Visa resultat

Design quality and materials for advanced design (2010), MPP096

Your own effort

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

30 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		23		76%
Around 20 hours/week»		5		16%
Around 25 hours/week»		1		3%
Around 30 hours/week»		1		3%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.33

- less than 5hrs including the class room time!!» (?)
- Basically lectures + 1-2h /week» (At most 15 hours/week)
- This course have not required much time at all, mostly less than 15 hours a week. All the lecture times have for example been scheduled for 4 hours but we almost never had more than two hours» (At most 15 hours/week)
- The home assignments were very basic and only took a couple of hours to complete, and after that I didn"t feel there was anything that needed to be done except go to the lectures.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- usually less than 5 hours a week» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Ridiculously low amount on time spent on this course. Got a "5" after spending 15 min on an assignment» (At most 15 hours/week)
- What wheree there to do?» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Very lille workload» (At most 15 hours/week)

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

31 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		1		3%
50%»		2		6%
75%»		13		41%
100%»		15		48%

Genomsnitt: 4.35

- Did not attend too many of the lectures since it was not that useful. Just a repeating from old courses (Materialteknik & Tillverkningsteknik) I attended the first two weeks lectures.» (25%)
- The lectures where ok and somewhat interesting.» (100%)
- skipped one or two lectures» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		6		19%
The goals are difficult to understand»		4		12%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		14		45%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		7		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- I did read the goals, but forgot about them. I had a totally different expectation of the course.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- The first description I read was describing a nice course, with design aspects of materials and surfaces taken into consideration. However, the course was somewhat a brief and light description of material science and manufacturing processes. The whole course PM is a joke, with many divergenses and nothing in the PM is clearly understable. In the course content there is stated that a home exam is given, but not in the examination section. As well, there is stated that "active participation in lectures and seminars" are needed to achieve grade 3 or higher, but what is active participation and which lectures are compulsory? » (The goals are difficult to understand)
- i read the goals in the beggining of the course but can´,t not remember them entirely now. However when doing the assignments we did not know what we would be evaluated on nor hat was the aim which was a bit disturbing.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- But the they course pm was not right. for example was the type of examination different than it said in pm.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- But the content in the course has absolutely not matched the goals.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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

28 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		15		53%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		13		46%
No, the goals are set too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.46

- The course is set on a too low level, there"s no consideration on what we already know. Repetition, repetition, repetition. There nothing new in this course for a TD-student, I even heard some mechanical engineering students joking "As I always suspected, you guys at TD just slack around and do nothing". Kind of poor advertisement for our IDE program and to be frank, this is actually damaging to my masters degree.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- Goals are set way too low, this course is better suited for high school studies.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- it is very basic class» (No, the goals are set too low)
- I did not learn anything doing the three compulsory assignments that also were the examination in the course. Did not learn that much in the lectures I attended either, it was just a repetition of the other courses.» (No, the goals are set too low)

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

No, not at all»		9		32%
To some extent»		15		53%
Yes, definitely»		1		3%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 1.92

- examination were only on a small part of the goals/course content» (No, not at all)
- Lack of proper examination, presumed to be due to lazyness from course administration since the assignments where not very extensive either.» (No, not at all)
- The examination that consisted of two group assignments and one individual assignment could easily be conducted in one day. Perhaps half a day. » (No, not at all)
- I"m not even sure if the ambition of the course, the goals and the exam have any connection.» (To some extent)
- it could be clearer how the projects should be investigated, more small questions so discuss around» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		12		38%
Some extent»		14		45%
Large extent»		3		9%
Great extent»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 1.83

- Hardly anything I didn"t already know. RD&T was new, that was good.» (Small extent)
- Did not learn anything not already covered by previous courses, and things covered in the course where at a much more basic level than bachelor"s courses. This course should not be offered to master"s students, at least not Mechanical engineering students.» (Small extent)
- Extremely small extent, I could perform all tasks with knowledge I have from previous courses.» (Small extent)
- Since I did not need any new knowledge to pass the course with probably a good grade the teaching in the course was unimportant.» (Small extent)
- this course have contained of diffrent lecturers. However it seems like it was unclear to the responsible what knowledge students have from before since much time have felt like repetition of previous years. Also since many different lecturers have participated it has sometimes not felt like a clear read thread through the course. » (Some extent)
- The guest lectures were interesting, but I feel like the lectures generally could have covered more ground or go deeper. The course felt very basic for an "advanced" course.» (Some extent)
- most of it were rubbish» (Some extent)
- the lectures were mostly interesting.» (Some extent)

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

Small extent»		16		53%
Some extent»		10		33%
Large extent»		3		10%
Great extent»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 1.63

- The book is good, but there isn"t much information in it that I haven"t got in books from other courses.» (Small extent)
- No extent. Bought the book, but never opened it, and still got a 5 in the assignment» (Small extent)
- what literature?» (Small extent)
- I didnt really use the course book at all» (Small extent)
- Have not opened the book» (Small extent)
- i think the book is good, but i did not need to read it to manage the course. It would be better if there was assignments or similar on the contents of the book to.» (Small extent)
- Extremely low extent!» (Small extent)
- I bought a book for nearly 400 SEK and I have not even opened it. That are 400 kronor I don"t see again!» (Small extent)
- The book was very good, also the first part of the book which was not recomended.» (Large extent)

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

Very badly»		3		9%
Rather badly»		8		25%
Rather well»		17		54%
Very well»		3		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- Studieprotalen was down on several hand-in dates» (Rather badly)
- there were troubles several times, but on the other hand they were fixed quickly.» (Rather badly)
- Little information about the assignments and long time before any feedback on the assignments. And the feedback given was a short sentence. A little more feedback would have been appreciated before the last assignment!!» (Rather badly)
- It´,s been ok. However some messages have been badly missspelled/mistyped » (Rather well)
- just some problem with hand in of one of the assignments.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		3		9%
Rather good»		9		29%
Very good»		10		32%
I did not seek help»		9		29%

Genomsnitt: 3.8

- Trying to get a look on the door panel before handing in the last assignment, but could not get hold of anyone involved in the course.» (Rather poor)
- I would not say good but it was not poor either. The thing is when asking Ralf questions he is often a bit unstructured in delivering an answer of knowing what he want us to do so it sometimes do not get clearer by asking him.» (Rather good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		12		38%
Very well»		19		61%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- Better to be able to form your own groups.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

Too low»		19		61%
Low»		7		22%
Adequate»		4		12%
High»		1		3%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.58

- I can easily say I had more workload during my high school courses!!» (Too low)
- This course does in my eyes not respond to 7.5 etcs and it feels like a waste of time.» (Too low)
- I had expected more workload. I had expected to learn more advanced knowledge. » (Too low)
- The course was very easy to follow even without reading the literature. I feel like there was a lot of information from the lectures that we were never tested on during the assignments. The assignments could have been bigger, or a written exam could have been used to give some motivation to study harder. It also felt like some lectures from different lecturers was about the exact same thing, giving us the same lectures twice. A little more communication between the lecturers would probably be good. I also think the course should go deeper than it did, since it is supposed to be advanced level and since we all have studied materials technology before. The materials technology knowledge was never really even put to use.» (Too low)
- Embarassingly low course workload, assignments could have been done in less than one workday without having attended a single lecture» (Too low)
- The home exam was not given due to high work load (probably for the teacher), even with a home exam the course workload would have been too low. As said before: you could have completed the course the first day (almost).» (Too low)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		4		12%
Low»		8		25%
Adequate»		14		45%
High»		5		16%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- The other course I studied was also not very heavy, which gave a lot of free time this period.» (Low)
- Since much time been spent on visual branding and very little on this course its been rather ok. » (Adequate)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		17		54%
Fair»		4		12%
Adequate»		8		25%
Good»		1		3%
Excellent»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 1.87

- Thought this was an advanced course.» (Poor)
- I think the aim of this course needs to be revised and checked whether this is the way to achive these aim is to put the course like this because this does not feels like a course on a masters level. And I can see the relevance of getting to know reallife problems connected to materials and manufacturing problems but this course has no good balance between being brief and giving details so in the end it is hard to get out something from it. » (Poor)
- To easy. It almost felt like the assignments could have been made only using the knowledge from before taking the course. Design quality is an interesting field, and I would like to have learned more about it.» (Poor)
- Very little content in the course, barely any examination or assignments on the contents. Barely learned anything, and there wasn"t any real opportunitues to learn anything. Most of the lectures were on things learned in basic courses, and the level was very basic.» (Poor)
- Worst course during my time at Chalmers. Not appropriate for university level studies, did in all honesty not learn anything new.» (Poor)
- it was very basic.» (Poor)
- Unfortunetly a course that in the description sounded to be very intersting was too bad. » (Poor)
- The idea of the coure was very good. I am really interested to know more about this area. I would not complain if there where more good stuff in thís course. Of good quallity of course:)» (Fair)
- The course should be deepened to raise it to a master course level. The parts that are currently in the course are good with plenty of practical examples.» (Adequate)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

16. Additional comments