Visa resultat

TME190 Advanced Active Safety 2011

Your own effort

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

9 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		0		0%
Around 20 hours/week»		1		11%
Around 25 hours/week»		1		11%
Around 30 hours/week»		6		66%
At least 35 hours/week»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

- Lectures, mandatory exercises, assignments, lab...I"d say at least 30h/w.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- More than 35 during some week/weeks» (Around 30 hours/week)
- to much work at home» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

9 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		1		11%
100%»		8		88%

Genomsnitt: 4.88

- missed 3 lectures due to sickness» (100%)
- Missed some lectures but attended more than 75%» (100%)
- >90%» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals (learning objectives)?

I have not seen/read the goals»		0		0%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		4		50%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		4		50%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- The depth of knowledge maybe is difficult to grasp. The wiki assignment seem to fall out of the goals.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- They are clearly described but do they match the course contents? I don"t think so.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

4. Are the goals (learning objectives) reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

8 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		7		87%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		12%

Genomsnitt: 2.12

- The goals are not really reasonable, it seems like you need more knowledge about some topics than what have been presented in the course.» (No, the goals are set too high)

5. Did the examination, together with exercises and the lab, assess whether you have reached the goals (learning objectives)?

No, not at all»		1		11%
To some extent»		6		66%
Yes, definitely»		2		22%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- The lab and exercisses were over all great. Too many questions in the exam that didn’,t test the understanding of active safety and its functions but rather the students ability to memorise all information. Its ok with 1 or 2 such question just to make it hard to earn the highest grade but this was ridicules, especially compared with last year’,s exams. » (No, not at all)
- exercises and the lab was quite ok. but i think in final examination some quetions were too detail hich is not very easy to remember.» (To some extent)
- More focus should have been on the big FCW assignment, the wiki does not do much for learning about active safety, the exercises were quite good but could have been integrated into the FCW lab.» (To some extent)
- The calculation part (part 3) was good. The multi-choice questions (part 1) were not good because what was right or wrong was arguable. Part 2 should be improved so you can understand how much you are expected to write. Is 3 sentences or 5 pages sufficient?» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

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

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Some lectures better than other, Kip was a nice break from the otherwise technical view of safety.» (Great extent)

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

Small extent»		1		11%
Some extent»		5		55%
Large extent»		2		22%
Great extent»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- It is not always very good to read all the information from slides.» (Some extent)
- A compendium for this course would be very beneficial.» (Some extent)
- Lecture slides were good, but no course book, obviously.» (Large extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		2		22%
Rather well»		6		66%
Very well»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- Please use TimeEdit for the course schedule instead of using 2-3 different places for posting this information.» (Rather badly)
- Everything was present on the webpage, but one level of folders could be skipped in the structure. » (Rather well)

Teachers

9. How was Marco as course coordinator?

Excellent»		0		0%
Good»		3		33%
Adequate»		4		44%
Poor»		2		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- He was keen on timings whixh is very good, because some other guest lecturer were quite bad at it. Besides he was helpfull , trying to make a compromise with students.» (Good)
- » (Adequate) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Well, Marco seemed to like the course and the teaching a lot. The problems are bascially: A) We have other courses going on in parallel with this course, so unfortunately we cannot spend all our time on it. So there is no point in having mandatory stuff for no reason. If the students are interested and able to attend, they will attend. Some students may have reasons not to attend all lectures. So that should be up to each and everyone to decide. C) There were way to many tasks in the course.» (Adequate) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- A very clear/defined course-PM must exist. It should be stated what is to be expected throughout the course, prior to the start of the course. There were way to many tasks in the course.» (Adequate) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

10. How was Azra as a teacher?

Excellent»		5		55%
Good»		4		44%
Adequate»		0		0%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.44

- Azra was quite helpful. I really liked her lab assignment althogh it took a lot of time.Nevertheless, it was quite educational.» (Excellent)
- She new and need some more experience.» (Excellent)
- Enthusiastic and very helpful.» (Excellent)
- All together Azra was good, and excellent as an assignment assistant. Answered emails and was very available although the geographic difficulty of Lindholmen. » (Excellent)
- Very good response on questions, both via mail, lab and in lectures. Some lectures felt a little bit basic.» (Good)
- Clear and easy to follow!» (Good)
- Azra did a good job and did her best to answer questions during the lab. The content of her lectures could have been more advanced though.» (Good)

11. How was Marco as a teacher?

Excellent»		0		0%
Good»		4		44%
Adequate»		5		55%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.55

- The lecture about sampling was at a too basic level, could have incoroprated matlab coding or higher level of theory» (Good)
- Talk way too much about what we will do/not do. Gets carried away with questions.» (Good) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

12. How was Jonas as a teacher?

Excellent»		6		66%
Good»		3		33%
Adequate»		0		0%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.33

- Jonas should be more involved in the course!» (Excellent)
- Structures and interesting information. Seemed like the information taught was useful. » (Excellent)
- Excellent. Interesting to listen to people who know what they are talking about!» (Excellent)

13. How was Selpi as a teacher?

Excellent»		0		0%
Good»		3		33%
Adequate»		4		44%
Poor»		2		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- Some lectures felt a little bit out of place.» (Good)
- Unfortunately she was not very good at timing during lectures.» (Adequate)
- You should try to make the content more interesting to listen to.» (Adequate)
- Rather confusing lecture, » (Poor)

14. How was Kip as a teacher?

Excellent»		5		55%
Good»		4		44%
Adequate»		0		0%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.44

- Interesting and a very good speaker.» (Excellent)
- I"m not sure that I like the way of lecturing really... with that many discussions in class etc. But Kip was excellent anyway. Very interesting lectures» (Excellent)
- Excellent, I think that these were very interesting and useful sessions. However, if the guest lecturer (the expert) doesn"t want to have the homework: Don"t have it! » (Excellent) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)
- Tried really hard to get the attention and contrbution of the audience» (Good)

Exercises, Visits, and Guest Speakers

15. Which exercises should be kept next year?

9 svarande

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

Accident reconstruction (Mikael)»		3		33%
CAN (Marco)»		7		77%
Lidar (Jonas)»		8		88%
Cooperative Systems (Marco)»		2		22%
Driver Cognition (Kip)»		5		55%
Real-traffic data FOT (Marco)»		4		44%
Kalman Filtering (Azra)»		4		44%
8-truck data (Marco)»		3		33%

- I would say all the exercises where you get a better glimpse of how to use MATLAB should definitely be kept for next year.But still it is a lot of work to do.(when combined with lab assignment)» (CAN (Marco), Lidar (Jonas), Real-traffic data FOT (Marco), Kalman Filtering (Azra), 8-truck data (Marco))
- Good with small matlab excercises that only take one or a couple of hours, but even better with discussions for those subjects that permit such an excercise.» (Accident reconstruction (Mikael), CAN (Marco), Lidar (Jonas), Driver Cognition (Kip), Real-traffic data FOT (Marco))
- CAN exercise could be included in the lab.» (Lidar (Jonas), Cooperative Systems (Marco), Driver Cognition (Kip), 8-truck data (Marco))
- Combine CAN with the lab.» (Accident reconstruction (Mikael), CAN (Marco), Lidar (Jonas), Driver Cognition (Kip))
- Use the exercises as teaching sessions instead of examinations so that you actually learn something useful to be used in the FCW lab.» (CAN (Marco), Lidar (Jonas), Driver Cognition (Kip), Kalman Filtering (Azra))
- The first and most important thing is to remove the damn wiki-exercies. Those exercises were just waste of time.» (CAN (Marco), Lidar (Jonas), Kalman Filtering (Azra))

16. Which exercises should be significantly revised?

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

Accident reconstruction (Mikael)»		1		11%
CAN (Marco)»		2		22%
Lidar (Jonas)»		1		11%
Cooperative Systems (Marco)»		2		22%
Driver Cognition (Kip)»		3		33%
Real-traffic data FOT (Marco)»		2		22%
Kalman Filtering (Azra)»		2		22%
8-truck data (Marco)»		2		22%

- I found it a bit of unnecessary and time consuming.» (Driver Cognition (Kip))
- see q 15 comment» ()
- Keep the CAN, Lidar and Kalman filtering tasks and remove all other.» ()

17. How did you like the visits to SAFER, VOLVO, and VTI?

Excellent»		5		55%
Good»		3		33%
Adequate»		0		0%
Poor»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

- Excellent, the VOLVO and VTI visits were really good. The SAFER visit could be improved a lot, don"t really see the point for it other than showing the place where the teachers are working.» (Excellent)
- Nice to get an insight into the industry but the presentation at vti were too long and difficult to get a connection to.» (Good)
- Keep it.» (Good)

18. Which guest speaker should be kept next year?

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

Malte (VOLVO - Radars)»		6		66%
Per (VCC - Functional Safety)»		6		66%
Trent (VOLVO - Driver Impairment)»		7		77%
Erik (Chalmers - Wireless communication)»		8		88%
Mikael (VCC - Accident database)»		6		66%
Henrik (VCC - Driver modelling)»		6		66%

- and Kip» (Malte (VOLVO - Radars), Per (VCC - Functional Safety), Trent (VOLVO - Driver Impairment), Erik (Chalmers - Wireless communication), Mikael (VCC - Accident database), Henrik (VCC - Driver modelling))
- Malte"s lecture was at a "higher level" than the others.» (Malte (VOLVO - Radars), Per (VCC - Functional Safety), Trent (VOLVO - Driver Impairment), Erik (Chalmers - Wireless communication), Mikael (VCC - Accident database), Henrik (VCC - Driver modelling))
- Most of these guest lectures were actually interesting to listen to.» (Malte (VOLVO - Radars), Per (VCC - Functional Safety), Trent (VOLVO - Driver Impairment), Erik (Chalmers - Wireless communication), Mikael (VCC - Accident database), Henrik (VCC - Driver modelling))

19. How was the collaborative assessment (wiki) exercise?

Excellent»		0		0%
Good»		1		11%
Adequate»		2		22%
Poor»		6		66%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- Basically a literature review and we have done that in the majority of all courses the last 4 years at chalmers. It’,s good that we were able to give an oral presentation of the assignment, otherwise it had been quiet useless from a learning perspective. » (Adequate)
- Shouldn"t be a wiki but a normal literature review also it took a lot of time beside the other excercises in the course.» (Adequate)
- Unfortunately i find it a bit unnecessary and time consuming. you still have to spend a lot of time even just to correct formatting issues when you publish your report on the webpage.It was ok for traffic and vehicle safety lecture, because there you share the work in group. But for this lecture, you work individually and have to handle eveything on your own. Besides, you also have to give feedback on two other students work, and then you have to present your own critisims. This whole process feels a bit odd to me.» (Poor)
- few are already done in the lecture. » (Poor)
- Useless, why write a wiki-page about something that is already presented in the course by "an expert" on the subject. It makes no sense what so ever. Its not enough to say that this assignment is useful to learn how to make a wiki-page, write a "report" and use references, give feedback and to improve presentation skills. These are, in my point of view, "skills" that one can assume the students already should possess after 4 years of university studies. Even if that"s not always the case it"s not necessary for a course like this with an already normal/high workload (according to last year"s class) to include an assignment like this.» (Poor)
- It takes unnecessarily much time and should be removed for next year. The peer review and wiki stuff was just a useless repetition of the task in VTS (which was a prerequisite for this course)» (Poor)

20. Do you think the Wiki material can be used as study material by other students next year?

Yes, definitely»		1		11%
Yes, probably»		1		11%
Maybe»		2		22%
No»		5		55%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- I for one used it to study for the exam» (Yes, definitely)
- I don"t think everyone puts the same effort on the work so all the materials might not be content-full. But ofcourse still would be enough to provide some general information which would be fair to learn» (Maybe)
- Why not...» (Maybe)
- If they are literature reviews, they are not complete, maybe they could be available for students to keep building on to.» (No)
- Let the experts do their job.» (No)
- No. Stick to the lecture slides.» (No)

21. Does the FCW-lab match your expectations of a lab in a course called Advanced Active Safety?

Completely»		7		77%
To some extent»		2		22%
Not at all (not relevant for the course)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.22

- I really found it teaching and felt that I was dealing with something valuable, a real life example. But still i should mention that it took a lot of time to deal with data...really» (Completely)
- More focus could be on developing a algorithm instead of 99% of the time going into data manipulation» (Completely)
- Excellent, the best thing in the whole course.» (Completely)
- Great lab, should have had a little more focus on teaching possible ways to complete the lab. Now a lot of time was wasted on searching the Matlab help for useful commands. I"m not saying the task should be solved for us but it was just time consuming which could have been spent on creating better data sets and algorithms. » (Completely)
- The lab was one of the best things with the course. If you just could remove the other unnecessary stuff (wiki and some of the other exercies) one would be able to spend more time working with the lab.» (Completely)
- I would like to see more lectures about algorithms and especially real-time algorithm implementations. » (To some extent)
- Good to be aware of "real" problems but it did take a lot of time, so maybe it was helpful in order to get a notion of a future job.» (To some extent)

22. Did the work load to complete the lab correspond to the significance it has for the final grade?

Completely»		1		11%
To some extent»		5		55%
Not at all (too much work)»		3		33%

Genomsnitt: 2.22

- The workload for this lab was more or less up to the students in the lab groups to decide dependent on the level of ambition. I believe the lab covers the main topics in active safety (driver behavior modeling, data processing, algorithm design, evaluation...) and therefor it should be a greater part of the final grade.» (To some extent)
- I think you should let the lab affect the final grade a little bit more actually.» (To some extent)
- It should have bigger significance for the final grade.» (Not at all (too much work))

23. How much time did you spend on the lab in total?

less than 20 hours»		0		0%
20 to 40 hours»		0		0%
40 to 60 hours»		4		44%
more than 60 hours»		5		55%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- maybe more? not really sure» (40 to 60 hours)
- Data processing, algorithms, literature reviews etc - its worth spending time on an interesting task like this!» (more than 60 hours)

Lectures

24. Which lectures shuold be kept next year?

9 svarande

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

Signal Processing»		7		77%
Sensors (Cameras, Lidar, GPS, etc...)»		9		100%
Wireless Applications (cooperative systems)»		9		100%
Machine learning and optimization»		1		11%
Human Factors»		8		88%
FOT data collection and database»		6		66%
Naturalistic data analysis»		7		77%

- The signal processing lecture can be more advanced.» (Signal Processing, Sensors (Cameras, Lidar, GPS, etc...), Wireless Applications (cooperative systems), Human Factors, FOT data collection and database, Naturalistic data analysis)
- It is a course in active safety, try to narrow it down and focus on the main topics. If matlab is to be used throughout the course why not add it as a prerequisite?» (Sensors (Cameras, Lidar, GPS, etc...), Wireless Applications (cooperative systems), Human Factors, FOT data collection and database, Naturalistic data analysis)

25. Which lectures shuold be significantly revised?

9 svarande

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

Signal Processing»		2		22%
Sensors (Cameras, Lidar, GPS, etc...)»		0		0%
Wireless Applications (cooperative systems)»		0		0%
Machine learning and optimization»		8		88%
Human Factors»		1		11%
FOT data collection and database»		2		22%
Naturalistic data analysis»		1		11%

- Machine learning and FOT data collection is interesting but I at least didn"t learn much from Selpi because she wasn"t coherent in her lectures. I learned more from just re-studying her slides and using Wikipedia.» (Machine learning and optimization, FOT data collection and database)
- Machine learning: could have been summarized into shorter lecture. Human factors: keep the lectures, skip the homework. » (Machine learning and optimization, Human Factors)
- The signal processing should be more advanced. machine learning and optimization should be made more interesting to listen to.» (Signal Processing, Machine learning and optimization)

26. What is your overall impression of the lectures contents?

Excellent»		1		11%
Good»		3		33%
Adequate»		5		55%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.44

- Sensors - good. Human factors - good. » (Adequate)

27. Did you feel there were many unuseful repetitions among the lectures?

Yes»		3		33%
No»		6		66%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

- Data processing (previous courses), wiki-assignment (from the AAS lectures)...» (Yes)
- Only the picture of a chinese soldier at a shooting range.» (No)

Study climate

28. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help from the teachers?

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		3		33%
Very good»		6		66%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

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

Very poorly»		1		11%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		1		11%
Very well»		6		66%
I did not seek cooperation»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- It should be stressed that the lab groups should be two people, in a group of 3 there is easily 1 person just not doing anything at all to help out. » (Very poorly)

30. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		0		0%
High»		2		22%
Too high»		7		77%

Genomsnitt: 4.77

- Too many exercises, one lab work , wiki assignment, presentations .. and only 7 weeks?» (Too high)
- Remove the wiki assignment, it has very low learning value compared with the time it takes to perform well. Most other exercises were useful and gave good and much needed matlab practise. » (Too high)
- It"s not reasonable to include so many different MANDATORY tasks in a course and at the same time cover so many different areas. Its a 7.5 credit course in active safety, not signal processing or whatever. The workload was normal or high last year, and it seems like it was even higher this year? » (Too high)
- Too many small assignments, keep focus on making good lectures and the large FCW assignment which was very useful and could be improved even more. » (Too high)
- Again, remove the wiki task and some of the exercises.» (Too high)

31. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		1		11%
High»		4		44%
Too high»		4		44%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

- If you try to be ambitious and perform well in each and every task in this course it would be a fulltime job, unfortunately its only a 7.5 ETCS course...» (High)
- Too high. I had to forsake my other course some times during this period to meet all the deadlines.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

32. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		11%
Adequate»		5		55%
Good»		3		33%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- It would have been "Fair" without the lab, can and lidar exercises!» (Adequate)
- Administrational problems with little advance information and too many separate tasks. It"s a good course with great potential thanks to many talented lecturers with a big know how and the close cooperation with the industry.» (Good)
- Good with guest speakers, the lab and some of the exercises (CAN, Lidar and kalman filtering). But remove the wiki task and the other exercises and this course would be excellent» (Good)

33. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

34. What should definitely be changed to next year?

35. Additional comments