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.

Sustainable Power Production and Transportation, ENM095

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-10-10 - 2011-10-30
Antal svar: 37
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 55%
Kontaktperson: Valborg Ekman»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: 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.

37 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»8 21%
Around 20 hours/week»12 32%
Around 25 hours/week»12 32%
Around 30 hours/week»4 10%
At least 35 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- 90% of the work was the assignments» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

37 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»2 5%
50%»6 16%
75%»16 43%
100%»13 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- I was mostly doing self study. This worked quite well for me.» (25%)
- In the start I went to all lectures, but noticed it didn"t give very much. Only attended to guest lectures at the end.» (75%)
- I miss one classes due to sickness, but all in all - all the lectures even they were at the morning were interesting » (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 learning outcomes?

35 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 8%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»12 34%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»20 57%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I have seen them but I don"t remember...» (?)

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.

34 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 2%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»31 91%
No, the goals are set too high»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.02

- Im am an electrical engineer so I have the "right" background.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

35 svarande

No, not at all»2 5%
To some extent»10 28%
Yes, definitely»13 37%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»10 28%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.4

Teaching and course administration

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

35 svarande

Small extent»4 11%
Some extent»13 37%
Large extent»16 45%
Great extent»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- Please see question 15 for a more detailed answer.» (Some extent)
- Good help from the TA"s with the assignments, no other help needed.» (Some extent)
- it depends on the teacher and the subject» (Large extent)

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

37 svarande

Small extent»7 18%
Some extent»13 35%
Large extent»15 40%
Great extent»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.32

- Was difficult to get grip of what was supposed to be read. Maybe better to have a course compendium! » (Some extent)
- Mostly pdf"s with the slides, and they were good.» (Large extent)
- The materials would be very helpful in the future.» (Great extent)

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

37 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»2 5%
Rather well»20 54%
Very well»14 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.27

- Nothing to complain about.» (Rather well)
- Only problem (for example the sign ups) but they are caused to the IT of the new portal.» (Very well)
- Excellent work and organistaion» (Very well)

Study climate

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

37 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»11 29%
Very good»23 62%
I did not seek help»3 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

- You could go to the TA"s pretty much anytime and ask.» (Very good)
- Only complaint is the computer room was too small. Is it possible to use the E-studio more? » (Very good)

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

36 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»10 27%
Very well»26 72%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

11. How was the course workload?

37 svarande

Too low»1 2%
Low»1 2%
Adequate»26 70%
High»7 18%
Too high»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.21

- Quite low in the beginning but in the end the hybrid vehicles assignment took quite some time. Maybe start earlier with this?» (Adequate)
- Not necessary to have scientific work» (Adequate)
- but the work load for the Hybrid was too high» (Adequate)
- course workload depends of the type of assignments. Some were very easy, some are difficult, espacilly when you have a different background (no electrial stuff)» (High)
- It seemed like quite a lot of assignments for just this one class.» (High)
- Relatively hich load if you do not have electrical background.» (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

37 svarande

Too low»1 2%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»20 54%
High»10 27%
Too high»6 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.54

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

36 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»4 11%
Adequate»10 27%
Good»18 50%
Excellent»4 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- It was VERY general about most stuff, I thought it would be more technical. Most of the lectures were just slides with statistical data over and over again.» (Fair)
- It becomes obvious that it is very difficult to make a course like this, which students from almosta any program/background can choose. Either it is too easy or too challenging, or wrong perpective etc. Anyway, it worked out pretty well according to me (electrical engineering student)» (Adequate)
- Good basic knowledge in many different processes.» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the study visit»
- The lectures on fusion energy, fission energy and the Matlab assignments (in general good exercises!).»
- The wind lectures where good. The lecture about Nuclear was very good. The lecturer was optimistic and gave a good impression of having a good knowledge within the field and had a structured powerpoint. The Solar lecture by Mike was interesting with a more implemented perspective on solar energy and solar panels.»
- In general the assignments were good»
- Matlab Assignments. Wind and solar laboratory.»
- Study visit to Hono island and MATLAB assignments.»
- The assignments.»
- assignment aswell as scientific report.»
- assignments, laboratory exercise»
- out university experiences»
- assigments, assistants - great help»
- Generally, all should be preserved, the lectures with different teachers and the assignments. Also the labs and the trip were useful.»
- Last assignment, despite being interesting it is too big for one assignment - should be divided into 2.»
- labs»
- The part about wind power is very interesting because we can see more things. »
- The assignments should be preserved»
- the course syllabus»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- more details in the lec. Often, we only saw pictures of nice power plants and diagramms. But no detail informationen The lec about sun power was really very bad. The teacher was not able to speak a understandble english»
- There has to be put requirements on the teaching staff that their English should be of a certain level. Teaching at a master"s level should require three things of the person doing the teaching: knowledge of the particular subject, a certain level of English proficiency, as well as didactic skills. In general the staff doing the teaching this year meets the didactic requirement as well as having the knowledge of the subject. Some stand out as exceptionally good (Tünde Fülöp and Anders Nordlund). It was also a pleasure to listen to Michel Snyder (who naturally doesn"t have any language problems). However, sadly, the teaching of some stand out in the other direction, namely the teaching of Ingemar Mathiason and partly of Ola Carlson. Regarding Ingemar"s teaching, the level of the language was way below what"s acceptable. I am Swedish myself so I have nothing against Swedes speaking English. However, students from all over the world are attending this course. Some have payed huge amounts of money to get an education of a certain quality, and THEY have to supply proof of their knowledge of English. It is obvious that the same requirements (or preferably higher) should be put on the teaching staff. In Ingemar"s case, the lack of knowledge of English serioudly hampered the didactic outomce of his class as well. Same thing goes for the laboration on photo voltaic, where the lab pm honestly has to be rewritten. In Ola"s case, the English proficiency is enough to allow for some didactics to be realized in the teaching. However, the level of the language could definitely be improved. Sometimes the acutal meaning of what he said/had written on power point slides simply became wrong or plainly incomprehensible. For example: written: ridged (instead of rigid) idée"s (instead of ideas) rev (instead of reef) soft wear (instead of software(!)) said: skiss (instead of sketch or outline) evaluation (instead of elevation) igrigation and agrigation (instead of irrigation) invited (instead of invented) These are just some examples and I do not at all want to make this a personal matter, but I hope those examples can show the quality of the language, and thereby also the quality of the teaching. Of course it is ok to do mistakes, but the examples above are actually all quite basic. (By the way, if those examples could be passed on to Ola, I am sure that next year"s students would appreciate it, but I won"t deliver them personally). Summing up, I believe that the issue of the lingustic level of the teaching staff has to be taken more seriously both by the academic staff themselves, as well as by the university. When it becomes too bad, the situation is actually embarrassing for Chalmers, since it will be part of forming a picture of Chalmers in the mind of the students, a picture which will be spread to people all over the world. If we (Chalmers) want to be a well renowned university worldwide, things like those described above have to be delt with. (Thanks for reading this far =) )»
- The more theoretical solar lecture by Ingemar Mathiasson could be greatly improved. Unfortunately his English was lacking in pronunciation, which made it very hard to understand him, and the powerpoint slides could be more structured.»
- The hybrid vehicle assignment is a mess, most boring I have ever done. Focus is on copy and paste, not understanding. You care about how the structure of the file is, not how it should be for real. You should make it smaller but with more focus on learning stuff. Last questions is finding values in a table, seriously?»
- Don"t know. Everything was ok.»
- The assignments needs some work. The first assignments are given too much time, and the HEV one too little. I.e., reduce the time for the first ones, and give more to the HEV assignment. »
- Clearer solar lectures with more technical details.»
- I think part of the computer assignment can be proved orally rather than writing a report. This increase the workload of both students and tutors and not so meaningful.»
- I enjoyed the solar lecture by our classmate. The other solar lecture could definitely be improved.»
- scientific work. we don"t have any guidance. I am not sure why I should do this. Maybe it can be replaced by other work.»
- too many objects, sometimes not so much deeply understandable»
- more background could be given.»
- Some classes for students who have never used MATLAB before.»
- Updating the hands outs before you did it (al least before the lecture which is related). »
- The last assignment is too long, and it could be split.»
- hybrid lab»
- Nothing»
- The course is very interesting but too general. I would like to learn more for each renewable energy. I think it is more interesting to keep only three type of renewable energies and speak about that more deeply because we just had a general presentation.»
- Less theorical lessons»
- the question paper»

16. Additional comments

- To get more out of the evaluation of this course, it could perhaps be an idea to let the students fill in which kind of engineering background they have.»
- None.»
- the last assignment (hybrid) is too much and it is not good for learning and understanding subjects »
- Have lectures related to the Hybrid Vehicle assignment so that we can have a clearer idea about the hybrid assignment»
- This course should not be a recommended course for MPEPO-2 since it is on a too low level. It would be good if this course was moved to MPEPO-1 even though it is hard to fit in somewhere.»
- I don"t think I learned much about the electrical aspects since this course seemed to be more for people in the electrical program (and assumed they already knew the basics).»
- the course seems like a general review - when compared to a master class »
- On the last week of the course we had some scientific work to do. It would be very nice if we can share our power point presentation on the student course page - some of them were really interesting, what is more - we were divided into 2 groups so maybe we can exchange our scientific work with them ? »

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.4
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.8

Kursutvärderingssystem från