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.

Random processes with applications, MVE135, MPCOM,HT2007

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2007-10-10 - 2007-10-27
Antal svar: 36
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 30%
Kontaktperson: Lena Peterson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Elektroteknik 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.

35 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»6 17%
Around 20 hours/week»7 20%
Around 25 hours/week»8 22%
Around 30 hours/week»8 22%
At least 35 hours/week»6 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.02

- I did not spend a lot of time studying by myself at first, but during and after the first hand-in I spend several hours doing exercises in the book.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- There was a heavy workload from Introduction to Communication Engineering. I"m reading the MPCOM program so the priority was clear. I wanted to spend more time on the course but it wasn"t possible.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- a little too fast» (Around 25 hours/week)
- The workload was ok since there are only 2 courses. Might be good to have the labs earlier in the program.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

35 svarande

0%»2 5%
25%»4 11%
50%»9 25%
75%»6 17%
100%»14 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.74

- I thought it was to much information on the slides at the lectures. I found it more useful to study on my own. The exercises was good but Sima should take more time to explain what she"s doing. Understanding one exercise is more important than then copying ten.» (25%)
- I started of strong, attending all classes. After, say, 3 weeks I concluded the lectures to be completely useless and decide to have the time better spent by studying on my own.» (50%)
- almost 100.» (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?

35 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»6 17%
The goals are difficult to understand»5 14%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»18 51%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»6 17%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- an exercise-exam would be a good guideline to what kind of tasks we are suppose to be able to solve, and what kind of level the course is set to.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- i think only the reading material or course contents were covered without any explanation of concepts. » (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Actually, during the lecture only theory were shown but example were not shown. Moreover, a lot of theories is covered up in short while. » (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- The course should take aim on more practical communication problems.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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.

30 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»20 66%
No, the goals are set too high»10 33%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- the course contents are too large. it is almost impossible to grasp all the concepts in one quarter. » (No, the goals are set too high)

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

32 svarande

No, not at all»1 3%
To some extent»9 28%
Yes, definitely»5 15%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»17 53%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

Teaching and course administration

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

35 svarande

Small extent»15 42%
Some extent»17 48%
Large extent»3 8%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.65

- The structure of the lectures was bad. Several powerpoit-slides with a lot of text and a lot of formulas packed on top of eachother. Its funny how students get to take a course in presentation, but (only this teacher?) seems to be unaware of how to get info out to the students using ppt-presentation. More examples of hands-on exercise-solving would be appreciated, like, for example how to approach the Lab-tasks.» (Small extent)
- almost no extent. i read and understood from the book. the teacher gave lectures on slides. she shifted very quickly from slide to slide. one didnt have time to understand. the slides werent prepared well. they had errors.» (Small extent)
- I might have been badly prepared for lectures but they were hard to follow.» (Some extent)
- Solutions to exercises was very good!» (Some extent)

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

34 svarande

Small extent»4 11%
Some extent»7 20%
Large extent»16 47%
Great extent»7 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- I found the coursebook hard to read. Not worth the money spent.» (Small extent)
- The book is good. Not as good as the books we had in a similar course in statistics during my Bachelors. Again the slides - hopeless...» (Large extent)
- The course book was fine.» (Great extent)
- The book is exceptional. the slides i did not read at all.» (Great extent)

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

35 svarande

Very badly»2 5%
Rather badly»4 11%
Rather well»16 45%
Very well»13 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- It was not clear from the beginning what and when something was going to happend.» (Very badly)
- I think the web page is not very user-friendly. It can be clearer.» (Rather badly)
- info on two different homepages! links not working! why not keep to studentportalen?» (Rather badly)
- the course website is not good. it should be improved.» (Rather well)
- Good web page. Some news was though published only on the Chalmers web page which was confusing.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

35 svarande

Very poor»1 2%
Rather poor»3 8%
Rather good»12 34%
Very good»12 34%
I did not seek help»7 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

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

35 svarande

Very poorly»3 8%
Rather poorly»1 2%
Rather well»15 42%
Very well»16 45%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- We have not been brought together on tasks (e.g. lab-groups). I dont know anyone in the class and (as far as i know - i started 4 days late) no actions has been made to bring the class together. » (Very poorly)
- I sought little cooperation.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

35 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»8 22%
High»13 37%
Too high»14 40%

Genomsnitt: 4.17

- I had no idea how to solve Lab1, and Lab2 does not look any better. » (High)
- It was a bit high, specially in the end...» (High)
- lab1 and the homeworks was OK, but lab2 was just the devil personified, shame on you Mats Viberg! Submission in friday week 7, evil is just the first name!» (High)
- The course contents are over estimated w.r.t time. and labs are also time consuming.» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

35 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»9 25%
High»14 40%
Too high»12 34%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- It was not too much.» (Adequate)
- for random process» (High)
- Its so much to do, havent had time to studdy the questions in the book yet» (Too high)
- this course with this kind of material should be presented in a semester not a quarter» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

35 svarande

Poor»9 25%
Fair»9 25%
Adequate»10 28%
Good»7 20%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Bad lectures» (Poor)
- the course contents are too large. method of teaching is not good at all. there should be less talking on slides and more writing on black board. the concept of the topic should be delivered properly. there should be more explanation. there should be more examples during lectures. it will help in clearing of concepts. i actually understood more from the exercise session. » (Poor)
- I won"t consider it as `good", but it"s not so bad. It"s not so interesting as I expected. Professor was just reciting the power point, I can read it by myself. I mean, I expect to lean something beside the book.» (Fair)
- Important material.» (Adequate)
- To bad prepared! faults in laboration, bad lectures slides! To much information in one course. » (Adequate)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Slow down of lecture procedure.»
- Labs is all about communication, its good»
- Definitely should focus on concurrent solution with the relevant theories»
- The textbook ans exercises»
- homework assignments»
- The good design of homepage website, The exercise course, »
- The design of homepage website, exercise course,»
- Keep the homework and Labs. Good solutions to problems in exercise lectures. Very good to have a copy on the computer.»
- I don"t know, generally the course is a bit dull.»
- homeworks with bonus points!»
- the course should be presented each semester»
- The Book. In my opinion this is the best book on this subject.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Use not only PPT but also Blackboard to express some functions" inference procedure.I mean how to get some equation based on the knowledge that was taught.»
- The slides, to much info. To fast. »
- the lectures»
- the course is soo extensive and diffcult to understand.It can be better to cover less chapters to have a better explanation of this»
- The material shall be reduced»
- The course attempts to cover too much content in a period too short. Which makes it is hard to learn anything at all. It would be better to cover less material and go more in-depth.»
- More examples also on blackboard, fewer just in the slideshow»
- The workload of this course is really high, please make it low»
- The workload of this course is really high, The accent of the teacher is strong,»
- Fewer equations on each slide would be good. Should use blackboard occasionally to keep students engaged.»
- Some additional material beyond the textbook. More vivid teaching style.»
- remove lab1 and lab2, I thought it was irrelevant for the course! Make the homeworks mandatory instead!»
- the course load should definitely be decreased »
- I wish that the lecture should take more time on conditional probability, CDF and PDF, poisson process, markov process and estimation or make them clearer»
- The course contents should be reduced. It should be up to chapter 8 of book with the concepts of random processes being explained extensively.»

16. Additional comments

- No,the teacher is very nice.»
- They say you should already have done 80% of this course before starting at the master, Ive gone to Chalmers 3 years, and this was a elective course. And on the mpcom-resumé it was not a mandatory course.»
- when attendants to lectures gets lesser and lesser, and neather questions nor comments are brought up during class, then something is terribly wrong.»
- more exercises will help the courses to be more interesting to the student»
- The amount of signal processing taught was bit out of place for some students. Overall it was plain that the staff was conscientious and had worked hard to make the course good.»
- There is no propose use of black board and slides.All most all the lectures are taught using slides and no balckboard. The lectures are too fast paced.I think it would be better if they use blackboard also to teach.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från