in the end.» (Some extent)
- Sakurai is overall good. Did not read the perturbation theory chapters though. Also I don"t think treatment of density matrices nor tensors/wigner eckart was very well made, both too brief.» (Large extent)
- Sakurai is great!» (Great extent)
- Sakurai is a very good textbook.» (Great extent)
- Sakurai is a fantastic book, I have been working with it before.» (Great extent)
- The course book is good. » (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		0		0%
Rather well»		12		44%
Very well»		15		55%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- Besides some inaccuracies and typos in the handouts it worked well.» (Rather well)
- Information about the course was clear.» (Rather well)
- Some mistakes were corrected to close into deadline. The webpage is nice.» (Rather well)
- The RSS feed was a nice touch.» (Very well)
- Lots of errors in both assignment and solutions.» (Very well)
- RSS-feed is a good idea, everyone should use that.» (Very well)
- But lots of errors in exam solutions, hand-ins and thesis.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		10		37%
Very good»		16		59%
I did not seek help»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- I did not seek that much help but I felt that if needed I could ask and get help which is very good.» (Very good)
- I have not asked for much help, but have felt that I could do it if I wished to.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		1		3%
Rather poorly»		1		3%
Rather well»		6		22%
Very well»		18		66%
I did not seek cooperation»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- It worked pretty well. The homeworks required collaboration which is really educative. That the students have different background means that the level is too high for some. I helped a student a lot who didn"t understand anything in the beginning. I like explaining to others and learn a lot from that. I think I"m an exception since he told me that no one else would help him. So in this case it worked out, but maybe there should be some more help for new students next year. It was really good when stellan offered to book an FL-room for us to study together.» (Rather well)
- Very very well.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		5		18%
High»		15		55%
Too high»		7		25%

Genomsnitt: 4.07

- But maybe a bit misleading, due to the diffivulty of the exam.» (Adequate)
- There is an awful lot of material to cover in only 7 weeks of teaching. Some of the material will definately not "stick". (eg time-dependent perturbation theory in 20 minutes)» (High)
- It was high but I think I learned a lot from doing the hand-ins.» (High)
- There was a high workload, but I choose to put alot of time on the hand in problem since I really wanted to perform in this course, so time spent was "self-choosen".» (High)
- Is it really necessary to have all the topics in this course? Couldn"t some parts be moved to the advanced quantum mechanics course?» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		6		22%
High»		16		59%
Too high»		5		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.96

- PhD student, my workload is my responsibility.» (Adequate)
- It is fortunate that Classical mechanics has more humane hand-ins, otherwise all students taking both courses would live at campus.» (High)
- Putting this course next to Experimental physics next year might make it too high.» (High)
- It was very very high, specially week 5-6 when the hardest hand in on both courses was given at the same time.» (High)
- Free time is a luxury of the past.» (High)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		4		14%
Adequate»		7		25%
Good»		13		48%
Excellent»		2		7%

Genomsnitt: 3.4

- Examination is the main point waying my impression down. Furthermore the poor structure of lectures and the course book.» (Fair)
- Most of the things were good. The handins are really good for learning and the bonus system to the exam is great. The exam itself was a disappointment and did not reflect very well the important parts in the course. The point system on the exam is bad also since I think that the amount of points should correspond the the difficulty of the problem.» (Adequate)
- In order to benifit from the homework problem, one had to put a lot of time into solving them. One therefore had little oppertunity to study the course litterature and solve extra problems.» (Adequate)
- Actually most of the time I didn"t see the physics behind all the home problems. For me it was mostly calculations (but of course there were exceptions to this). I read the quantum physics course at Chalmers and in that course I did see the physics behind most of what we did and I missed that in this course.» (Adequate)
- Good balance between mathematical theory and physical insight. Stellan seems to know both areas well. Stellan"s blackboard technique is difficult to take notes from. There is a lot of notational confusion, and he keeps erasing and changing instead of writing new. I really appreciate that Stellan is able to do calculations on the board, but maybe he could prepare notation and general disposition a bit in advance? Otherwise it is an impressive one-man-show..» (Good)
- Its a good course but the hand-ins could be a little bit easier, the problem sessions could be improved and the exam was too different from what we learned in class.» (Good)
- I was very satisfied with the course, until the final exam which was very dissapointing.» (Good)

14. What should be preserved to next year?

15. What should be changed to next year?

16. Additional comments