Visa resultat

Software engineering using formal methods , Lp1 HT-10, TDA293 / DIT270

Your own effort

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

At most 15 hours/week»		5		29%
Around 20 hours/week»		9		52%
Around 25 hours/week»		3		17%
Around 30 hours/week»		0		0%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.88 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

0%»		0		0%
25%»		3		17%
50%»		5		29%
75%»		5		29%
100%»		4		23%

Genomsnitt: 3.58 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.73

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		4		23%
The goals are difficult to understand»		1		5%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		6		35%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		6		35%

Genomsnitt: 2.82

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

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		12		92%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

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

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		5		29%
Yes, definitely»		10		58%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		1		5%

- The lectures seemed to be a lot more about type theory and KeY internals than how to use formal verification practically (as the goals seem to suggest).» (To some extent)
- I considered the course as a software engineering management course by looking at the name and description, but get a total different view in the learning.» (To some extent)
- A pro tip is to not bring the solutions to the exam when you are there for questions. Thank you for the atomata points you give when you stood in the front. » (Yes, definitely)
- It did, although some of the exam question were a bit mean. Overly complex and requiring too much writing.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		3		18%
To some extent»		5		31%
Large extent»		4		25%
Great extent»		4		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- Professor W was fairly good but R was better than him, also the assistants were not good enough. Professor W explained the subject too complicated.» (?) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- The exercise sessions and the KeY-related lectures were completely useless to me. The Promela/Spin lectures were great.» (Small extent)
- Too many students in a far too small room.» (Small extent)

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

Small extent»		3		17%
Some extent»		7		41%
Large extent»		6		35%
Great extent»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.29

- The lecture slides were really good during the lectures, but they did not explain things enough for them to be useful during the labs or while studying for the exam. The links on the website were not helpful either. The most helpful material was the exercise PDFs, which somewhat explained the lecture PDFs and allowed for trial-and-error.» (Some extent)
- The slides could be better to illustrate some concepts. Especially in the automata part, I cannot make a clear impression of that.» (Some extent)
- Great slides.» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		1		5%
Rather badly»		2		11%
Rather well»		5		29%
Very well»		9		52%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- Felt like the course was a bit ill-prepared. If this was the first year for the course, then you are excused.» (Rather badly)
- It was difficult to get an overview of the links on the website, otherwise the website was quite nice.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		1		5%
Rather poor»		1		5%
Rather good»		6		35%
Very good»		6		35%
I did not seek help»		3		17%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- Thanks Richard he helped us a lot» (Rather good)
- The feedback from the course assistances was good.» (Very good)
- The exercise sessions with the assistants were mostly very good.» (Very good)
- Every course should have a mailing list like this!» (Very good)
- It was easier to use the trial-and-error approach than finding a way to phrase questions.» (I did not seek help)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		2		11%
Rather well»		8		47%
Very well»		7		41%
I did not seek coopeation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- My labpartner didn"t pull their weight» (Rather poorly)
- We had both taken most of the recommended courses, plus cryptography, which simplified the labs somewhat.» (Very well)
- The Google Group was excellent!» (Very well)

Summarizing questions

11. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		5%
Fair»		4		23%
Adequate»		3		17%
Good»		7		41%
Excellent»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- I think logic and testing courses must be prequisite for this course. Otherwise it is too hard to understand the subject.» (Fair)
- Please, answer on the group my question: Is there any company in the industry that is using KeY? Moreover, is there any company that is verifying an application by using spin? » (Fair)
- The Promela/Spin part was really good and quite interesting, though the lectures on this subject were a bit too slow at times. The KeY part seemed to focus a great deal on the internals of KeY, and was difficult to grasp.» (Adequate)
- The name of this course could be more clear to show the goal of verification by using mathematics.» (Adequate)
- Great teachers, planning and labs.» (Excellent)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

14. Additional comments

Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor