|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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.
Engineering polymers 2010/2011, MPM080Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2011-03-01 - 2011-04-14 Antal svar: 17 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 50% Kontaktperson: Mikael Rigdahl» Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Maskinteknik 300 hp Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Övriga studenter
1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?We mean total time: spent in class and on your own work.17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.94 - I did my best in this course and I got very good result.» (around 30 h) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.41 - schedule overlaps with other courses» (50%) 3. Were the course goals reasonable considering your background and number of credits?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) 4. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning at this advanced level?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) - I think the lectures were good. » (high extent) 5. How well did the course administration, course homepage, handouts etc work?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.64 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) - This course was extremely misleading! To begin with, the course litterature and the reading instructions cover a lot of information that is more or less irrelevant for understanding the theory. Pages and pages of derivations which is far to complicated to follow for the student. The problems that where to be solved as well as the tutorials where extremely misleading as well! Variable substitution, double integrations...please, none of this showed up on the exam and was very tedious and time consuming to solve. The time could have been better spent on reading the hand outs which more or less was a slimmed down version of a lot of the things that was presented in the book. » (rather well) 6. How were the opprtunities for asking questions and getting help, were the lecturers caring?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.64 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) 7. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.58 - In the first lab we were supposted to do a lab report on two pages in a group of eigth students which is impossible, it would have been better with smaller groups.» (very well) 8. How was the course workload?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.76 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) - Mostly because I don"t have a background in materials. Maybe it should be emphasised more in the beginning of the course that it can be hard for students from other programs (even though it is very possible to still get a good grade, thanks to good tutoring)» (too high) 9. How was the total work load this study period?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.58 - Caused by the intensity of the courses.» (too high) 10. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- I liked the labs, and the lectures. »- Guest lecture by someone from the industry. The project/presentation (always useful to practice on spending time in front of a class, lecturing about a topic of your choice).» - I liked that the lectures followed the book very well! The administration also worked excellent!» - the book and the well organized leactures.» 11. What should definitely be changed to next year?- I didn"t like the handouts so much (except for the one in rheology), especially where the pictures are missing and you are supposed to look them up somewhere. »- Nothing» - more general information about the materials. felt like it was only a lot of calculations. » - The focus on mathematical formulae, specifically during the lectures on viscoelasticity. I would prefer a little more focus on the theory or concepts of the material.» - More coersiveness between theory and classification of polymers. Generally course lacked summarization of different polymers. Most students met with polymers for the 1st time.» - All calculations done in the home problems and tutorials should reflect what is to be tested for at the exam and what the student should have learned by the end of the course. This is something that has been a very hot topic among some students the week after the exam. It is very clear that Mikael Rigdahl is very enthusiastic about this course, which is rather humble approach in his teaching style. However I think that the biggest problem with the course is its to broad and going into far to many details, which makes it hard for the student to know which topics are the most important. Also a study guide for the litterature and hand outs could be revised/improved.» Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 1.65 Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.3
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5%