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.

Software Constraints, TDA612

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-03-07 - 2008-04-20
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 42%
Kontaktperson: Sibylle Schupp»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

1. Your study programme

- Computer science/GU»
- Software Engineering»
- Software Engineering and Technology»
- Software Engineering and Technologies»
- SET»
- Software Engineering and Technology»
- Software Engineering and Technology»
- IT "04 / Software Engineering "07»
- Software engineering and technology»
- Software Engineering»
- Datateknik D»
- Masters in Software Engineering and Technology»
- Computer Science and Engineering»
- Software Engineering and Technology»
- Software Engineering and Technology»
- SET»
- SET»
- D, Software Engineering.»
- Software Engineering»
- Erasmus»
- Exchange student»
- IT/Software Engineering and Technology»
- Master of sofware engineering»
- SET»
- SET»
- Computer Science at Göteborg University»
- Masters in Computer Science»
- Software engineering»
- SET»
- Software Engineering and Technology»

Your own effort

2. 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.

34 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»3 8%
Around 20 hours/week»10 29%
Around 25 hours/week»10 29%
Around 30 hours/week»10 29%
At least 35 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- attended the lectures and did the assignments.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Good workload, I know that many had touble with the workload, but I like the subject - so no problems here.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- It may sound little, but this is one of the courses I have spent most time on.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- This course had a very good workload.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Shifted from week to week, but I must say I spent quite a lot of time on this course, compared to other courses.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- It was a good idea to select students to present the exercise, we had to devote more time to understand the exercise. When you know that you may present, you try to understand it as good as you can.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- I put less time that I wanted on studing lectures,mostly studied the parts which were on homeworks» (At least 35 hours/week)

3. How many exercise sessions did you attend?

34 svarande

5-6»30 88%
3-4»4 11%
1-2»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.11

- A few presentations gave the impression that the presenter did not really understand the problem and/or presented a solution that at best could be described as muddled.» (5-6)
- All of them!» (5-6)
- Good level and good teacher. (Jean-Philippe)» (5-6)
- for some of excersises that I did not solve, I did not get answer even after exercise sessions. if supervisors can put more time to explain tough questions in class its really helpful.» (5-6)
- Keep them!» (5-6)
- All of them» (5-6)
- Gustav did really great work in exercise sessions.» (5-6)
- The idea with exercise sessions as the base for the grade was really excellent.» (5-6)
- Quite nice way of testing and exercising the knowledge» (3-4)

4. How many lectures did you attend (approx.)?

34 svarande

(almost) 0%»2 5%
25%»1 2%
50%»1 2%
75%»6 17%
(almost) 100%»24 70%

Genomsnitt: 4.44

- Prefer to read and study at home» (25%)
- Maybe a bit less.» (75%)
- All of them!» ((almost) 100%)
- Good lectures. Perhaps too many slides etc sometimes though.» ((almost) 100%)
- Good lectures! I wish I had time to study them more.» ((almost) 100%)
- except one session» ((almost) 100%)
- I really enjoy being at the lectures taught by Sibylle» ((almost) 100%)

5. How would you assess your previous background in programming/software design?

34 svarande

strong»9 26%
suitable»20 58%
weak»5 14%
none»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.88

- Four years at Chalmers leave a mark, no doubt about that.» (strong)
- I work with it.» (strong)
- My theorical background is enough but I am trying to improve my programming skills» (suitable)
- Had some rough time with C++ in the beginning but general knowledge about the area was suitable.» (suitable)
- I"m Swedish, and so much be humble.» (weak)

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.

6. What is the ambition level of the course goals?

33 svarande

modest»1 3%
just appropriate»6 18%
challenging, but OK»24 72%
too ambitious»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- Well stated and clear goals.» (just appropriate)

7. Did the course reach the goals stated at the beginning?

34 svarande

more than that»2 5%
yes, fully»18 52%
to a large extent»14 41%
partially»0 0%
barely»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.35

- I learned more than in most other courses.» (yes, fully)
- Yes, and with all the exercise we got I might even remember what I learned.» (yes, fully)
- By spending less time on preparing presentations of the home works more time could be spent on actually learning something.» (to a large extent)

8. Will it be useful what you have learned in the course?

34 svarande

yes, much»31 91%
somewhat»3 8%
hard to predict»0 0%
I don"t think so»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.08

- This was definitely good stuff.» (yes, much)
- ofcorse, this course is really helpful to improve our skils.» (yes, much)
- I have already used acquired knowledge during my part-time programming job.» (yes, much)
- Really interesting topics. Different course, in a positive way.» (yes, much)
- For me it was very usefule. It helps me in my other cources as well.» (yes, much)
- from the skill of reading scientific/technical papers to really specific technical issues.» (yes, much)
- Very good course, with relevant and interestin subjects.» (yes, much)

9. How often have you applied any of the course material to software written outside the course?

33 svarande

0 times»4 12%
1-2 times»10 30%
more than 2 times»19 57%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- Not much time have gone..» (0 times)
- Have not had a chance yet» (0 times)
- I don"t get this question. At least some of the course material is almost common sense, and I always apply common sense when programming...» (more than 2 times)
- The issue with exception safety especially, I almost cannot program anymore without thinking about it.» (more than 2 times)

Teaching and course administration

10. Course material in general

34 svarande

very good»13 38%
good»17 50%
OK»3 8%
bad»1 2%
very bad»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.76

- Good lectures, good lecturer. » (very good)
- very good and very dynamic.» (very good)
- Can be argued if the selection of articles and topics was the best. Have no suggestions though. » (good)
- Using the table of contents for a book was a bit weird, even though we got copies of individual pages.» (OK)
- I could google 80% of the solutions in internet! I know, I am a master student and I shouldn"t do that, but it"s very enjoyable!:D» (OK)
- A book would have been nice. Sibylle, God bless her, is a good teacher but doesn"t always produce the most pedagogical (spellin?) slides.» (bad)

11. How were the teachers prepared?

34 svarande

Very good»22 64%
Good»11 32%
OK»1 2%
Bad»0 0%
Very bad»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.38

- It"s always a good thing to have a teacher that knows the stuff and cares whether or not the students learn.» (Very good)

12. How much of a lecture did you understand already in class?

33 svarande

(almost) everything»10 30%
most of it»11 33%
part of it»10 30%
a bit»2 6%
(almost) nothing»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.12

- read the slides at home» (?)
- Still a bit confused considering traits and c++-templates.» ((almost) everything)
- Homeworks and the take-home exam were essential to understand the lectures.» (part of it)
- If I had lecture notes printed out» (part of it)

13. Quality of exercise sessions (were they helpful and instructive)?

34 svarande

very good»15 44%
good»12 35%
OK»6 17%
bad»1 2%
very bad»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.79

- Exercises are greate, it helps in our professional life too much.» (very good)
- I think the excercises were helpfull to undrestand the cource, some of them were some kind of reading previous research and paper that I was intrested on them» (very good)
- Thanks to Gustav » (very good)
- I really liked the exercise layout. It really inspired you to actually do them, and do them well. Doing presentations was a brilliant idea!» (very good)
- I have my doubts about the random number generator. And it bothers me when people who obviously have missed the point of a task and still get points for it. I don"t know how many times this happened (evidently enough to bug me), but it usually involved the same persons. I could have done a crappy job and signed up for every single task we got every week, gotten by points and then spend some more time on the take home exam in order to get things right. No problem, but I only signed up for the tasks I completed and now I will get a 4, while they will get a 5. Fair? No, no it isn"t not at all. Also Jean-Phillipe can have a cruel morning temper, but I guess it"s okay. We weren"t the most responsive audience imaginable.» (good)
- The homework questions were a bit fuzzy at times. Not knowing whether your answer is the answer they wanted added to the level of nervousness of the presentation.» (good)
- The exercises were very nice indeed! » (good)
- It was nice of out supervisor not to take it very hard and let students relax in the exercises, but still students were afraid to ask questions or present their solutions even if the person who was trying to present was completely wrong, maybe because they didn"t want other students to ask them questions or oppose them when it is their turn! but this feeling was less and less as we got used to the sessions. Another thing was that at the beginning we were told that we should be 100% ready when we tick for an exercise, but at the end of the second session the supervisor told us that, it"s enough if you show that you have though about it, other students will help you if you have problems in some parts...It was unfair to people who have taken the first saying seriously!» (good)
- Maybe it would have been nice if the supervisors could go through the solutions after the presentation of each problem, to make sure everything important has been said. We finished too early basically all sessions. This extra time could have been used for pure teaching (no discussion etc etc, just teaching..)» (OK)
- The exercises were at the heart of the course. So, most of us were solely focused on exercises. Number of lecture"s attendant gradually decreased as students realized that the only thing they need is to earn points for exercises. I"m not telling that it is totally a bad thing, but I suppose it was a downside to the course, anyway. Even worse, I think, was that some students who were selected to present a solution in the exercise sessions, had only a clue (sometimes nothing?) and had signed up for that exercise, whereas there were some, who had substantially worked for each exercise they earned point for. But at last these two cliques were just the same in terms of final grade, which I deem is not fair. » (OK)
- The random-generator could be a little bit more random... or maybe the people who were selected in previous sessions should get selected with a lower propability.» (OK)
- By listening to a presentation by someone that didn"t understand the problem just made everyone more confused than before.» (bad)

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

34 svarande

Very good»11 32%
Good»21 61%
OK»2 5%
Bad»0 0%
Very bad»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

- Why do you have two course home pages? One at studieportalen and one external? Apart from that it worked really well, all the material was presented in a nice way and it was always up to date.» (Good)
- The Studyportal isn"t the best piece of software...» (Good)
- Lecture notes could be uploaded bit earlier. » (Good)
- It would have been nice to have a follow-up on the points system, but apart from that all worked well.» (Good)
- The point system was good, but it wasn"t clear enough from the get-go. You have GOT to make the laboration points relation to the rest more clear.» (OK)
- The chalmers portal is not that good...» (OK)

Study climate

15. What about the availability of the teachers if you needed help?

34 svarande

Very good»8 23%
Good»12 35%
OK»5 14%
Bad»1 2%
Very bad»0 0%
I did not seek help»8 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.91

- Was not looking for extra help» (OK)

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

34 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»13 38%
Very well»20 58%
I did not seek cooperation»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- A project course and labs side-by-side was a bit troubling. » (Rather well)
- Some of the group members needed VERY specific instructions to do any work.» (Rather well)
- Had good experience with discussing the homeworks with others.» (Rather well)
- Good enough.» (Very well)
- Only for the labs.» (Very well)
- As we were allowed to present same solutions, as long as we understood it, we cooperated very well. I tried to solve the exercices myself, but we gathered the day before the exercise session and discussed our solutions.» (Very well)

17. What was your favorite lab?

34 svarande

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

6 17%
12 35%
20 58%
14 41%
Didn"t like any»5 14%

- Number three was the best!» (3)
- all of them. they are very interesting and innovative.» (1, 2, 3, 4)
- Lab 1 and 2 were too tedious, I"m afraid.» (2, 3)
- The first two seemed a bit redundant.» (3)
- In lab3 we returned to book and reviewed ourselves all rules so it was really useful, I think this review can be asked from all with submitting a report after lab session.» (3, 4)
- The labs was good in the sence of what you gained from doing them but some of them was quite boring (1 & 2)» (3)
- Found it the most interesting» (4)
- The concept of poster making lab was quite neat.» (3)
- The labs were very good, but it would have been enough doing smaller parts of the labs, after a while all labs became very repetitive and boring. I guess that was partially training in group assignments» (1, 2, 3, 4, Didn"t like any)
- The exercices were more helful than the labs, exercise 3 was interesting, we almost reviewed a book! by looking at other people"s posters.» (3)

18. Which lab did you like least?

34 svarande

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

19 55%
11 32%
4 11%
5 14%
Liked them all»2 5%

- Number one was the worse one. Sure, we should this and if it would have been in an homework assignment it probably would have gotten a * with the result that not so many people would do it (start are scary). So, well, it was a boring lab but I don"t have any quick alternative solution either.» (1)
- i like all of them.» ()
- I didnt learn much from 3rd lab. Poster session was inefficient.» (3)
- Please omitt this lab. It was too much with 4 labs, and Jean-Phillipe (spelling?) scared us during the presentation.» (4)
- huge amount! » (1, 2)
- I am scared of C++...» (1)
- They didn"t give much and were time consuming. I think that another excercise session would give more.» (1, 2)
- They felt like "just finish" labs.» (1, 2)
- I didn"t learn much of that» (2)

19. What exercise problem(s) did you like most?

- HW1:1, HW3:1,2,3, HW4: 1,3, HW6: 3, 4»
- The double checked locking idiom is the best!»
- i like all exercise problems, they are really helpful in my profissional life.»
- Almost all»
- Small and compact exercises.»
- The practical ones, where we wrote tests and other types of code. I learned most from these, because I produced something myself, and then drew conclusions from that.»
- Homework 5, exe 3 Homework 6, exe 3»
- reading papers and programming part (changing part of a code)»
- I like the ones we should read an article and undrestand it,specially HW5,Q3about Scalability and complexity analysis»
- Those involving synchronization and threads.»
- No preference. All were good.»
- almost all»
- Almost all»
- Liked them all, except from one (see the next question).»
- I really liked most of them, they were quite challenging ...»
- The exercises related to inheritance and exposure and he exercise about the double checked locking idiom.»
- Exploiting code.»
- The exercise related to Traits.»
- In general I liked them all.»
- exercises about synchronization,and different ways for that»
- Hmm, code reviews maybe. »
- I liked almost all, some of them that we had to read a paper were nice, good papers were chosen »
- The multi threading issues. All the API design excersices»
- The ones dealing with exceptions and exception safety was a real eye opener for me. Thread safety was too.»
- I think I found most of them interesting.»

20. What exercise problem(s) did you like least?

- Hw2: 1 (not at all obvious how to make it compile with g++ even when the "obvious" bugs are fixed.) Hw3: 4»
- All the ones involving C++ code basically. We simply don"t know this language syntax well enough. If we would have been given a course in it previously this wouldn"t be an issue. But to my knowledge there are no courses in C++ available, otherwise I would have take one.»
- No problems»
- The one about staggering visitors. Hard to understand. Also exercises with long articles.»
- The "read and explain" problem.»
- Homework 6, 1 and 2»
- Those involving weird C++ stuff, such as traits.»
- The ones I couldn"t solve :D»
- The exercise which was about time complexity in different algorithms. It was totally out of place in this course. As far as I know, nothing was mentioned in the lectures about this.»
- the c++ problems»
- All problems where we should review our existing projects. This is too time consuming for such an excercise. Maybe a given project is preferable.»
- The exercise of the visitor pattern and the exercise of reviewing the compareString function.»
- The problems summarizing parts of different papers.»
- Exercises related to the The Fragile Base Class.»
- None really. I tend to like them less if I find them hard to understand, had problems with traits. But that doesnt mean it was a bad exercise.»
- The ones that took too much time and were very language and problem specific.»
- maybe the ones containing c++ code since were not really learned that at chalmers...»
- Code review exercices could be designed smarter.»
- none»

21. How was the course workload?

34 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 2%
Adequate»7 20%
High»21 61%
Too high»5 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.88

- Again, I would like to say that it was not good in this regard. I personally did not attend in much of the lectures, since I did not find it necessary. And, exercise session were not very serious. The bottom line was that I would get selected and that was not a big deal. Only having a general idea and showing a couple of power points usually sufficed. So, usually only half a day working on exercises worked. I knew students who were really spending only this much during a week for this course! » (Low)
- The way you planned this course is perhaps the best way I can think of. Gently force people to learn small pieces of the course at a time and before you know it, they know it all. Much better than the conventional approach. I which more teachers would pick this up.» (High)
- It was high, but I learned a lot, and was given more control over my grade. harder work meant a higher grade, which is not always the case unfortunately. Sometimes, it simply depends on whether you"re a genious or not.» (High)
- A bit too high with both labs and excersices..» (High)
- enough in general but need time in last week to return to lectures» (High)
- High but good! I did not feel that any time I put into the course was wasted.» (High)
- High but I rather enjoyed it.» (High)
- I thought it"s good we have a take home exam about the exercices that we have solved already, yoohooo, but it was definitely times more stressful and laborious than a written exam!» (High)
- Compared to other courses it had one of the higher workloads, in that you had to work with the homeworks each week.» (High)
- With the amount of work I invested in the homework presentations and labs it was a bit disappointing to find that the take-home design was as (potentially) extensive as it it.» (Too high)
- Too much time spent on preparing presentations.» (Too high)
- The exam was too big, im really happy i didnt aim for VG because then the workload would have been enourmus» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

22. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The homeworks, most of them being very instructive and fun.»
- Everything. I wouldn"t change one thing.»
- Labs and exercises.»
- I think almost all material was quite good and can be repeated next year.»
- It was a good course overall. Both the organization part and lessons learned.»
- The whole set-up with the points etc.»
- I like the way of exam. It was very useful to view througt all the homework and exercises. I like format of exercise sessions (presentation, teacher explaning etc.)»
- Excercises and their sessions.»
- the way of organazing homeworks was really good. it gave us chance to review the lectures and related resources to be able to solve the home works. So it was helpfull to review the cource every week plus the papers in the homeworks were some kind of recources to the cource.»
- All lectures,exercises ,lab3,4»
- Excercises each week.»
- report writing instead of exam»
- The whole procedure is really good, I suppose. We accumulated points during the term. This is really nice, as it excludes written exam"s stress. Moreover, it encourages students to work for the whole period and earn point little by little. But, some modifications to it (to make exercise session more serious and also creating a motive for student to attend in the lectures) would really promote it. »
- The lectures - they were great! »
- The covered topics.»
- The presentation execersises, with the point system.»
- exercise sessions»
- organization: homeworks, exercise sessions, labs, home-exam - It really seemed very beneficial to students. Motivating - explaining why the knowledge gained will be useful.»
- the exercises»
- Exercise session»
- exercise sessions »
- "Everything"»
- Just about everything was good.»
- The homeworks. I haven"t worked like that before and I liked it.»

23. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Consider having a regular exam instead, or a less open-ended take home exam.»
- The people who come unprepared and still sign up for presentations should be punished in some way. The ones who are prepared but obviously missed the point should not be given any points. It"s only fair. And please, make the random algorithm a bit more random. Or, perhaps random is the wrong way to go. Make it more fair. Some people got to present their work 4-5 times while others (my self included) didn"t stand in the spot light at all.»
- nothing.»
- As I said all can be preserved»
- Maybe the poster session in a bigger room.»
- The labs, they were tedious and meant too much work, if you look at how much we learned from them (not much)»
- have no idea»
- Labs.»
- The labs. Add more excercises or make the labs more meaningful (and don"t do it by increasing the number of points awarded...)»
- The labs»
- The way of presenting home works.»
- Lab 1 and 2?»
- course workload»
- the labs should be smaller but same subjects, the home exam was too big when aiming for a higher grade.»
- sometimes time is short to learn vast things though that is interesting»
- labs.»
- The "random" system:) More clearly specified written exam.»
- The labs, especially lab 1 and 2 felt rather pointless, it was too much copy pasting. One understood the point already after a few minutes, but then however there was hours left of tedious work. :/»
- The poster lab was very time limited and crowded. I think I could have gotten more out of it if we could have spent a little more time with it.»

24. Additional comments

- Very good lectures. One of the best courses I"ve taken. »
- Well done, well done indeed. I would have been proud of my self if I had given this course like you did.»
- overall, Sibylle made this course very interesting. She worked hard in the whole course to make it relevent and interesting. i really like this course and want to join again if the course literature is change.»
- Very nice course and teachers»
- I liked it.»
- home exam should be given with some sample template for help becuase it took lot of time to decide what to write and how to write.»
- It was a great course overall. One of the best courses in my education for sure! It focused on things that every good programmer should know! »
- Overall I really liked this course one of the most interesting courses I´,ve read in this programme, it was challenging, and yeah it was alot to do but I really liked it !»
- See if the course is given at the same time as a project course. Form the lab groups to be the same as the other course groups. It was really hard to allocate time when most members of the lab group where in different groups in the other course.»
- Best course I"ve taken so far :-)»
- Thanks :)»
- I should appreciate sibylle beacuse of her very nice teaching method and realy this course was my best course which i have had in chalmers,and i learned a lot in this course with this nice teaching method»
- Definitely one of the best courses so far. I would suggest to try to improve also other courses according to that. »
- It would also be nice of you to put the deadline of submitting the paper take home, at least one day after the electronical version!, so that we don"t invade the university 11 pm! All in all, it was the most useful course I have had until now, and when I was studying for the reexam of programming paradigm I noticed how much more I understand than the previous time. I hope we have more courses like taht in the future, Good job! :)»
- One of the most interesting courses in my 4 years at Chalmers. Thank you!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från