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.

Advanced Classical Physics, FUF015

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-09-27 - 2010-11-24
Antal svar: 12
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: ?%
Kontaktperson: Gabriele Ferretti»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Teknisk fysik 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.

12 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»5 41%
Around 20 hours/week»4 33%
Around 25 hours/week»3 25%
Around 30 hours/week»0 0%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.83

- The quantum course takes a lot of time.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- The work load of QM really punished this course.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- I count half for hand ins and half for scheduled time..then some reading and of course the examination week» (Around 25 hours/week)

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

12 svarande

0%»1 8%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 8%
75%»6 50%
100%»4 33%

Genomsnitt: 4

- I missed two weeks in the middle of the course» (75%)
- Probably all the lectures and almost all practice sessions.» (75%)
- 90% really.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

12 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 25%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»4 33%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»5 41%

Genomsnitt: 2.91

- Yes it is very clear.» (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.

10 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»10 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- It is a fair expectation. However tensornotation could be introduced almost earlier then it did now.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

10 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»3 30%
Yes, definitely»7 70%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- Yes pretty fair exam in total, good hand ins and a final exam that was pretty fair, though a bit tricky.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

12 svarande

Small extent»3 25%
Some extent»1 8%
Large extent»7 58%
Great extent»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- Too large part of the lectures were on field theory which is another course, right? Some outlook towards fields is nice but now it feels we rushed past everything else and then spent two weeks on fields.» (Large extent)
- Both lectures and practice sessions have been good.» (Large extent)
- Per is a good lecturer, didnt attend Christians classes.» (Large extent)

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

12 svarande

Small extent»1 8%
Some extent»1 8%
Large extent»9 75%
Great extent»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- The "patchy lecture notes" were really good. I feel Goldstein"s book was more than adequate for the particle mechanics, but didn"t cut it for the field mechanics.» (Large extent)
- Goldstein is a good book but bad with fields.» (Large extent)
- The book was not used that much unfortunatley, but material was accesible.» (Large extent)
- Good book» (Large extent)

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

12 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»3 25%
Very well»9 75%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

Study climate

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

12 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»4 33%
Very good»8 66%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

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

12 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 8%
Rather well»1 8%
Very well»9 75%
I did not seek cooperation»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- Very Well.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

12 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 8%
Adequate»11 91%
High»0 0%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.91

- Around 15h/week is rather low after all.» (Low)
- A bit low if only considering this course.» (Adequate)
- Not half as much time spent on this course as on the QM-course parallell to this.» (Adequate)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

12 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»3 25%
High»6 50%
Too high»3 25%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Some 40h weeks, some 60h weeks. It seemed to depend a bit on how difficult the QM problems were.» (High)
- High is good but this is right on the edge to "too high". The QM Hand-ins are a bit too tough sometimes.» (High)
- Very high though alot selfchoosen.» (High)
- This course has suffered a lot due to the heavy work load of the quantum mechanics.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

12 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 8%
Adequate»2 16%
Good»6 50%
Excellent»3 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- Hopefully the new "Electrodynamics" course for nexst year will look alot like the ACP which is a very needed course.» (Good)
- To be excellent, some material concerning for example d"Alemberts principle could be removed and replaced with more of Gaugeinvariance, on how to construct a physical theory and mathematical aspects. » (Good)
- I"m very positively surprised actually. I didn"t think the course would be this rewarding or that "common" mechanics could be so interesting.» (Excellent)
- Interesting and very useful in the future i hope!» (Excellent)

14. What should be preserved to next year?

- hand in problems»
- I understand that the course will be removed next year, so I suggest that the contents is preserved in some other form or place.»
- Hand-in problems»
- The course itself !!»
- More or less everything.»
- Christian!»
- Per, the book.»
- most of the course»

15. What should be changed to next year?

- more examples to help understand the meterial in the lectures»
- It wouldn"t hurt if the hand-in problems took a bit more time. I"m not saying that they should be ultradifficult or really messy, but perhaps more sides of the course contents could be explored this way.»
- More structure on lectures, especially the field-part. Not move so quickly when it comes to variational calculus or other calculations involving skipping several steps of partial integration.»
- A bit smaller emphasis on field theories.»
- I have no special remarks here except that the Stress-Energy-Tensor should be focused on a bit more so it makes sence when it appears on the exam.»
- It would have been better to consistently use tensor notation throughout the course, I don"t like the mixture of index and matrix notation. »
- The field mechanics part could be more thoroughly I think.»
- The Quantum mechanics course.»

16. Additional comments

- ..»

Kursutvärderingssystem från