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 Product Line Engineering, Lp 2 Ht11, DAT165/DIT275

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-12-08 - 2011-12-22
Antal svar: 23
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 14%
Kontaktperson: Åsa Samdell»

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.

23 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»7 30%
Around 20 hours/week»9 39%
Around 25 hours/week»4 17%
Around 30 hours/week»3 13%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

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

23 svarande

0%»1 4%
25%»1 4%
50%»3 13%
75%»11 47%
100%»7 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- Teaching could have been better planned and structured.» (25%)
- The lectures were inconsistent with the weekly projects, so I did not find them useful.» (50%)
- Lars Paretos teching wasn"t the greatest. Flickering through slides and sometimes unprepared. Therefore I didn"t attent the latter lectures.» (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?

23 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»10 43%
The goals are difficult to understand»4 17%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»7 30%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.04

- Don"t remember if i saw them in the beginning or not, however it is possible that i forgot them.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- I don"t remember the lecturer showing this in the beginning of the course, but I could be wrong.» (I have not seen/read the goals)

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.

17 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»13 76%
No, the goals are set too high»3 17%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- To be able to study a company I think there is a need of moore time than you are able to get in a 7.5 credits course» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

18 svarande

No, not at all»2 11%
To some extent»8 44%
Yes, definitely»2 11%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»6 33%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- The course had too much focus on the projects. The exam was somewhat a dumbed down version of what we had already done in groups. More focus on the reading material.» (To some extent)
- Does not really seem relevant to have 2 means of examination (hand-ins and exam) when both test for the same thing. Especially since the exam allowed for unlimited aids in form of print-outs. If it"s necessary to have an exam to test the same thing as the hand-ins, why not make it an home-exam and save the environment as well as the printer quota of the students a bit» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

23 svarande

Small extent»14 60%
Some extent»6 26%
Large extent»3 13%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.52

- Since it is project based this not so strange» (Small extent)
- Lectures (except guest lectures) were unstructured, inconsistent, and most often irrelevant.» (Small extent)
- The lectures didn"t help that much. The highlight of the course was the guest lectures which was really great.» (Small extent)
- The assistants tried their best to help but were not well informed on the issues. The lectures were a joke as they were mostly comprised by extensive flipping back and forth through powerpoint-presentations. The guest lectures were very good and covered good topics.» (Small extent)
- I didn"t attend lectures. But read the lecture slides offline and covered material not mentioned in the course literature.» (Some extent)

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

23 svarande

Small extent»6 26%
Some extent»10 43%
Large extent»6 26%
Great extent»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- The literature gave a very good theoretical background which was unfortunately not covered in the examination of the course.» (Large extent)
- Books were good. Would have very much liked some reading instructions (what chapters to read for each week).» (Great extent)

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

23 svarande

Very badly»6 26%
Rather badly»10 43%
Rather well»7 30%
Very well»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.04

- Information was published to late all the time.» (Very badly)
- Problems up on the site very late every week. I think all problems in the course should be available from day one. This time the last problem wasn"t even handed out! » (Very badly)
- Information outdated and information that should be added to the web page wasen"t.» (Very badly)
- The wiki-based page was inferior to most course page variants I"ve encountered. The navigation was confusing and generally very difficult to find useful information. While it might be possible to create a good course page on a wiki. I"m not sure how this would be done.» (Very badly)
- Problem description should have been posted a lot earlier. » (Rather badly)
- The concept of a wiki is good. It was rather hard to find information on it however. Often the project specifications were uploaded too late (during supervision time, leaving us waiting for some minutes). At one occasion (week 6) it was not uploaded at all, without any notice.» (Rather badly)
- It would be nice to have to problems a bit earlier.» (Rather badly)
- Material wasn"t up on the page as promised. I had to try reaching Lars three straight days without any luck and because of this our project got stalled.» (Rather badly)
- Would be great to have the problem descriptions uploaded sooner. Grading of hand-ins also took a bit too long.» (Rather well)
- Just during the end of the course, there were some mismanagement in course website not being updated as should have been. » (Rather well)

Study climate

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

22 svarande

Very poor»2 9%
Rather poor»2 9%
Rather good»12 54%
Very good»6 27%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- The back-up case study was not published, and it was impossible to reach teacher and staff for 3 days! email, telephone, no answer. Also one phone number goes to a fax» (Very poor)
- neither the examinator or the assistants answered mails very fast. When trying to call the examinator, he did not answer his phone (on multiple occations) and when calling the number to the assistants available on the course page, one reached a fax machine or modem» (Very poor)
- The project supervisors where greate but they didn"t get all information that they needed to help ous. » (Rather poor)
- During the planned project time where you could get help by undergraduates it was good. Altough, trying to reach them and Lars during other times wasn"t easy at all.» (Rather poor)
- Thanks to the supervisors» (Rather good)
- Supervisors were stretched this toward the end of the course.» (Rather good)
- Good opportunities to ask the supervisors.» (Rather good)
- Supervisors did great work with answering our questions!» (Very good)

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

23 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»5 21%
Very well»18 78%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

11. How was the course workload?

23 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»3 13%
Adequate»15 65%
High»5 21%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.08

- Low at times and very high at times.» (Adequate)
- High due to the fact that it was unclear what to do, so we had to take it upon ourselves to ask for instructions, ask and ask again.» (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

23 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»13 56%
High»9 39%
Too high»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- Read three courses» (High)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

23 svarande

Poor»11 47%
Fair»4 17%
Adequate»4 17%
Good»3 13%
Excellent»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- This course have potential to be a very good course but the organization was a catastrophe I think. Also I think the course should have been focusing more on one thing, either programming, bapo models and similar in theory or making a study of a company. By doing all of them as we did it feels lke we just touched the top of everything but didn"t really learn so much as would have been preferd» (Poor)
- Greate subject but the lectures where messay.» (Poor)
- Sorry to say that this course was the worst I"ve ever taken. I can"t imagine that this is a course that Chalmers wants to put it"s brand name on.» (Poor)
- One of the worst course I"ve read this far. While I felt that the material could be interesting, this course basically ruined the subject.» (Poor)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Guest lectures, the only good teaching in the course.»
- the supervisors»
- Real life experience and practice, company contact.»
- Free course literature (yay!). Both guest lectures were very good, though I guess Jan will be moving on sooner or later.»
- The guest lectures»
- The problems where greate.»
- Having a mix of architecture and managerial.»
- The supervisors.»
- The technical side of the course.»
- I like the setup with problems every week, and that the exam mirrors the problems. »
- Group Discussion hours and the Weekly problems»
- Guest lectures»
- Not much, but the assignment where one identified and created variability in existing software was quite good. It would be better if a few alternatives where offered on which the assistants where able to offer help and suggestions. While this gives less diversity, people will probably understand more and spend less time frustrated googling for errors while the assistants where unable to help.»
- Guest lectures»
- The available time slots for asking supervisors for help.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Getting a motivated and good teacher»
- Lars need to extend his knowledge in BPO»
- The course should cover the full BAPO and not just architecture. The course should also be more influenced by the bussiness perspective rather then coding.»
- The course. This course should really be reorganized from the bottom I think to be useful enough»
- Lars should be more assertive, I think it would help his teaching.»
- Have another type of exam or make it to a homeexam since it was like doing the problems in 4 hours.»
- Focus more on the B, P and O of BAPO. For architecture I think we should have more looked into different ways of realizing variability. Contacting companies for industry case study the same week are supposed to make research for the company doesn"t work in practice. Sometimes it can take a week just to get in contact with the right person.»
- The course needs to be restructured. The lectures need to be aligned with the project so that they actually become helpful. For the most part we were "on our own" for the project. Also- give Business, Project and Organisation aspects of SPLE more room, this is not a course in SW architecture.»
- The industrial case, as it currently is, it"s just a waste of time. Totally useless for companies (of course not even one company was at the final workshop) and a waste of time for students.»
- Try to get structure in lessons, what is important and what is relevant to the current problem. Prepare live demos before the class. Arrive some minutes before the class so that we can start on time. Plan for breaks in the lessons and don"t run over in the end.»
- The lecture Slides. They should be more readable. »
- The projects shouldn"t be as dependant on the industry. My group tried to find several companies but they didn"t have the time. Therefore we didn"t get as much out of the course as other groups did and writing a report on a company with no insight is really hard and more like a guessing game.»
- The structure of the lectures must be improved. At some points it was impossible to follow the lecture due to illogical flipping back and forth in the slides. Spending 10 minutes of a lecture trying to enlarge the font size in eclipse makes one wonder whether any preparation took place. It could also be a good idea to test whether a demo actually works before trying to perform it live. The lecturer learned something and used screenshots from thereon but that gave less value to the lecture. The part with industry contact must also be improved. Either let students find the companies earlier, get some companies that you are sure can participate (this is how this course element was presented) or make a proper backup assignment for those who fail to acquire industry contact. Most importantly of all is to actually respond the students questions in a timely manner. Maybe it"s easier to cancel the course and create a new one from scratch»
- What is the purpose of the course? Maybe think of something smart, and how to achieve it. The exam was just very poorly written leaving me only more confused.»
- Better planning of the course. The teacher wrote the assignments after the lecture where he went through what each week"s assignment was about. Some weeks the assignment was not finished for the first supervised time slots (could not start working).»

16. Additional comments

- A short live tutorial about different build tools (make, ant, maven), noting their strengths, weaknesses and major areas used (programming languages, platforms, ...) early in the course is appreciated as one might not encounter all of these mainstream build tools and the philosophies behind them in the course of the course. Some students might already be familiar, but few are familiar with all of them. Meant to be an overview, students will further learn the details when encountering those.»
- This was a waste of time I"m afraid. Wish I"d taken another course.»
- If there is no time to organize/handle a real industrial case of study, it"s better to make the course more technical. At least technical knowledge is always worth and spendable.»
- If one is expected to have industry contact in a course, I would suggest making it an initial assignment to find this contact as companies don"t work very fast at all times. It is also good to be consistent when saying there will be a backup assignment and actually creating this assignment and answer the students questions when they ask what the assignment is. I don"t think the alternative for those who failed to get a company to study is an acceptable assignment for a master course. »
- Feels like the lecturer did not take the course very seriously.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från