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.

Advanced Computer-Aided Design, 2011 (PPU080), PPU080

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-10-28 - 2011-11-28
Antal svar: 38
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 47%
Kontaktperson: Lars Almefelt»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Maskinteknik 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.

38 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»10 26%
Around 20 hours/week»13 34%
Around 25 hours/week»10 26%
Around 30 hours/week»4 10%
At least 35 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

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

38 svarande

0%»3 7%
25%»12 31%
50%»7 18%
75%»7 18%
100%»9 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- Attended no lectures, only computer labs.» (25%)
- Probably less but not 0%» (25%)
- svårt att ta till sig hur man cadar, genom bara titta på. hade varit bättre med föreläsningar i cadsal. » (25%)
- I really think that you should consider putting the lectures online. It would be much better to have them in a small window next to CATIA on the computer. In that way you could use the program meanwhile listening on Lars telling you how you do it.» (25%)
- The lectures were not interesting.» (50%)
- The lectures were not inspiring, and did not feel relevant or up-to-date. The content of this course should be examined, or the name "Advanced computer aided design" changed. » (50%)
- I really appreciate lectures given by Lars and others!» (75%)

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?

38 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»6 15%
The goals are difficult to understand»4 10%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»16 42%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»12 31%

Genomsnitt: 2.89

- It"s difficult to understand for me because I"m an Erasmus student so some of the terms were not clear, it was difficult to see exactly what it means in my own language.» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- They are not that specific. They can include alot of stuff» (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.

34 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»2 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»30 88%
No, the goals are set too high»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2

- However, it is really basic and from the beginning, so calling it advanced computer aided design is very misleading!» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

35 svarande

No, not at all»6 17%
To some extent»23 65%
Yes, definitely»5 14%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.02

- The excavator-assignment was a trial-and-error assignment, and the exercise-leaders didn"t even know the goals when passing people on that part. The written exam was relevant to the goals.» (No, not at all)
- The test consisted of information general to most cad systems and history. Nothing to do with "advanced" computer aided design. Excavator was okay however very basic level. Would be better with a smaller project but 100% accuracy or detail required. Not "model as you go" since there is no advanced learning going on if one only models something else if one shape is to difficult. Extra tasks consistet of "knowing" the basics of some extra features...» (No, not at all)
- Worst exam i have ever taken at chalmers. The conten was rubbish» (No, not at all)
- Strange to have a exam in this course, would have been better to have an exam by a computer and cad something» (To some extent)
- Well, its hard to have a written exam in CAD..» (To some extent)
- The exam is maybe too "learning by heart"» (To some extent)
- The exam felt very unneccessary. » (To some extent)
- handlade lite för mycket om att plugga gamla tentor. endel material som vi skulle lära oss kändes inte relevant.» (To some extent)

6. Was the setup of the project work good for learning CAD and CAT systems?

(e.g. excavator model, extra points for extra tasks, ...)

38 svarande

No, not at all»2 5%
To some extent»6 15%
Adequate»3 7%
Yes»15 39%
Yes, definitely»12 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- Exercises basic, excavator project to general and large. Many low detailed parts instead of few realy advanced parts with difficult surfaces. Extra tasks consistet of "knowing" the basics of some extra features...» (No, not at all)
- The excavator was a good task but the extra tasks wasn"t a great way to archive higher grade. Not without possibility to get help » (To some extent)
- Good thought with letting students do a bigger project in group, to learn from eachother, but there were no guidelines, and the exercise-leaders couldn"t answer questions, and the project was to unrealistic. A realistic cad project would be to create a (small)model from several given 2D-drawing with details and measurements, since that is how the program usually is used in the industries. Also, the cad program should be more in focus on the lectures than equations and stuff, since that is what we should have learned.» (To some extent)
- Why not use the book more? It has alot of small exersises instead of one large. Maybe make the project going in steps instead. Going from somewhat easy to more and mord difficult» (To some extent)
- The course shouldd focus more on the modelling and the details of the design. » (To some extent)
- some parts should be more strict concerning measurements, tolerances, etc. To just use random measurements and designing a part/assmembly from basically no instructions is no challenge and definitely not how a "real-world" worktask would be presented. Give som clearer demands on the product which are trickier to solve. Extra points for extra tasks was a good way of mastering alternative tasks.» (Yes)
- Problems with finding computer, since a lot of student taking thris course and the first year students have Matlab course, alot of students need computer. Would be better to have individual taskt, half the size!» (Yes)

Teaching and course administration

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

38 svarande

Small extent»16 42%
Some extent»18 47%
Large extent»4 10%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.68

- Had another course that had lectures exacly the same times» (Small extent)
- Just sitting and listening to someone who uses cad isn"t » (Small extent)
- Lectures not relevant to cource. Lectures consisted of words and other general knowledge on cad systems as oppesed to advanced techniques and CAD knowledge» (Small extent)
- Youtube movies on Catia helped more.» (Some extent)

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

38 svarande

Small extent»17 44%
Some extent»16 42%
Large extent»3 7%
Great extent»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

- The slides with theory-info for the exam were good.» (Small extent)
- Didnt read as it wasnt necesarry, very basic exercises and tools explained. However the extra book on surface modeleing contained certain usefull and detailed information on more advanced modeling techniques and tools. However slides posed no use.» (Small extent)
- The book was good, easy to follow. And also really good that you could borrow it» (Some extent)

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

38 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»2 5%
Rather well»28 73%
Very well»7 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- Hand ins were easy. Pdf easily downloadable. Up to date info...» (Rather well)
- But I would prefer PingPong» (Rather well)
- Should be on the new student portal» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

38 svarande

Very poor»3 7%
Rather poor»6 15%
Rather good»14 36%
Very good»15 39%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- Few teachers who didn"t could CAD enough » (Very poor)
- Weird having a project that is part of your final grade when teacher nor exerciseleaders can"t answer basic questions about the program. Also not good to have extra-assignment that the teachers are not allowed to help you with if you get stuck, how is that motivated for learning?» (Very poor)
- Knowledge of staff very low. Neither of the persons on he set were able to answer the most basic questions and did not offer to "look it up" only said they didnt know. Couldnt provide information on project or help with any of the extra tasks as there was little knowledge in CATIA or e.g RD&T.» (Very poor)
- big ques to get help, more teachers, especially when approval time is coming up.» (Rather poor)
- For the extra tasks now one would answer as there was no time for those who did them» (Rather poor)
- Lot of people in the queues» (Rather poor)
- During computer exercices, sometime long queue to have help.» (Rather good)
- ibland lite för lång väntan på att få hjälp» (Rather good)
- Extremely helpful an competent course assistants.» (Very good)

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

38 svarande

Very poorly»1 2%
Rather poorly»2 5%
Rather well»8 21%
Very well»26 68%
I did not seek cooperation»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- had a lot of comunication problems with my partner.» (Very poorly)
- Good cooperation with my group mate but less with other students (nearly competition climate).» (Rather well)

12. How was the course workload?

38 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»4 10%
Adequate»27 71%
High»7 18%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.07

13. How was the total workload this study period?

38 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»2 5%
Adequate»22 57%
High»9 23%
Too high»5 13%

Genomsnitt: 3.44

- Other cource had higher workload so balanced out.» (Adequate)
- Took 3x 7.5 hp courses» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

38 svarande

Poor»5 13%
Fair»7 18%
Adequate»10 26%
Good»16 42%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.97

- To have a written exam in CAD is a joke» (Poor)
- Poor help with project, no guidance for extra tasks, not relevant knowledge on the written exam, should be more focused on learning how to use the program properly!» (Poor)
- Dissapointing as the cource was called "Advanced" and the cource didnt fullfill what was stated in the description» (Poor)
- The CAD-part where tou work in Catia is good because it"s something that you can use later. But all the basic info about computer graphics etc really doesn"t feel relevant.» (Fair)
- I would have appreciated more info on theory/practice for how to build part structures which are well designed in terms of computation time and "easy-to-follow". When at a company this seems to be the most crucial aspect since others will have to follow and analyze your model as well. » (Adequate)
- i actually hoped for some more "advanced" cad..» (Adequate)
- I would prefer it if the course were more oriented around using the CAD-system and less theory behind old CAD-programs. I thought it was really interesting to learn to use surface-modeling though!» (Adequate)

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- I didn"t get the point of written exam and the things we had to study for it. I would prefer to learn more about the CATIA in practice than the information I even can"t remember now. »
- The Catia exercise»
- Some kind of project, but not in the same way.»
- Having a project to work and learn from was good. However another project is needed.»
- Ofcourse, the larger part of the course is the project work where the software can be put to use in the best way. This should definitely be preserved.»
- The project work»
- The project work, work in computer rooms»
- Computer exercices»
- The project»
- -stora projekt med hjälp från övningsledare -bra med egen problemlösning -bra att få tillgång till litteratur, som vi dessutom slapp betala för»
- The project, though it would be interesting to do something other than the previous years project as well»
- The project»
- The projekt was a good part of the course, you learned very much from it.»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Lectures where Lars goes through how Catia works can be skipped or moved to a computer lab where the students can follow on their own computers. Also a lot of the material in the couse doesn"t feel relevant. Sure, it can be intresting but most likely we will never have any use of computer graphics etc »
- Type of project, and it should be a bigger part of the course (the exam shouldn"t be in focus), better help and more exercise-leaders, more project time scheduled. »
- Lectures need to be relevant. Cource needs to focus on indepth advanced tools and techniques for CAD modeling. Project needs to be consistend of fewer parts and more specified specificaions and dimensions to practice real world CAD scenarios and not "do what you want in the program" learning. Helpers in the CAD exercises need more knowledge in the programs to provide help if not offer to look things up for the students that they dont know. Test in the end might aswell be changed for something else??? Since not realy usefull information.»
- I feel this still doesn"t need a written examination since the individual is best tested on the outcome of the project work. And learning the literature, to a large extent, doesn"t mean anything in the course.»
- More assistant teachers»
- A lot of the material in the lectures seems irrelevant or has little connection to the actual use of the CAD systems and the project. Learning the material for the exam is rather based on memorization than understanding, and that is of no benefit to the student. The time spent on some of the lecture material, could be used for teaching how to use the tools that are to be used in the extra tasks of the project, to give more thorough and practical knowledge of Catia, for example Tube design or Ergonomic Analysis. »
- The exam was unneccessary and the focus of the questions were too specific.»
- Maybe insist more on the extra tasks: we need to discover them even if we don"t want to.»
- The theoretical part. It don´,t give anything. Try to turn the lectures to a more helpful structure of how to CAD smart. From the course name, Advanced CAD, i expect myself to have a advanced knowlegde in CAD. Now I don´,t. »
- The exam. Felt totally unneccessary»
- -mer fokus på cad och mindre fokus på vad som händer i datorsystemet. -föreläsningar i cadsal»
- The lectures. Do them online or make them shorter, alternatively do them in a computerenviroment like E-studion.»
- The help seasons should include more assistance»
- The exam could be a much smaller part of the course. The modelling should be a larger part. »
- The exam should be more relevant. Perhaps a computer exam»

17. Additional comments

- in order to calculate the grade, the coarse pm and the teacher weren"t the same. It must be changed until next year»
- The exercise-leaders had so much to do when people wanted to get their projects approved, so they had no time for helping the students, and when approving the different parts, the standard was really low because they were so stressed. So maybe a few more exercise-leaders, at least in the end of the course, would be a good idea!»
- I do not think that the examination was done in the best way. It was good with the project, but I do not think that the exam tested what you vad learned since it focused too much on small details and not the important things.»

18. What master program do you attend?

37 svarande

Product development»24 64%
Systems, control and mechatronics»1 2%
Automotive engineering»2 5%
Engineering design»1 2%
Advanced Engingineering Materials»2 5%
Other»7 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- Applied mechanics» (Other)
- Industrial Design Engineering» (Other)
- Production Engineering» (Other)
- Solid and fluid mechanics» (Other)

Kursutvärderingssystem från