|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär 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.
Internet technology, Lp 1 HT-10, EDA386 / DIT661Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2010-10-13 - 2010-10-31 Antal svar: 28 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 22% Kontaktperson: Victoria Ewers»
Your own effort1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?*28 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.85 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?*28 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.67 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.76 Goals and goal fulfilment3. How understandable are the course goals?*Chalmers course pm EDA386GU course plan DIT661 28 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.78 - course materials are too much which i spend most of the time memorizing rather than understanding.» (I have not seen/read the goals until now.) 4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?26 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.07 - I just use my previous knowledge to go with class in cases i had no background I hardly could understand what lecturers saying » (No, the goals are set too low.) 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?28 svarande(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)
- - the number of questions in the exam was overwhelming for only 4 hours!!!
» (To some extent.) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?- Not much, most my learning has been from the book and MIT lectures on the web.»- Teaching do not help me any extent. He just go through some slides and most of the students do not undersatnd his class.» - to some extent» - The teaching has been aweful.They don"t know how to explain things in English ,and what they do in the class is just reading some vague slides that doesn"t explain anything well,and most of the times they teach a large volume of material (they don"t teach they just read some slides (that we can ourselves read without wasting our time) and skip 9 or 10 slides )at the end of each lecture they say ok today we COVERED these 2 or 3 chapters of the book and you should also read this and that paper that we will put the link on the course"s homepage.and fortunately we searched the internet for other useful resources that can teach us something like some lectures from american university MIT.» - moderately» - Quite good teaching, the teacher was committed, trying to do his best so that everyone can understand. Only that the course is complex and the material is quite advanced. » - few» - The teaching part dealt with the socket programming was not that much helpful. The instructor just went through a pre-prepared slides and just read the codes to the audience with some minor explanations. It was not helpful at all! The major parts of the course taught by the course examiner were very well-organized and comprehensible. » - - the level of the lectures was extremly low (lower than a bachelor course i"d say), most of the time it was only "karaoke" and seldomly contained original explanations - the english level of the teacher didn"t seem so high and the explanations he gave were sometimes not being clear at all - questions from students were being left unanswered and unclarified, the rare answers we got were often umbiguous, not well explained. - in several courses time was wasted on "how the exam will be like" rather than on course aspects, this seemed rather stressful and not very motivating - for laboratory 3 and 4 the teacher didn"t give satisfying explanations, but only answering questions with other questions - i find this approach extremly innefficient, suitable only for short-term learning - overall i found lectures as a waste of time, they did not help me to understand the aspects taught» - Lecturing was extremely disappointing. The faculty was a slide reader. He rarely used the board to make understood to the students clearly e.g. Lack of explanation outside the slides during the lecture deliberation.» - Some extent.» - None. I stopped going to the classes after half the course since they were very poor. The teacher read straight from the PowerPoint slides and sounded like he had no idea what he was talking about.» - it is a little bit difficult to understand the teaching class.» - - very poor quality of teaching - unclear and ambiguous explanations - the teacher seemed to read the slides rather than explaining them - questions were not answered during the courses » - My opinion is that even the professor knows the subject very well he didn"t have the experience to analyse some lectures in a more understandable way for the students » - i received indications on what will be on the exam. and what kind of questions could be asked» - The teaching was not very useful, at least not for all lectures.» - Hard to understand, did not get most of the answers.» - Some, but not as much as I had hoped. Attending the lectures did not give much more than going through the lecture slides on your own.» - The help at the labs were very useful.» - Not really satisfied with the structure of the lectures. Too much discussion between (usually) the same two, three students in class and teacher, regarding different review questions and often no clear answer was given. Better to dispose all lecture time on going through the slide material using "one way communication", though discussion can of course be held at some times, but not as much as it was during this course.» - Small extent» - To some extent.» - S"s and M"s lectures where a big help, but E"s didn"t give me anything. » (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand) 7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?- The course literature is very good and describe the subject very well.»- The book is a very bad one. It in only RFC based. The course book should be changed.» - to great extent» - it is too much for just 2 month to cover the book and all the other papers,not to mention how time consuming the 4 labs are.» - not much» - Course material is not good for beginners in TCP/IP » - few all of them was copy of the book» - A major part of the course deals with developing codes using Socket API. The material used for teaching this part (An advanced 4.4BSD Interprocess Communication Tutorial)is not clear enough and easily understandable, and much of the document is ambiguous. There are so many tutorials dealing with socket programming that are more straightforward and comrehensible. From my point of view the material should be replaced with a better one, or a customized one be provided at Chalmers. » - - the course book is ok but i would have preffered something that contained less stories and more technical/engineering like explanations - the presentation slides - unoriginal , i would have preffered a Chalmers approach on the topic rather than a Purdue university one. - the additional comments on several lectures were just copy-pasted from the book, it made me wonder whether the rules against plagiarisms do not apply to teachers as well... - the laboratory 1 memo was ambiguous (not clearly stated what the server is expecting to get from the client, what cases to take into consideration when testing the application), it would be better to add the exact description of the automated tests that have to be performed on the client/server. - laboratory 3 & 4 memo: the pupose of the labs should be reformulated and updated based on teacher"s requirements, the questions from the lab memo were not perfectly matching the evaluation that was done at the end of the lab, therefore it was a bit misleading and did not help me focus on what the actual purpose of the lab activity was.» - Video based was very efficient but good book selection was badly needed. » - A lot. I have only read slides and other on line content.» - The book was very good.» - it helps a lot» - -the course book selected was ok but it contained too many basic explanations - in any case we were told that the slides are enough for the exam, so no one really encouraged us reading it » - The materials-course book was very well organised and was very helpful for studying.» - it was helpful.» - The book and slides were helpful. » - A lot» - Lecture slides were very good, excellent with expanded comments attached. The book was also good, easy to read and concise.» - I used the slides to study only, and they helped a lot.» - large extent» - a lot» - The book has taught me basically everything I know since I couldn"t understand anything from the teacher"s lectures.» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand) 8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?- The dates for deadlines was a little unclear at the beginning, the information was presented in such way that we thought that first submission deadline for labs were the final deadline. And of course Pingpong had some problems listing my events one week during this study period.»- overall good» - the course homepage is not organized ,and so confusing» - not good» - It worked pretty good» - The homepage was really messy at the beginning. The lab instructions were unclear. The lecture notes were named to e.g. "lecture 10" when it was actually "chapter 10".» - good» - The slides were perfectly organized according to the course main literature, a plenty of short animations and instructive films were played at the course lectures. Those were great, and they provided me with the new learning techniques and refering to other sources availble to learn in the Internet.» - - course administration was ok and the web page was updated frequently, - it would be nice to have an electronic group and labratory registration rather than a papper "going round" (i refer here to lab 3&4 registration only)» - Nice. But sometimes ping pong made disturbance since its a new system. The teacher helped us in this aspect.» - The ping pong site was down a number of times making it impossible to reach course content.» - Good. Annoying to have to log into PingPong every time to access the web site.» - pretty good» - ping pong was updated, handouts were posted without delay, however the courses were numbered after the chapter"s titles not after the lecture number --> this was also ambiguous» - very well. The Ping-Pong system works really fine and it was possible to access and find all the appropriate information for the course.» - once I had access to pingpong it was fine, all material was clear. but it took a long time until i received access to pingpong which made the course harder » - Fine» - Quiet well» - OK, PingPong was not needed though. Some confusion over updated/out of date files, but otherwise fine.» - Good.» - well» - OK» - Good» Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?- sorry, I don"t know since I didn"t seek such help at all»- several times some questions has been asked but even the teacher didn"t know the answer to them ,and much time was wasted because he was trying to find an answer to the question» - Very poor. Lecturer explicitly refuses to answere any questions the week before the exam.» - Good enough» - good» - The instructors and course TAs were easily accessible. Emails were answered quickly and questions were welcomed warmly at lectures.» - - while working for lab 1: the teacher helped me solve some of the problems i had with the code. - during laboratory 3&4, i didn"t get too much help and my questions were answered with other questions... - during the lecture, the teacher encouraged the students to ask questions » - Nice but still lecture deliberation was extremely poor. He rarely used the board, and also the deliberation was completely lack of explanation outside the slides during the lecture.» - Bad. Especially in the end it felt like the teacher didn"t want us to learn anything unless it was specifically written in the slides. It makes you doubt the knowledge of the teacher and it feels like you are not there to learn but only to pass the exam.» - It was not possible to ask questions during class or per email. The teacher completely refused to answer even the simplest question and let a couple of students say what they thought was the correct answer to the question, without really confirming what answer was correct.» - adequate» - - a lot of opportunities to ask questions we were encouraged to ask them but i seldom found the answers to questions satisfying and clear - i hardly got any help from the lab assistant for lab 3&4 » - During the Lectures we had the opportunity to ask question but the whole point is: when you ask a question you expect an answer, and the professor had a different view for this, by leaving a lot of question unanswered to search by our selves and from my view it was a littlte bit stranger.» - it was alright. » - Fine» - Lots of students have questions, seldom got the clear answers back.» - Good.» - good» - Middle extent» - Ok» - You don"t really dare to ask for help in the class cause one of the teachers has a very condescending attitude.» (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand) 10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?- Quite good.»- very well, rather pleased» - -» - Pretty good» - It didn"t work at all. People who knew themselves before communicated well.» - a lot » - The cooperation especially for doing the lab assignments worked well to an acceptable extent.» - - i colaborated well with my group member and i consider team working as a good approach for laboratory activities - i didn"t have other opportunities to cooperate with other student except those i knew, therefore i think it would be a good ideea to form the lab groups randomly» - Nice but still lecture deliberation was extremely poor. He rarely used the board, and also the deliberation was completely lack of explanation outside the slides during the lecture.» - Very well.» - Good.» - very well» - fairly ok but the lab activities didn"t require interaction with too many of them» - Very well.» - pretty well» - Not bad» - Good.» - Good.» - Excellent» - very well» - very well» Summarizing questions11. What is your general impression of the course?28 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.46 - This course covers lots of internet aspects not for understanding just for memorizing» (Poor) 12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Lab 3 and 4, I learned a lot from these labs.»- The lab assignments» - change everything,this course is the fundumental course of NETWORKS and DISTRIBUTED systems...» - Lab 1» - Everything in the course, however the group selection should be done randomly among members» - Just main lecturer» - Relaxing the deadlines and not being strict for performing lab 1 and lab 2 were really great and helped me to prepare for the exam to a great extent. » - - the course book is fairly ok but i believe that there might be better options on the market» - Labs were good. Especially the first lab made you realize how difficult it may be to implement a robust internet application.» - The exam was good. The first and third lab.» - text book» - - nothing» - The course material which was very good.» - lab 3 and 4, they were a lot of fun» - Main topics, animations and the interacting way of the class. » - The projects,helpful» - The relatively long time you had to do the programming lab - allowed me to plan my time effectively.» - The laborations were good.» - The labs, they were excellent, espacially lab 1 and 3. » 13. What should definitely be changed to next year?- Lab 1 could be a little less work. Of course it was good to learn the details of sockets and how they work, but too much focus of this course has been on this single lab.»- The automated test for lab 1, could definitely be better if the work flow and some part of test code is given so we could easily debug our own code.» - Bring some professor who knows English good ,and have the ability to explain things ,just having professional experience and background doesn"t mean they can be a good teacher .give the labs one by one ,and the fisrt lab is so time consuming » - Labs should be numbered in order, so that the first deadline is for Lab 1. The lecturer needs to stop complaining about the course. We"re here to learn, I really don"t want to listen to your whine about the material. "The slides are not good, I took them from the book". Not anything you can use for your own defence, and belonging to a completely different forum than our classroom. FOUR lectures per week is a lot. There"s so much material we can clearly tell examinator don"t know what to bring to the exam, because there"s too many topics to choose from. It"s not good at all. Most classes have 2 lectures per week, which would mean HALF as much information.» - I think there should be a complete change in resource book and slides .» - The material regarding Socket API programming as well as the alloted time for teaching this big issue. I believe to get the most out of it needs more time and more proper teaching.» - - the lecturer - the presentation slides: contain to much information, i also found one of the lectures taught useless - Internet in space (fun, interesting but still...?!?!?!) - the labs should be more practical: firstly, the students should have the opportunity to choose the programming language to work with (maybe a more intereting C/S application can be requested not only the dull currency exchange), - the RFC lab - considering its formualtion and also the exam questions related to it, for me it seemed only a way to add more study material to the already exting one rather that really focusing on what might be useful for me on the long run (as a future network engineer) - lab 3&4 should be reformulated (purpose,guiding questions) In general, I would have liked more to configure network devices, DNS/DHCP servers a.s.o. I would have liked to write an application in OPNET» - Book, syllabus is huge and the faculty tried to remove some parts but still it looked like the same. Lab should be easier to some extent.» - The teacher. To get someone who actually understands how to teach. The second lab. It didn"t offer anything to the course.» - lab 1 is too large » - - the lab memos - contained unclear explanations, did not allways match with what we really had to do and understand (esp. lab 3&4) - maybe a better course book can be selected - some lectures are pointless - Internet in space » - The Laboratory 1 was really demanding, and the other 2 it was very easy.So balancing between the Labs. And the Professor must change the way he make the lectures. Maybe in a more "quenstion answering way".» - more explanations and less reading from the slides» - accent of the lecturer» - More discussions of possible problems and/or related facts about things during the lecture, and less just reading off the slides.» - The exam should be tweaked. Internet technology covers such a wide range of areas, tons of protocols, standards and models. In such a course, you can"t ask specific questions about everything. There are entire courses who just cover a tiny area of what internet technology does. those are the ones who should ask for specific and deep questions, not this one. Like when you asked about MPLS. I know what it is, and could easily describe basically how it works. But you"ll never know that, because the question was about what it does to fragments, which is in my opinion very specific question. Another better example is the one where you were supposed to compare specific fields in the headers of SNMP and IPv6. Except you didn"t get the headers. Not only am I 95% sure that it was said during a lecture that there wouldn"t be such questions, and if there were, the header fields would be supplied because it"s obviously unreasonabele to be able to remember all the headers for all the protocols in the course.» - Examination containing more relevant questions regarding slide material. Structure of lectures.» 14. Additional comments- This course had to many lectures, and there are to much details in every lecture. That makes it very hard to stay concentrated. Maybe you should try to make it one lecture less per week for next year and add some kind of discussion group session or workshops instead.»- Actually one of the poorer classes I"ve attended. I can see there"s a point in getting the class to debate and analyze - but there"s really no point in you refusing to answer. "Write this question down, and maybe someone will figure it out later" - a lecture should lecture us about something, not fill us with questions.» - Elad might be good at the things that he"s supposed to teach, but he is not a good teacher.» - Thank You» - The course examiner, Elad Schiller is very knowledgeable, smart and also humble, and always ready to help the students. He always has a smile on his face, and kindly welcomes suggestions and questions. I do appreciate his efforts regarding the Internet Technology course. » - The teacher was semi-aggressive towards students who talked in class, was late or simple leaned over to a neighbor. This lead to a very poor climate in class and completely ruined my confidence for the teacher. The chapter about Internet in Space was totally worthless. Drop it and focus on a real world topic.» - slides and PPTs are better to be given before class add assignments to help understand the content. » - The Laboratory 1 was very demanding and although there were lectures helping us to underestand the basics of socket programming, I spent almost whole of my time in this Lab and I didn"t manage to consentrate in whole course. As i spoke with a lot of students they have a really big problem by doing this Lab because the level of this specific assignment was too high in contrast with the other 2. I think that you must create Laboratory exercises that they are balanced because there was a "huge cap" between the first one and the other two. A general observation that I have is that you could focus in C programming language with an extra course for the first term not only with a "crash course" like the introduction to C-programming. Thank you very much for the opportunity that you give me to hear my opinion.» - Cut your hair Elad :)» Additional commentsBeräknat jämförelseindex: 0.51 * obligatoriska frågor
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10%