Visa resultat

Course Evaluation Measurement Techniques in Automotive Applications 2010, TME165

1. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		5		50%
Fair»		3		30%
Adequate»		2		20%
Good»		0		0%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.7

- Course unorganized. Study instrucions handed out too late.» (Poor)
- - One of the worst course I have taken - Bad information spread - Reading instructions for book study week (really bad) - "Teachers" that had bad planing of lectures and not relevant content in lectures» (Poor)
- This course was the worst I"ve ever had. Bad planning, an examinator who seemed not to care for the course or students and some really bad teachers. Mathias can"t have put any time at all in this course.» (Poor)
- I expected more information on basic signal processing, controls and the CAN bus network.» (Adequate)

2. What is you general opinion about the strain gauge laboratory work?

Poor»		0		0%
Adequate»		7		70%
Good»		3		30%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- Well performed but the learning outcome can be questioned. Instructions for caculations and report presentations poor.» (Adequate)
- The two seperate labs could be one within 2 hours!» (Adequate)
- This laboratory was the best in the whole course. Göran did a great job with planning and helping the students. Although it might be reasonable to question the relevance in doing a strain gauge lab at master level. After all, it"s my third strain gauge lab at Chalmers...» (Adequate)

3. What is you general opinion about the LabView presentation and assignments?

Poor»		1		10%
Adequate»		5		50%
Good»		4		40%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- LabView would have been a great program to learn, but there were no assignments in LabView and too little time and effort was put in this part.» (Poor)
- I think you could have emphasized more on building labview models, since it is a very useful tool.» (Good)

4. What is you general opinion about the experimental design presentation and assignment ?

Poor»		2		20%
Adequate»		4		40%
Good»		4		40%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

- Unclear how to perform a fraction factorial design. Presentations can be improved.» (Adequate)
- It was good to learn factorial design. Azra should learn some teaching methods. It"s really hard to understand what she"s trying to teach. Wikipedia did a better job this time.» (Adequate)
- Nice to learn DOE» (Good)
- The experiment itself was interesting, but I can"t see where the theory of experimental design fits in with the rest of the course. Azra was good in her teaching and guidance for the assignment.» (Good)

5. What is you general opinion about the steady state cornering vehicle dynamics laboratory work?

10 svarande

Poor»		4		40%
Adequate»		4		40%
Good»		2		20%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

- I can tell money was spent on the hands on lab. However, not many brain cells went into the overall teaching of the theory behind it or what we were doing. I read the book the understand what we were doing.» (Poor)
- Tests were good but lab execises unorganized. Students didn"t know what to do for the report. Guidance to the reporting and the different tasks unavailable.» (Poor)
- This lab could have been so good but ended up in misery. First of all, it"s not ok to put a date for a lab and change it with such a short notice when you"ve known for a long time that you have to postpone the date. I had to take a day off from my job since I was supposed to work at the first date and only days before I was told the lab was postponed. Secondly, a mail with preparations shouldn"t be sent out the day before, most students do sleep at night. Third: It"s an advantage if the teacher shows up on time. 45 minutes delay is really bad without any explanation. Fourth: The lab-Pm for both parts was a joke. No structure or correctly asked questions. If there was a question it asked for therms which does not exist. The lab-PM:s seemed to have been written by someone who doesn"t know english and doesn"t know what he"s asking for. The people from SAAB must have been really disappointed for such a lousy laboration. Mathias should really have taken care of the big opportunity this lab actually was, but he failed big time. There were absolutely no time for evaluation of the labs given. We were basically throw into vehicles, drove a bit and were handed a USB memory with data. We didn"t know what to do with the data, what type of units it came from or anything. These two labs was a total mess and waste of time. It"s also good if the teacher has some basic knowledge in the software being used. It"s a big fail when the teacher spends 15 minutes of a 30 minute lab figuring out how to sample and save data.» (Poor)
- This was a very good opportunity to work with real world data. Activity must be carried for next year as well.» (Good)
- Both the VD experiments proved to be excellent tools to understand how car data is collected and processed. I found that I was able to understand VD concepts in a much better way as a result of this experiment. Working with the data was enlightening, I understand some VD concepts better now because of these exeriments.» (Good)

6. What is you general opinion about the transient cornering vehicle dynamics laboratory work?

10 svarande

Poor»		5		50%
Adequate»		3		30%
Good»		2		20%

Genomsnitt: 1.7

- Tests were good but lab execises unorganized. Students didn"t know what to do for the report. Guidance to the reporting and the different tasks unavailable.» (Poor)
- No info prior the lab. Bad information in PM that was given on place not before which was a mistake. Few and bad information how to perform the task. Short of time which lead to it couldn´,t be done in time. » (Poor)
- The same thing applies here, no time for evaluation or introduction of what we where doing. It would have been better if the teachers had a batch of data which were sent to the students and put the time of the lab on writing understandable lab-PM:s instead. There were really nothing we learned from the lab. Totally fail.» (Poor)
- This was a very good opportunity to work with real world data. Activity must be carried for next year as well.» (Good)

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

Very badly»		3		30%
Rather badly»		3		30%
Rather well»		3		30%
Very well»		1		10%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

- Reading lists sent out the last week» (Very badly)
- Stora holm lab was changed on a SUNDAY when the lab was on tuesday (teacher known it ealier it was said).... BAD planing. Bengt and Janos had not access to homepage-> information spread via mail. No reading instructions untill end of period. » (Very badly)
- I"m lack of words in describing how bad it is to hand out the reading instructions one week before the exam. When this was pointed out for Mathias he just laughed and didn"t seem to care. How an examinator can act like that is nothing I understand. He should have some kind of reduction in his pay for doing such a bad job with this course.» (Very badly)
- Information to students came too late, in some cases only days before the exam regarding work that should have been done during the wole course.» (Rather badly)

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

Small extent»		4		40%
Some extent»		4		40%
Large extent»		2		20%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

- Johan Davidsson was pretty much the only teacher who actually did a good job in this course. He is a natural in teaching and should definitely be preserved in this course. Janis on the other hand is hard to describe. I"m not shure if he even knows what he"s teaching. He speaks terrible english and is lacking all kind of teaching fundamentals. He"s scatterbrained and shouldn"t educate at all. Why the hell does someone teach pin-configuration of an RS-232 port. His classes doesn"t make any sense at all.» (Small extent)

9. What is your opinion of the teachers?

Very bad»		4		44%
Rather bad»		3		33%
Rather good»		2		22%
Very good»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.77

- Some of them were very bad with computers......unacceptable at this day and age really. Some of them were very bad with explaining themselves.» (Very bad)
- Johan had a few good presentations early on. The outcome of the other lectures close to none.» (Very bad)
- Johan D, Azra, Azra and Delphi guy OK. Janos is probably the worst teacher I have meet.» (Rather bad)
- I especially liked Bengt"s handouts. They were very helpful in explaining the basics of state space models. They also helped my understand of the signal processing that we did on the car data. Very simple and clear explanations. » (Rather good)

10. To what extent have you been able to understand the teachers presentation in English?

Small extent»		2		22%
Some extent»		2		22%
Large extent»		5		55%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- Monotones make me fall asleep.» (Small extent)
- Some language skills among the staff were poor.» (Some extent)

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

Small extent»		5		50%
Some extent»		2		20%
Large extent»		2		20%
Great extent»		1		10%

Genomsnitt: 1.9

- Powerpoint is good enough since it was only 1/10 of book that covered the leasson. » (Small extent)
- This question was funny. Not much in this course was new. Pretty much everything had been covered in previous courses and should be fundamentals for an engineer at our level.» (Small extent)
- Too bad the reading instructions were handed out less than a week before the exam.» (Large extent)
- I found Bolton to be good, especially the basics of laplace transforms, etc. » (Large extent)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

14. What is your opinion of the written exam?

Very bad»		2		25%
Rather bad»		2		25%
Rather good»		4		50%
Very good»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.25

- I don"t think the exam"s definition of "gauge pressure" is correct. I"ve always been told, in all my fluids classes, that it is the pressure above the ambient. Wikipedia agrees http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_measurement#Absolute.2C_gauge_and_differential_pressures_-_zero_reference I am quite confident that I was right but it wasn"t worth it for me to try and argue for points when I got barely a 4» (Very bad)
- I wonder how many actually answered the last question. After only a two hour lecture put an exam question that is equivalent to the hardest parts of the automation course is ridicilous.» (Very bad)
- The course content and the exam content ot the same.» (Rather bad)

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

10 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		4		40%
Around 20 hours/week»		3		30%
Around 25 hours/week»		2		20%
Around 30 hours/week»		1		10%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- Although the overall time spent was fine, we ended up having to do too much work in the end, too close to the exams - because the VD lab was held so late in the course. A week in advance would have have resulted in better distribution of the workload.» (Around 20 hours/week)

16. What was your priority of this course compared to the other courses you follow?

Much lower»		2		22%
Somewhat lower»		2		22%
Equal»		4		44%
Somewhat higher»		1		11%
Much higher»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.44

- Worst class at Chalmers.» (Much lower)

17. Additional comments