Visa resultat

Modern imaging, spectroscopy and diffraction techniques, TIF030

1. Optical microscopy

- It was very introductory, not giving any real knowledge about microscopy. There should have been a paper covering all the necessary knowledge. Mikael should have lectured all the lectures»
- The lectures where ok, but there didn"t seem to be much room to get answers to deeper questions»
- Interesting subject. Some of the slides weren"t very describing so it was easy to misinterpret or misunderstand a lot of the concept here. But besides that it was a really nice part of the course.»
- Kjälls lecturee notes were not instructive enough, could have been some pointers at the slides.»
- Mikael Käll was good. Virginia not so good.»
- I think it was interesting but there was too few time for go more in deep in each technique »
- Could have been better if all lectures were given by specialist, phd student (Virginia) sometimes wasn"t prepared to answer some questions.»
- good in general»
- This part was interesting and it was set on its right place as the introductory part of the course. And the Lecture reflected the good understanding of the course and used a good methodology to make us understand. The seminal related to this part was interesting»
- Confusing...»
- Good, maybe the SNOM part could be skipped and tackled in the SPM part.»
- I think it was rather rough on Victoria to assign her these lectures, although she did not have much experience. Also, the part concerning the Lorent"s model was very unclear from the lectures and also unclear from the lecture notes.»
- Good»

2. Electron microscopy (SEM and TEM)

- The home assginments should have been more creative. Lecturer not really interested in teaching.»
- The method of writing and talking the worlds at the same time gives no grasp of the containt. When re-reading the notes they where good, but going to the lecture should give more than the notes.»
- Very good. Interesting subject and good teaching. Nice to have some on the lectures written on the blackboard. »
- they were ok. Sometimes a bit slow but otherwise fine»
- Okay»
- I found very interesting, but also in this case too few time for do exercises in the class »
- These lectures were very informative and well structured »
- very good, clear and condesed»
- This part was interesting. And the Lecture reflected the good understanding of the course and used the best methodology to make us understand the complex thing in an easy way. I liked the way she interacted with the students»
- Very well prepared and pedagogical!»
- Excellent»
- I liked it. The fact that Eva wrote everything on the table was good - except for when I sat too far back in the classroom.»
- Excellent because it was "blackboard" course and not only powerpoints, which helps a lot to understand and learn the technique.»

3. Scanning probe microscopy (SPM)

- Too small part of lecture time concerning the size on the exam. Otherwise a good and prepared lecturer.»
- Good, plus for having the notes printed with place to make your own notes, smart!»
- Very good and describing power-points. A really interesting part of the course as well. Good teaching.»
- they were good.»
- Good»
- Interesting »
- OK»
- good in general»
- This part was interesting. But it came at the last minute when we have no time to learn much more on this part. But the Lecture was good and he did all his best to be informed on this part»
- Missed one part, but good»
- Excellent»
- It was OK. It is the part I am less likely to use.»
- Good but the courses were after the labs so they were less useful»

4. Laborations

- Too easy, didnt learn anything.»
- The optical lab was good for getting a grip of how it really looks. The SEM and TEM felt more like watching others turn knobs, you don"t really get a feel for the system by doing that. AFM was better.»
- I gained a lot of useful knowledge from the laborations. A lot of the earlier learned concepts were more widely understood because of the labs as well, so I consider them to have a high value for the course.»
- They helped alot. One learnt alot from the PM and they supervisors were good as well.»
- Learned to a high degree from the labs.»
- Yes I found useful. »
- Yes, labs were good»
- very interesting to ask technical questions to the lab assistant, maybe try to have "funnier" samples on which we can learn to stuff, from a different field (eg biology)»
- yes»
- Laborations were really good! I learned a lot! However we were always to many in my gropus.....»
- Quite helpfull. The preparations were helpfull. Maybe the samples in TEM and OM could be more original.»
- The OM (Victoria) and the SEM (Samira) labs were the best ones, but the other ones were not bad either :)»
- They helped a lot to really understand the »

5. Home assignments

- The number was ok, but too typical. Good to have home assignment to attend workshop.»
- They where good, but it was unclear how they where graded, first it seamed like they all gave two point if you did a good try, then they where suddenly graded with 0,05 precision. Good to get them back and learn from them»
- The home assignments summed up what was taught in the lectures in a good way. They also made you start studying the course at an early time as well which as really good.»
- They were too many in the end when there were ?3? at the last lesson that were to be handed in.»
- Home assignments had too low level of difficulty.»
- I think yes.For the optical part we didn"t receive back the corrected homeworks.It would be useful for understand what was good and what not. »
- Yes, I think there were just enough of the homeworks»
- good number, not too hard, fitting the content of the lectures»
- Yes, the assignments, had a high learning value to me because they they have been helping me to continually revising the course. They were reasonably set, not too many nor too few »
- Most of them were really good!»
- The assignment were a good application of the lectures.»
- It was sufficient.»
- We didn"t get any correction, even orally in class, so they seemed quite pointless to me. The number was ok.»

6. The exam

- Too typical.»
- Pretty well, you can"t fit everything, so there is always that factor of what you get this time.»
- The exam reflected what was in the course. Almost all of the questions on the exam where things that you were supposed to know if you attended all the lectures and studied hard.»
- Yes. Very well, though if the questions for SEM and TEM were copy-pasted which lowered the overall impression of that part.»
- Yes»
- More or less yes»
- Definitely »
- yes»
- yes»
- Yes»
- No surprises, the exam was reflecting the course well.»
- The exam reflected the course in a good way. Except for the question about the filter cube, which was mentioned (if at all) very briefly. The results of the exam should be posted at the latest three weeks after the exam. Still, after almost four weeks, we have heard NOTHING! Both I and one student that filled in this evaluation too early are very upset about this!»
- Yes»

7. Relevance

- Couldnt see the connection to the industry too well.»
- Yes, it"s already showed useful in other courses of interest. Seams to span over many fields as well.»
- Very much so. »
- Yes it had and I"m happy I read it.»
- Yes, I"m interested in photonics.»
- Yes is why I choosed»
- Yes, definitely»
- not exactly, but that"s personal»
- yes, If I had not taken it I would have so many problems in the courses that I am having now»
- Yes»
- Absolutely.»
- A lot, I study material science so analysis techniques are really a must »

8. Expectations

- Low expectations.»
- Yes»
- Yes.»
- Yes it did»
- Yes»
- More or less yes»
- Yes»
- yes»
- Yes»
- The "spectroscopy" aspect wasn"t really tackled. The captors technology is not tackled»
- Yes.»
- Yes»

9. Would you recommend the course?

10. Work load

- Low»
- The work was portioned in a good way and not overwealming.. Good with detailed lab prep and no report! »
- I think it was a nice workload on the course. Not too much and not too little.»
- It was a good workload.»
- Quite low work load.»
- Was pretty high»
- Adequate »
- good, not to much but enough too have some regularity»
- it is nice»
- Quite okey I would say»
- Good »
- It was sufficient.»
- It is fair, not too much but still a lot of things to learn and understand»

11. Ideas about improvement

- Have one lecturer, more creative labs and home assignments. »
- A bit more concetion between the parts, sometimes felt like three courses.»
- More describing powerpoints on the microscopy part would be a huge improvement for the next year.»
- I think that give back the corrected homework could be nice »
- I guess each year there are a lot of students who take this course, it would be better if bigger lecture room is reserved. This year there were too many students and a bit too small room.»
- put the labs in some more partical context have a last lecture summing up the pros and cons of all those techniques, and their field of application»
- To pace well so that the last part of scanning probe microscopy have an additional week to cover the material»
- Make sure that people are at the right place at the right times.»
- Please assign a bigger classroom! Perhaps the FB-salen or the GD-salen, or maybee something at Hörsalsvägen?»
- A lot more feedback on the assignments»