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.

Discrete optimization, lp3 VT11, TDA206/DIT370

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-03-18 - 2011-03-24
Antal svar: 10
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 25%
Kontaktperson: Rebecca S»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Informationsteknik 300 hp

Your own effort

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

10 svarande

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

Genomsnitt: 2.9 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

10 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»2 20%
75%»5 50%
100%»3 30%

Genomsnitt: 4.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.5

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

10 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»1 10%
The goals are difficult to understand»2 20%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»5 50%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

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

10 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»8 80%
No, the goals are set too high»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

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

10 svarande

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

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»3 30%
Yes, definitely»7 70%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

- The exam was okey but I felt that we should have had much more lecture time where we calculated on problems like those on the exam. There were no such opportunities, which was bad.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

10 svarande

Small extent»2 20%
To some extent»4 40%
Large extent»4 40%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

- Very vague discription on exercises.» (Small extent)
- The lessons were on a much higher level then what I read before. It felt like they expected to much of my mathematical backround. I have read 6 course in mathematics on Chalmers but they just jumped right in to solutions without explaining the background. » (Small extent)
- The lectures on convex programming need some work. Devdatt is a great lecturer, but the convex programming lectures seemed mostly to be about browsing through slides --- something we could"ve done on our own.» (Large extent)

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

10 svarande

Small extent»1 10%
Some extent»3 30%
Large extent»5 50%
Great extent»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- The course literature was ok. Probably one of the better things with this course. If I was to suggest a course to someone, it will never be this one. The course could be so good, because it has potiential but isn´,t teached out in the right way. One example is that I probably spent 70% of time in the beginning trying to solve syntax problems which has nothing to do with solving the weekly problems in linear opt. They should have explained more of the syntax.» (Some extent)
- but a couple of papers were barely understandable» (Large extent)

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

10 svarande

Very badly»2 20%
Rather badly»4 40%
Rather well»3 30%
Very well»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- The webpage has no good structure but it works. I found the things I wanted but what I don´,t like is the information about the weekly home problems. The description of the problems were very poorly, about 2-3 rows. Normally the laborations at Chalmers consist of at least 1/4 description of the problem. New info also came up on the homepage 1 day before deadline, not okey... The information in general during the course was very confusing and unorganized.» (Very badly)
- Often difficult to understand the weekly assignments (i.e. "what is the actual assignment here?"). Confusion about deadlines at times!» (Very badly)
- this was the weak point of the course, not well organized» (Rather badly)
- Changes were not announced on time, sometimes unclear what was supposed to be submitted and when.» (Rather badly)
- Well, except that the web page was impossible to find until after the first lecture. Official page at studieportalen had wrong course literature. » (Rather well)
- The LP exercises were clear, the convex programming exercises, especially the last two were confusing.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

9 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 22%
Rather good»3 33%
Very good»4 44%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- This is the positive thing to bring up. The two guys who were responsible for the home assignments was always very nice and helpful. If the information from them would have been clearer i think that they wouldn´,t have had so many people asking questions each week though.. » (Rather good)
- With the confusion surrounding some weekly assignments, fortunately Azam and Vinay were very helpful and patient with questions.» (Very good)

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

10 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»5 50%
Very well»4 40%
I did not seek coopeation»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- This is not really applicable for this course, but at times one had to ask other students if they understood what we were supposed to do for some of the assignments.» (Rather well)
- It has worked well. » (Very well)

Summarizing questions

11. What is your general impression of the course?

10 svarande

Poor»2 20%
Fair»1 10%
Adequate»2 20%
Good»5 50%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- I mean, I could probably right the whole day about this course but here is a brief description what wasn´,t good: - Poorly background (matematics, they took to much for granted) - Poorly information - Bad updating frequency on the webpage - No lectures where you could calculate problems I don´,t think this course is even close to the Chalmers level of teaching even though the course could be very interesting..» (Poor)
- Well, that"s a bit unfair really... I liked the course, and know that I have learned many important things, but the administration needs a complete overhaul.» (Poor)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- No, much.. Let me put it this way: - Either the course should be redone. That means the whole course planning would be redone. - Or it think that the course should be take away as a choice on Master level.»
- The lecturer»
- the take-home exam is a very good idea»
- Devdatt"s "black-board"-style lectures are very good, keep those...»

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- More introduction on Convex programming, since this was much harder to understand then LP.»
- All I have written before»
- The convex programming part felt rushed and badly planned. More time spent on the theoretical basis of convex programming (affine sets, convex sets, Lagrangian etc.). Introduce "Lab sessions" open for questions about the tools.»
- the labs»
- Use cvx/Matlab from the beginning maybe? Change the lectures on convex programming so that they are more similar to the rest.»
- The administration.»

14. Additional comments

- I hope Chalmers those anything about this course because it is probably the first time of my 4 years that i´,m this disappointed in a course..»
- Most of us do not have a particularly solid mathematical background, and have not worked with Matlab (that much). This need not be a problem for this course, but you should be aware of it.»

Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.5
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.62

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från