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.

Programming language technology, lp3 VT11, DAT150/DIT230

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-03-18 - 2011-03-24
Antal svar: 23
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 28%
Kontaktperson: Rebecca S»

Your own effort

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

23 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»7 30%
Around 20 hours/week»4 17%
Around 25 hours/week»7 30%
Around 30 hours/week»4 17%
At least 35 hours/week»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.47 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

23 svarande

0%»1 4%
25%»0 0%
50%»4 17%
75%»8 34%
100%»10 43%

Genomsnitt: 4.13 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.3

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

23 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»4 17%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»8 34%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»11 47%

Genomsnitt: 3.13

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

20 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»19 95%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.95

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

23 svarande

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

No, not at all»1 4%
To some extent»6 26%
Yes, definitely»13 56%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 4%

- The last question was more than what we expect to see. but other questions were ok. even though I have carefully read the material I could not understand what I have to do. and I think I cannot get even a part of the grade. » (No, not at all)
- it would be better if code generation (syntax directed) was part of laboratory.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

22 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
To some extent»8 36%
Large extent»9 40%
Great extent»5 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

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

23 svarande

Small extent»4 17%
Some extent»10 43%
Large extent»6 26%
Great extent»3 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.34

- Didn"t buy book. Lab PM essential, as well as online resources.» (Large extent)
- labs were very helpful and useful» (Great extent)

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

23 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»12 52%
Very well»11 47%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- Some problems with the testcases for the assignments, otherwise very well.» (Rather well)
- Group discussions are really useful, thanks for instant teachers assistants answers» (Very well)

Study climate

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

23 svarande

Very poor»1 4%
Rather poor»2 8%
Rather good»9 39%
Very good»7 30%
I did not seek help»4 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- Unacceptable waiting time on lab supervision.» (Very poor)
- the time of lab session wasn"t good. if it take 4 hours for each session ,it would be better» (Rather good)
- Too few TAs on the lab supervisions. Was only able to get help once (about 5min) per session. Did get help when we asked for it outside of the session hours though.» (Rather good)

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

23 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»4 17%
Very well»18 78%
I did not seek coopeation»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.86

- Was hard to get lab partner, and that"s very recommended. Great Google group.» (Rather well)

Summarizing questions

11. What is your general impression of the course?

23 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»3 13%
Good»12 52%
Excellent»8 34%

Genomsnitt: 4.21

- Snarky rejection of lab submission where a makefile were missing. Feels like it would have been easier/ more productive just to write bnfc -m and give proper feedback right away. This was very frustrating as there are very tight deadlines on lab 4 resubmission. (Now we basically have no chance of a real resubmission).» (Good)
- I learned monads!» (Good)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- It is not fair to put the last lab on the last days for master student. »
- exercise session»
- Labs.»
- Teacher.»
- Labs»

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- I think we have to have a better LAB PM for lab4. it is not clear what we have to do in the last lab»
- The lab instruction lab4 could be improved, also the all parts regarding functional programming could also be improved.»
- it would be nice to have basic code for lab4, as for the other labs»
- Would appreciate if the first lab pm had mention conflicts between rules in bnfc, would have saved our group a lot of time.»
- More help in lab sessions.»
- Either press harder on using Haskell or give more support to using other languages. Explain the functioal lab better. Teach teory notations better or do not use them.»

14. Additional comments

- Coming from the csall master program it seems like this course should be much earlier, most of the material covered is already covered to a greater depth in the optional courses I"ve already finished.»
- Great course. I learned a lot!»

Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.3
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.57

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från