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.

1011-2 Testing, debugging and verification, TDA566/DIT082

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-12-16 - 2011-01-23
Antal svar: 30
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 33%
Kontaktperson: Börje Johansson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Informationsteknik 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.

30 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»8 26%
Around 20 hours/week»15 50%
Around 25 hours/week»4 13%
Around 30 hours/week»2 6%
At least 35 hours/week»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- More like 5..» (At most 15 hours/week)
- A hell alot» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

30 svarande

0%»1 3%
25%»4 13%
50%»5 16%
75%»9 30%
100%»11 36%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- It is impossible to recall anything said during Reiners since he says "eh", "ah" or "uhm" more than anything else during a lecture roughly about 450 times per lecture, the only other thing I can recal from his lectures are "I mean", repeated on average every 3 minutes» (25%)
- though it all sucked so much» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

30 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»8 26%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»7 23%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»15 50%

Genomsnitt: 2.96

- U did not show them» (I have not seen/read the goals)

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.

25 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»23 92%
No, the goals are set too high»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

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

26 svarande

No, not at all»1 3%
To some extent»7 26%
Yes, definitely»14 53%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»4 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

- The first assignment were too complicated to understand the program, and if u didnt do it, then u fail on the jml too and then almost impossible to pass so one of the worst exams i have ever seen» (No, not at all)
- The problems took too much time to understand before I could start answer the questions. You could have described the graph array more clear.» (To some extent)
- I thougth the exam covered each part of the course in a quite good way, exept for the testing and specification parts. These parts were too complex, maybe multiple questions and smaller questions would have done it.» (To some extent)
- The questions in the exam is not clear enough, and hard to understand.» (To some extent)
- But due to limited time I couldn"t write everything I could.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

30 svarande

Small extent»5 16%
Some extent»4 13%
Large extent»14 46%
Great extent»7 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- as said before, reiners lectures are pointless due to the extreme extent of uselsee fillers words/noices sticking to memory instead of the actualy lecture» (Small extent)
- U should have a choice for nothing» (Small extent)
- I was not in synch with course pace, as I relied more on books to get detailed information, I could not benefit from them much.» (Some extent)
- Lechures are always good guidance.» (Large extent)

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

29 svarande

Small extent»8 27%
Some extent»11 37%
Large extent»9 31%
Great extent»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- Very much of the material about testing and debugging in the literature was irrelevant for the course, and the lack of literature and documentation regarding JML and KeY was troubling for the latter part of the course.» (Small extent)
- nothing, since it were like 5 books and very little in everyone and we cant afford to buy 5 books for like 3000 kr and then u cant even put up the slides before the lectures, how the hell are we supposed to learn then...» (Small extent)
- Did not read much in the litterature, but it seemd to be much focus on the first two parts of the course.» (Some extent)

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

30 svarande

Very badly»1 3%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»12 40%
Very well»17 56%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Very shitty, put up the lecture slides before the lecture so ppl can read them before of the lecture is a total waste of time since u cant follow» (Very badly)
- A bit too long time before accept/reject on the lab exercises.» (Rather well)
- I would have liked to get lecture notes before lecture.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

30 svarande

Very poor»1 3%
Rather poor»2 6%
Rather good»11 36%
Very good»10 33%
I did not seek help»6 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- office hours once a week was a little. Not that a felt I needed much help, but the opportunity would be nice.» (Rather poor)
- The assistants were very responsive in the Google group but I still would have preferred to have time set aside for assisted lab hours.» (Rather good)
- Quite good on the googlegroup, but i"m sorry to say Ran were not helpful at any time for us» (Rather good)

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

30 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 3%
Rather well»9 30%
Very well»20 66%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

11. How was the course workload?

30 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 3%
Adequate»25 83%
High»2 6%
Too high»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

12. How was the total workload this study period?

29 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 3%
Adequate»13 44%
High»10 34%
Too high»5 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.65

- Modeldriven Sw Development» (High)
- course overlap with crypto course» (High)
- Because I am looking for master thesis and other learning that must be done beside university education.» (High)
- Model driven software development was very time consuming.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

30 svarande

Poor»1 3%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»7 23%
Good»16 53%
Excellent»6 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.86

- worst course i have taken so far in 3 years i can actually say that nothing were good everything sucked... the lecturs, assignments, teachers, assistants and so on» (Poor)
- Good mixture of very aplicable skills (testing debugging) to more academic and hopefully in the future more usefull» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the labs, the teachers.»
- labs»
- The partitioning of the course into clearly defined units. Wolfgang and Reiner.»
- Wolfgangs lectures»
- Testing, formal specification and formal verification»
- nothing, change everything because it all sucked»
- testing and verification units»
- everything »
- Exercises with guidence are good, but can be improved.»
- Wines!»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The execises. The assistant there mostly did things on his computer without explaining what he was doing. I was looking for more explainations and teaching. »
- The verification part could be skipped and more focus on onter parts.»
- Higher level of difficulty on the first two labs, in order to better prepare students for the exam...»
- Harder test exams. More info on invariants in hoare logic. Harder labs (the testing coverage part on the exam was way harder then the ones in the lab)»
- none»
- I feel that the unit about formal verification should be removed from the course, both because the subject itself is difficult to learn and because the units on testing and debugging were neglected. I looked forward to learning the in-depth treatment of testing and debugging in the course literature but was disappointed that very little of this was included in the teaching and the exam. My suggestion is that formal verification is removed in favor of additional testing and debugging lectures. Using specific tools like KeY can be nice but is problematic because there is so little documentation, making it easy to get stuck.»
- Remove Ran from the course or give him education in the parts he teaches»
- Reiners lectures, he MUST record his own lectures and listen to them and he"ll most likely stop listening to the lecture and start counting "eh", "ah", "uhm" and "I mean". To much information has been packed into the slides, and information needed to methods for solving labs is missing from them aswell as decent examples.»
- I did not like the Hoare logic with updates. To me it seemed less intuitive, and more complicated than the ordinare Hoare logic.»
- Debugging and auto-generated test cases»
- everything»
- debugging part»
- minimize the literature a little bit + number of assignment should be 2 or these 3 assignment should be finished before the final exam»
- Labs(assignments) should be more detailed, most of the time my partner and I are confused and not sure how to do it while trying to do the labs. Exam questions should focus on the knowledge which had been teached during this course.»

16. Additional comments

- I really enjoyed the lectures! Mostly the first parts, not that Reiners were bad, but I found them more interesting.»
- The test exams didn"t represent the true level of difficulty compared to the final exam.»
- none»
- We were never given a clear description of how to actually achieve (by hand) path coverage, statement coverage, etc. which made it seem much more complicated than it usually was.»
- Uhm, eh, and I mean, ah, [something important], eh, I mean. repeat this for 45 minutes and you have a Reiner lecture. (I"m not trying to be mean to reiner, but I"m here to learn, not fill my head with eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh)»
- Please take this seriously, had about 6 friends who took this course too right now, and they all thought it was the worst course so far»
- Totally the manner of course teachers was good »
- The formal verification part is hard, or say not easy to understand. It would be better if the teachers could slow down a bit while explaining some improtant steps of the verification. I think the exam in December of 2010 is not good, because two big parts are related to a piece of program with complex logical, which is not good to test students" understand of testing at all. In another hand, to anylise such a complex code logic under a nervous mode and within limited time is very hard, and the skill needed for anylise the logic in the questions is not related to this course.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från