Visa resultat

Model-driven engineering, Lp4 VT11, DAT240/DIT596

Your own effort

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

At most 15 hours/week»		7		31%
Around 20 hours/week»		9		40%
Around 25 hours/week»		4		18%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		9%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.04 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		1		4%
75%»		6		27%
100%»		15		68%

Genomsnitt: 4.63 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.34

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		2		9%
The goals are difficult to understand»		5		22%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		4		18%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		11		50%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

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

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		15		75%
No, the goals are set too high»		5		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.25

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

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

No, not at all»		8		36%
To some extent»		4		18%
Yes, definitely»		8		36%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		2		9%

- As a matter of fact,the way course was taught did not reflect in the examination paper i.e. the course was not structured and taught good whereas the examination paper was a structured one and good one.» (No, not at all)
- Some questions were dependent on others. I don"t like that. I think each question should be independent so that if you fail on one question you do not automatically fail the next. In this case, the metamodel question served as a base for half of the exam. It would have been better if we were given a metamodel for the M2M, M2T and Constraints questions and then have a separate question on how to design a metamodel.» (Yes, definitely)
- The examination didn"t test if student"s had the experience, it was a stress test to see how much stress the student could manage during four hour. Way to much to answer on way to little time. Make it a home exam for next time.» (No, not at all)
- Far too long and complex exam, I didn"t even have time to answer all questions, and if the student get one question wrong or didn"t know how to answer, the following answers would be wrong too, since all questions were so tightly connected.» (No, not at all)
- The case study was too difficult to understand.I personally spent more than 3 hours to understand and draw its meta model. Because I thought defining the correct meta model was too much important since the remaining questions were depend on the defined meta model.I was really disappointed because I really liked the course and do my best during the group meetings, I never missed even one session of lectures and group meeting, because I was really intrested the course.But I have no time to answer the questions because I ran out of time when I was trying to understand and define the meta model. » (No, not at all)
- the case study was not related to software engineering » (No, not at all)
- Everything in the course was well planned and relevant until the final exam. The exam was very tricky and assume prior knowledge in embedded and home automation systems. The case study was complex and its understanding seemed irrelevant to the course topics. In future, simple case studies should be given that assumes no prior knowledge or prolonged reading, and the emphasis should be on the MDE topics.» (To some extent)
- The exam might have been a bit too extensive and all questions were more or less dependent on the first question. A better solution could be to have a first question regarding meta modelling which have no connection to the rest of the exam and then be provided with a correct different meta model for the other problems.» (Yes, definitely)
- i did not enter the examination » ()

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		3		14%
To some extent»		5		23%
Large extent»		8		38%
Great extent»		5		23%

Genomsnitt: 2.71

- More emphasis was on the tool but there was no satisfactory guidance what we are suppose to do with the tool..although there were initial indications but we were like seeing a new tool every lecture but when it came to solving the problem with the tool,the real concept what is suppose to be done and how to tackle the problem was lacking.For e.g we had lecture on OCL constraints but in the lecture we had more emphasis on the tools that can be used to write OCLs instead of focusing more on OCL constructs,more examples & tutoring on writing OCLs in context of different problems.Same goes for all concepts lectured.» (Small extent)
- You learned mostly by yourself and with your group.» (To some extent)
- Excellent approach to learning such an advance topic in the field. Lectures were concise and to the point.» (Great extent)

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

Small extent»		10		45%
Some extent»		9		40%
Large extent»		2		9%
Great extent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 1.72

- The course material that was suppose to the primary reading or source for the course was made as supplementary material and the course book given was practically of no use given the context of the problems given to solve. » (Small extent)
- In future, stable tools should be selected and ones with detailed and well organized documentation and tool training material. This will improve MDE learning process, saving time learning tools.» (Some extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		8		36%
Rather well»		12		54%
Very well»		2		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- Late PM uploads for the modules. Often confusion about the weekly assignments.» (Rather badly)
- There were quite a few issues with the accessibility of the handouts and assignments etc. It"d be nice to have a simple, well structured course homepage. E.g. http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~feldt/courses/reqeng/» (Rather badly)
- Problem sets were late on occasion, student portal is... not so good.» (Rather badly)
- I think there are much better alternatives to the system in "studentportalen". A simple website to provide students with up to date information e.g. http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~feldt/courses/agile/ would be better in my opinion. It would have been nice if the weekly problems would have been provided early in the same week and also been a bit more thought through but I guess this is something which will get better later on since this course is quite new.» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		7		31%
Very good»		15		68%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- The supervisors and lecturer visited groups during the working session...they were of good help when we were stuck in a problem.» (Rather good)
- Could have been better if the stays in each group had been shorter so that you would have been able to get help more than once per session» (Rather good)
- But maybe one more lab assistent could have made things even smoother.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		1		4%
Rather well»		4		18%
Very well»		17		77%
I did not seek coopeation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- My fellow students found the course too dry due to lack of clear goals and objectives of the course and guidance,quite a few left the course and others were inactive in the group as they had no idea what to do» (Rather poorly)

Summarizing questions

11. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		3		13%
Fair»		3		13%
Adequate»		5		22%
Good»		5		22%
Excellent»		6		27%

Genomsnitt: 3.36

- There is a lot of room for improvement in the course.Especially the focus should be on the concepts not on the tools.» (Poor)
- Very enjoyable course, certainly the most enjoyable project I"ve worked on this year.» (Good)
- Very good course. Inspiring and enthusiastic teacher that encourages you to learn more about modelling.» (Excellent)
- Good structure, but could be a bit more prepared.» (Excellent)
- Should definitely continue with similar approach, but some of the unstable tools, like RSA, should be scabbed and the learning materials for different tools and weekly problems should be better organize. » (Excellent)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

14. Additional comments

Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor