Visa resultat

KBT191 - Nuclear Chemistry 2011

Lectures

1. Lectures: Difficulty

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		3		15%
4»		11		57%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.94 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Less slides, more work on the blackboard, more practical examples. It is better to get relevance of an example question during lectures. That way the information sticks in a much better way.» (2)
- The lectures were not extremely difficult in themselves, the difficulty was in the uneven distribution of lectures during the study period. Most of the book was covered in just a few weeks, making it very hard to read everything in advance. In that sense, the later lectures were probably not as useful as the earlier ones since the previously covered material had yet to sink in» (3)
- Slides go by in 200 km/h.» (4)
- quite a lot of things to know» (5)
- So much chemical things for a student of nuclear engineering programme, especially one wants to choose the direction of reactor modeling.» (5)
- Verkar som ni antar att man ska kunna all kemi från gymnasiet + en del till i överkant för att läsa kursen» (5)

2. Lectures: Interesting

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		6		31%
4»		5		26%
5»		8		42%

Genomsnitt: 4.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- They have been interesting!» (4)
- But not so giving.» (4)
- Less slides, more work on the blackboard, more practical examples. It is better to get relevance of an example question during lectures. That way the information sticks in a much better way.» (5)

3. Lectures: Relevance

19 svarande

1»		2		10%
2»		0		0%
3»		1		5%
4»		14		73%
5»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.73 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- So much chemical things for a student of nuclear engineering programme, especially one wants to choose the direction of reactor modeling.» (1)
- försök att verkligen ta ut de väsentligaste delarna som man verkligen måste förstå för att hänga med istället för att dra upp halva boken på en kvart» (3)
- Less slides, more work on the blackboard, more practical examples. It is better to get relevance of an example question during lectures. That way the information sticks in a much better way.» (4)
- They have been relevant, though it is just a little bit of the whole literature.» (4)

4. Lectures: Handouts

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		10		52%
4»		3		15%
5»		6		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.78 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Less slides, more work on the blackboard, more practical examples. It is better to get relevance of an example question during lectures. That way the information sticks in a much better way.» (3)
- I don"t think the handouts has been too good. Though I can understand their purpose.» (3)
- Basically contents from the course book.» (5)

5. Lectures: Time for questions

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		6		31%
4»		2		10%
5»		10		52%

Genomsnitt: 4.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Again, the idea of ending the lecture a bit early to answer questions is good, but the point is wasted if the students have yet to read the material (because most lectures are covered in the first 4 weeks or so) so often the result was just that the lecture ended half an hour early without any questions being asked or answered.» (3)
- It has been plenty of time for the questions.» (5)

6. Lectures: Number of lectures

19 svarande

Yes»		6		31%
No»		13		68%

Genomsnitt: 1.68

- Since the sheer amount of subjects that are covered in the course it would be easier if there was a slight increase in lectures and at the same time did some more examples while explaining how it is done. That way one will grasp the concepts more quickly.» (Yes)
- The pace during the lectures, covering several chapters each time, was pretty high. It might have been better to have some more lectures scheduled.» (Yes)
- there already were a lot of lectures» (No)
- I think it was fine as it was.» (No)
- Just slower pace in them.» (No)
- Not really, perhaps a lecture covering an old exam» (No)

7. Lecturer: Prof. Christian Ekberg

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		4		21%
4»		10		52%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.89 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Everything is obvious to him but for the student its not.» (2)
- Nice guy» (4)
- Good lecturer.» (4)
- Skilled and full of knowledge, but some parts might be a bit rushed since the lecturer thinks some parts are obvious while they may not be to some» (4)

8. Lecturer: Prof. Emeritus Jan-Olov Liljenzin

17 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		4		23%
4»		7		41%
5»		6		35%

Genomsnitt: 4.11 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Didn"t see him» (3)
- Interesting to listen at.» (4)
- Very interesting to listen to, and passionate about the subject. The chapters he covered was probably his favorite subject. It was however not tested in the exam at all.» (5)

9. Lecturer: Dr. Stefan Allard

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		10		55%
4»		6		33%
5»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.55 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- wasn"t attending » (?)
- Didn"t attend so can"t comment» (3)
- Didn"t attend the lecturers he had.» (4)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.9

Laboratory exercises

10. Laboratory exercises: understanding

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		3		15%
3»		3		15%
4»		11		57%
5»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists. Also another aspect is that since there are a vast amount of lab exercises in this course it would help the students study for the exam if the lab PMs were more extensive.» (2)
- Man borde se över labarna och tänka genom om de verkligen ger det de ska ge och inte enbart ses som ett stressmoment hos studenterna, bara ett måste. Att pressa in så många labar man kan under sju veckor känns inte som ett bra upplägg för lärandet» (3)
- The labs were very good to understand the things we had read.» (4)
- The lab manuals provided the ability to really prepare for the lab and know what was to be done and why, which is very relieving since it"s often easy to feel lost in laboratory exercises where the manuals aren"t as thorough or helpful. It"s a good idea to test the students before the lab.» (4)
- All was good except Sabrina, she was really bad on the report » (5)

11. Laboratory exercises: relevance

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		2		11%
3»		3		16%
4»		5		27%
5»		8		44%

Genomsnitt: 4.05 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- relevant but much of the same thing.» (2)
- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (5)
- The labs were relevant to the course.» (5)

12. Laboratory exercises: Practical radiochemistry work - relevance

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		3		16%
4»		6		33%
5»		8		44%

Genomsnitt: 4.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Was"t attending» (?)
- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (4)
- Good to know the basic rules.» (5)

13. Laboratory exercises: Practical radiochemistry work - difficulty

18 svarande

1»		2		11%
2»		5		27%
3»		8		44%
4»		2		11%
5»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.72 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Was"t attending» (?)
- Not difficult to perform.» (3)
- ibland svårförståeliga labhandledningar för oss som inte brukar laba och inte har koll på varje detalj som finns att använda i ett lab» (3)

14. Laboratory exercises: Practical radiochemistry work - supervisor

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		0		0%
4»		10		55%
5»		8		44%

Genomsnitt: 4.44 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Was"t attending» (?)
- Was calm, and explained in a very good way what we was supposed to do and think of.» (5)

15. Laboratory exercises: Measuring ionizing radiation - relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		5		26%
4»		8		42%
5»		6		31%

Genomsnitt: 4.05 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- This lab PM should contain much more theory on how the detectors work so that one really can understand how they work.» (5)

16. Laboratory exercises: Measuring ionizing radiation - difficulty

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		4		21%
3»		10		52%
4»		5		26%
5»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.05 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Since the Lab PM didn"t include that much theory one had to do it by trial and error, that cost a lot of time.» (2)

17. Laboratory exercises: Measuring ionizing radiation - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		2		10%
4»		9		47%
5»		8		42%

Genomsnitt: 4.31 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Could have explained more, didn"t say much.» (3)
- Was very calm and explained the lab in a very good way.» (5)
- Nice and helpful» (5)

18. Laboratory exercises: The Szilard-Chalmers Process - relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		5		26%
4»		9		47%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.84 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (4)

19. Laboratory exercises: The Szilard-Chalmers Process - difficulty

18 svarande

1»		1		5%
2»		0		0%
3»		7		38%
4»		10		55%
5»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.44 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

20. Laboratory exercises: The Szilard-Chalmers Process - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		2		10%
4»		12		63%
5»		5		26%

Genomsnitt: 4.15 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Explained a lot and wanted us to understand. He had a great Ferrari example for us to understand flux.» (4)
- Nice, but the concept of solvent extraction could have been explained a bit more thoroughly» (4)

21. Laboratory exercises: The Szilard-Chalmers Process - supervisor

16 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		6		37%
4»		8		50%
5»		2		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.75 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Didn"t have him.» (?)
- Didnt meet him.» (3)
- Explained things that were unclear.» (4)

22. Laboratory exercises: Gamma spectrometry - relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		6		31%
4»		7		36%
5»		6		31%

Genomsnitt: 4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- No much info in the book=> Dissifcult to learn.» (3)
- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (5)

23. Laboratory exercises: Gamma spectrometry - difficulty

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		2		10%
3»		10		52%
4»		6		31%
5»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.31 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

24. Laboratory exercises: Gamma spectrometry - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		2		10%
4»		7		36%
5»		10		52%

Genomsnitt: 4.42 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Seemed like she hadent refreshed herself in the subject and especially the detector» (3)
- Very nice.» (4)
- Happy and helpful» (4)
- Explained well and wanted us to understand.» (5)

25. Laboratory exercises: Chemical dosimetry - relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		8		42%
4»		6		31%
5»		5		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.84 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (5)

26. Laboratory exercises: Chemical dosimetry - difficulty

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		2		10%
3»		10		52%
4»		7		36%
5»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.26 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Some parts could have been explained better» (3)
- Something had gone wrong with the solutions that we worked with so we could not get right on the dose rate.» (4)

27. Laboratory exercises: Chemical dosimetry - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		1		5%
4»		11		57%
5»		7		36%

Genomsnitt: 4.31 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Nice and helpful» (5)

28. Laboratory exercises: Growth and decay of the isomer Ba-137m - relevance

18 svarande

1»		1		5%
2»		0		0%
3»		7		38%
4»		7		38%
5»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.61 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (4)

29. Laboratory exercises: Growth and decay of the isomer Ba-137m - difficulty

17 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		8		47%
4»		8		47%
5»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.58 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

30. Laboratory exercises: Growth and decay of the isomer Ba-137m - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		7		36%
2»		2		10%
3»		4		21%
4»		5		26%
5»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.52 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Doesn"t reply to the lab reports in time. One can"t put the time limit on the students when she doesn"t pull her own weight.» (1)
- She"s the worst supervisor/teacher I have ever come across. No comitment or explanations what so ever in the lab. Extremely rude which brought down the mode during the lab to the ground. Tortures student with not accepting the reports and sends returnreport after returnreport, with no constructive critisicm. She thought it was ok to not anser the report for 4 weeks and then give a return 4 weeks into the new courses.» (1)
- Very harsh attitude towards students.» (1)
- The way the reports for this laboration was handled was atrocious. The report took almost a month to be corrected and handed back, during which time some parts of the lab had fallen out of memory. Some comments to the returned reports provided no explanation of what was wrong or how to correct it. Returning the lab report to her gave no response, and continous e-mailing to check how the correction of the report was going (close to 2 months after the lab was originally performed and well into the second study period) was simply ignored. If this has ever happened before and is not due to special circumstances, I think she should not have any labs next year.» (1)
- Too long to correct the report, has sent our report more than a month after we did the lab» (1)
- Is it necessary to not inform the students if their answers are correct before the lab.» (3)
- Explained what we needed to do.» (4)

31. Laboratory exercises: Reaction rate for isotopic exchange - relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		7		36%
4»		9		47%
5»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.78 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab PMs should be much more extensive explaining the theory and calculations related to them much better. The should be as an extra set of course litterature. They should contain an extensive theory section so that one really understands the theory. Since thic course is mandatory for the Nuclear Engineering programme and everyone are not chemists.» (3)

32. Laboratory exercises: Reaction rate for isotopic exchange - difficulty

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		8		42%
4»		8		42%
5»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.73 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The lab manual was a bit hard to comprehend» (3)
- It is not possible to calculate the values with aid from the course book.» (4)

33. Laboratory exercises: Reaction rate for isotopic exchange - supervisor

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		3		15%
4»		11		57%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.94 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- He had a lot of knowledge and had a great going through before we started the lab.» (5)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.75

Calculation exercises

34. Calculation exercises: relevance

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		4		21%
4»		6		31%
5»		9		47%

Genomsnitt: 4.26 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Generally relevant, but the exercises from the book were very different from the ones from the exam. The examinator should either provide separate exercises or the calculation exercise leader should perhaps in some instances choose to demonstrate old exam questions (not just at the end of the course) instead of questions from the book. On a separate note (since this is not asked in the questions below), I would like to point out that Arvid was a very pedagogical calculation exercise leader even though he just covered for another lecturer for a few sessions, so it should definitely be considered if he can have a bigger part in this course next year» (3)

35. Calculation exercises: difficulty

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		7		38%
4»		8		44%
5»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.77 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The questions was very different from the exam questions» (3)

36. Calculation exercises: handouts

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		5		26%
4»		11		57%
5»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.89 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- A lot of good information if you have time enough to go through it.» (4)

37. Calculation exercises: number of occasions

19 svarande

Yes»		12		63%
No»		7		36%

Genomsnitt: 1.36

- Perhaps more old exams» (Yes)

38. Calculation exercises: Time for questions

19 svarande

1»		2		10%
2»		1		5%
3»		6		31%
4»		8		42%
5»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.36 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- There should be more time at these excersises for questions. More practical examples would be better to have during lectures.» (1)
- To much calculations done by supervisor. Better to have more time to calculate yourself.» (3)

39. Calculation exercises: supervisors

19 svarande

1»		2		10%
2»		0		0%
3»		4		21%
4»		9		47%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.68 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Did not take it serious at all, very unprofessional. Writes like a 3 year old so can"t make out what he writes on the board. Didn"t think units for values were important which is VERY strange.» (1)
- Arvid was much better. Kristian doesnt seem to know the contents of the course.» (1)
- I always have had Jiaxu but we cannot leave a blank, so this vote is not to be taken in account...» (3)
- Smart and helpful but the tempo should be quite a bit lower and for pedagogical reasons some parts should be repeated and reinforced and not just rushed through» (3)
- He wanted us to understand. I liked the fact that he showed a lot of calculations on the board during the excercises and that we had to calculate more at home.» (4)
- Arvid was really good om his exercises» (4)

40. Calculation exercises: supervisors

18 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		5		27%
3»		4		22%
4»		7		38%
5»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.33 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Knows what he"s doing but would perhaps be better suited to handle a lab or something» (2)
- Just had him for one occation when there were one big group. I think he explained well.» (4)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.72

General

41. General: Workload

19 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		0		0%
4»		5		26%
5»		14		73%

Genomsnitt: 4.73 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Too many labs, way to many labs.» (4)
- As I heared that parts had been lifted out to the next course I think that was a good solution. I don"t think even more workload had been good.» (5)
- High and juicy but since parts were moved this year, it"s probably reasonable. It should be tough.» (5)
- Inte rimligt med det antal labar, mängden teori och mängden räknekunskap ni klämt in i kursen» (5)

42. General: Textbook

19 svarande

1»		3		15%
2»		3		15%
3»		5		26%
4»		7		36%
5»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The excersises didn"t really reflect the topics in the book. Also they should be arranged in an order that makes it easier to understand the underlying concepts before the more advanced questions. As it is now there are more or less only advaned questions and no real soultions. Also one needs to consider this since this this a mandatory course in the Nuclear Engineering programme everyone are not chemists.» (1)
- väldigt ostrukturerad med mycket ordbajs» (2)
- Not a very good book. It is difficult to jump back and forth to find the right graphs and so on.» (3)
- Structure of book could be better» (3)
- the book is good but very expensive» (4)

43. General: Administration

19 svarande

1»		1		5%
2»		0		0%
3»		8		42%
4»		6		31%
5»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.63 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Lots of confusion concerning what rooms we should have for lectures. Different information in timeedit, mails and course PM.» (3)
- Använd pingpong så det blir lite struktur på allt» (3)
- Stefan Allard is a champion.» (4)
- Good, except from the change of location all the time» (4)
- Always good information, sometimes a little bit late, but that has been ok.» (5)

44. General: Information

18 svarande

1»		1		5%
2»		2		11%
3»		4		22%
4»		5		27%
5»		6		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.72 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Vill se ett riktigt kurspm där det lätt går att se alla obligatoriska moment, vad som förväntas att man ska kunna » (3)

45. Exam

19 svarande

1»		1		5%
2»		4		21%
3»		8		42%
4»		4		21%
5»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- There is absolutely no way to predict the exam questions since the book provides useless exercises. Why did you change the concept from using exam quiestions similar to the book to picking random exam questions not encountered during the course.» (1)
- VERY hard to know what was expected of you in the exam. There is absolutly know need to "hide" this from the students. Clearly defined demands is a must in such a large course. » (2)
- The exam was to hard» (2)
- Fokus låg inte på det som det fokuserats på under föreläsningar, räkneövningar eller labar - vilket borde vara meningen när man läser en kurs.» (2)
- Many theory questions weren"t really covered in the lectures, and some not even in the book. Some questions were not formulated in a good way and were therefore misleading, i.e "identify the nuclide" in singular when it was in fact several nuclides. As previously mentioned, many of the questions were quite far from the ones practised from the book» (3)
- It reflected the course quite well.» (4)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.63