ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics Advanced, TME175

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-11-21 - 2011-12-16
Antal svar: 7
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 100%
Kontaktperson: Helena Martini»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: 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.

7 svarande

At most 10 hours/week»0 0%
Around 15 hours/week»1 14%
Around 20 hours/week»2 28%
Around 25 hours/week»2 28%
At least 30 hours/week»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

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.

2. How understandable are the course goals?

7 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»0 0%
The goals are difficult to understand»1 14%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»4 57%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

3. 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.

7 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»5 71%
No, the goals are set too high»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

Teaching and course administration

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

7 svarande

Small extent»3 42%
Some extent»2 28%
Large extent»1 14%
Great extent»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 2

- I do not understand why the students expected to learn everything on their own or expected what they were doing before.» (Small extent)

5. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts, contact with supervisors etc work?

7 svarande

Very badly»2 28%
Rather badly»1 14%
Rather well»3 42%
Very well»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Could have been much better» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

7 svarande

Very poor»1 14%
Rather poor»2 28%
Rather good»1 14%
Very good»3 42%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.85

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

7 svarande

Very poorly»1 14%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»3 42%
Very well»3 42%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

8. How was the course workload?

7 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»4 57%
High»1 14%
Too high»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

- Given the access to poor slow computers, it is just unreasonable. It is very wrong to assume that students dont have a life and should dedicate themselves completely to this course. This is still a university and not project that is done for the industry. » (Too high)

Summarizing questions

9. What is your general impression of the course?

7 svarande

Poor»3 42%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»0 0%
Good»2 28%
Excellent»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3

10. What is your impression of the Assignment - Discretization and Iteration?

7 svarande

Poor»2 28%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»1 14%
Good»4 57%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Completely unnecessary. Almost everybody would have done it in bachelor"s course.» (Poor)

11. What is your impression of the introductory sessions for the softwares ANSA and Fluent?

7 svarande

Poor»2 28%
Fair»2 28%
Adequate»2 28%
Good»1 14%
Excellent»0 0%
Did not attend the sessions»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

- To learn these programs the only way is to do tutorials and rear the manuals, but the sessions gave some basic help to get us going.» (Good)

12. How would you rate the project work?

7 svarande

Poor»2 28%
Fair»1 14%
Adequate»1 14%
Good»1 14%
Excellent»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Although the project makes the student industry ready, it should be kept in mind that the university is not a factory where students are produced industry ready. Rather the basic concepts should be re-enforced further. » (Fair)

13. What did you think about the project layout?

7 svarande

Poor»2 28%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»1 14%
Good»3 42%
Excellent»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- But I think it focused simply too much on software learning» (Adequate)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The course!»
- Everything»
- The second assignment (project)»
- The project and presentation»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The introduction to ANSA and Fluent could be better. The computer power could be improved.»
- Maybe have the students actually do a small research on what parameters to use in fluent and how do they relate to theory. Most of this information can be found in the fluent manual and some CFD blogs online.»
- In the second assignment, the justification of the numbers in the results should be expected and hence maybe just one configuration in comparison with the standard case »
- More consultation time. And consulting from the examiner directly. More advice and input on aerodynamics. Lectures on CFD fundaments and turbulence models. »

16. Additional comments

- One of the best courses in Chalmers.»
- The computer resources was inadequate especially during the solving in fluent.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från