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.

Biological Physics, FKA116/FIM160

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-12-15 - 2012-02-20
Antal svar: 12
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 60%
Kontaktperson: Sofia Svedhem»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Teknisk fysik 300 hp

1. What study program do you follow?

12 svarande

Chalmers MPAPP»5 41%
other Chalmers Master Program»0 0%
GU Physics»1 8%
Erasmus»5 41%
Other»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

2. Do you feel you received enough/consistent information about the course?

Consider both information given at the beginning of the course, during the course, and information about the examination.

12 svarande

Very good»0 0%
Good»6 50%
Fair»5 41%
Poor»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.58

- Some of the details concerning some evaluations were explained some days after the course started » (Good)
- Explain more that the book should be read with the list of figures, to help focusing on the key points, and not read the 800 pages in a row (very long, and not really useful)» (Fair)
- It was rather confusing in the beginning.» (Fair)
- The oral exam was told to contain "discussion of figures". I wasn"t about that at all. Such a big part of the course sould have been explained correctly.» (Poor)

3. What did you think of the class lectures?

Did the topic/way of teaching match your expectations? What would you change?

12 svarande

Very good»2 16%
Good»2 16%
Fair»5 41%
Poor»3 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- From the physics background, I was willing to be introduced to the area of biophysics, even though it was not easy to me, but the course matched my need» (Very good)
- Really nice efforts to adapt teaching. Maybe try to stick more to the list of figures that were given, and ask the students to do some short calculations just to have orders of magnitudes in mind. Sum up at the end to stress key points» (Good)
- + for Zorans commitment - didn"t seem prepared enough which made some unexpected hold ups at the lectures. Peter was very good.» (Fair)
- Very enthusiastic teacher but not always very prepared.» (Fair)
- more explanations, less calculations» (Fair)
- They where interesting in a way, but they did not seam to match the oral exam. Sometimes there was a bit to much of a "hand waveing" feeling, they could have been more concise and more in line with the way you needed to think at the exam.» (Fair)
- you couldn"t follow the order on the blackboard, unstructured- it was hard to see "a red line" between the lectures» (Poor)
- Honestly, I can"t say that the teacher was non prepared but maybe he went through the topics in a very fast way so that it was really hard for me to follow the discussion. I know that there was a matter of time but maybe it would have been useful to face a fewer number of topic in a more exhaustive way. » (Poor)

4. What did you think of the exercise lectures?

Did the topic/way of teaching match your expectations? What would you change? In particular, would you keep separated types of lectures or would you like to change it? How?

10 svarande

Very good»0 0%
Good»4 40%
Fair»2 20%
Poor»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 3

- This is not the course to be thought in the afternoons, a shift of the lectures to the morning times would be better» (Good)
- did not really understand the question» (Good)
- The seperation was good, but I didn"t feel like the examples lectures contributed as much.» (Good)
- didn"t really capture the physical points. Some excercises were just quickly calculated and then left where some things were not obvious. » (Fair)
- Very stressful and not very well organized.» (Fair)
- To much math and very specific calculations. Try to put more explanation of what this is useful for, where does it impact in biological mechanisms, give concrete examples (diseases, mechanism) rather than just say that we have to calculate a raidus of curvature» (Poor)
- too fast, not everybody had the same prequistions and knowledge to solve them» (Poor)

5. Did you like the two training labs?

If not fully satisfied, what would you change? Were the content of the labs relevant given your background? Was it useful to practice report writing?

12 svarande

Very good»6 50%
Good»5 41%
Fair»1 8%
Poor»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.58

- Very good.» (Very good)
- Nice to discover techniques, try to link it more with the rest of the course maybe....» (Very good)
- These have been good practices for me I hope that they may be beneficial to others too» (Very good)
- Nice to finally be working with proper devices and the laborations were well organized.» (Good)
- One would have been enough, the content was ok however. The way they where presented, as "practise" was a bit misleading though, they where a lot of work.» (Fair)

6. Do you think the home problems were useful/interesting?

Did you receive useful feed-back?

12 svarande

Very good»4 33%
Good»2 16%
Fair»3 25%
Poor»3 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

- Amazing effort to give individual feedback and help, thanks for that» (Very good)
- These have been good practices for me I hope that they may be beneficial to others too I got feedbacks and I have had the opportunity of discussing my work with the lecture» (Very good)
- but sometimes the scale of difficulties is not really well evaluated. an exercise of grade 5 required just to know about simple statistics, another of grade 3 required high knowledge of mathematic.» (Very good)
- didnt get too much feedback.» (Good)
- A lot of the problems were just math problems, and seemed to be randomly chosen by the teacher.» (Fair)
- Some of them seamed very relevant, and others just seamed picked at random. So very varying. » (Fair)
- the first exercises (estimate) seemed to be totally free of choice to start with the estimate->confusing» (Fair)
- I think that the exercizes didn"t help me to understand better the chapters and, moreover, the fact that I wasn"t sure about how much time I would have spent on them (stealing the possibility to use that time to study the book) made me really frustrating» (Poor)

7. Were you satisfied with the group project?

Consider the following aspects: Choice of topics? Opportunity to practise team work? Opportunity to practise experimental research? Interaction with supervisors?

12 svarande

Very good»9 75%
Good»3 25%
Fair»0 0%
Poor»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.25

- They were fun and the groups had many good times together. » (Very good)
- Very interesting but maybe define the goals better. We worked on the myosin actin motor, and the limits were a bit blurry, we did not know how deep we were supposed to go. Otherwise, it"s nice to have labs we design ourselves» (Very good)
- In fact I learnt a lot from others and may be they learnt from me too» (Very good)
- This was the best thing in the course. In my oppinion it was the thing you learned most.» (Very good)
- The project was fun!» (Very good)
- The laboratory experience was really interesting but I"m still complaining about the fact that group projects don"t give you the opportunity to understand the amount of work that each member performed (and this is happened in my case)» (Very good)
- It was interestning work, but the fact that we had so few hours and so much could go wrong made it feel like the result of your work was partly based on luck. Our supervisor seam very keen on making sure we at least got some material to work from, so that was positive.» (Good)

8. What do you think about the course work load?

How did you spend the time on different tasks?

12 svarande

Very good»1 8%
Good»2 16%
Fair»4 33%
Poor»5 41%

Genomsnitt: 3.08

- the course workload was heavy, I used to spend a lot of time to different tasks: days(home assignments), weeks (lab reports), even months(prepare the exam, or project), even sometimes I used to have unexpected results. But I think this is what has to be expected for a course which opens the gate to the new area of research where Physics, Biology, and Chemistry meet.» (Very good)
- It was really a lot to do, and it was quite decorelated between home problems, project, labs reports, oral exam. Insist on reading the book since the begining of the course, not just after the second week.» (Good)
- The workload was definatly too much. I think you could cut out at least one of the parts to the next years course.» (Fair)
- The amount was in a way acceptable, but the problem came in the fact that there where so many different tasks, and that takes time in itself. Having both hand-ins and exam felt too much, as did having both two labs and a large project. Better would have been to focus your time on (for example) larger hand ins and a larger project.» (Fair)
- A bit much at the same time. It would perhaps be good to try and distribute the work more evenly. » (Fair)
- The excercises and projects were enough. To that add read the entire book and have discussions about biological physics which contained more than was said is just plain bad.» (Poor)
- too much work, it was impossible to read the book before the lectures» (Poor)

9. Do you think the combination of theory (assignments, oral) and experimental work (report writing, project work) improved your learning during the course?

If not, why?

12 svarande

Very good»4 33%
Good»4 33%
Fair»3 25%
Poor»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- Yes,If any of them was missing , the course would not have met my expectation.» (Very good)
- Good to get to test experimental on a somewhat larger scale, to see if you like it. That is a good experience even if you decide you don"t like it.» (Very good)
- assaignments + project was ok. If the oral had been what is was supposed it would have been a better grade from me.» (Fair)
- Some of the were good but most of the were just blury and unstructured.» (Fair)
- I think that I missed the most important part of the course that, in my opinion, should be the physical concepts behind the biological processes. And this is due to the fact that I have never found the time to read carefully the book even if I was spending the most of my time on this course. » (Fair)

10. Was the examination of your achievements consistent with the stated goals of the course?

Do you think your learning would have improved by having a conventional exam instead?

12 svarande

Very good»0 0%
Good»8 66%
Fair»3 25%
Poor»1 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

- possibly. But that would have resulted in that bio physics would have been a higher workload than 2 other courses i was taking. » (Good)
- My suggestion would be that the one who spend uch time Lecturing should be the main Examiner(in the oral)» (Good)
- The big surprise was the change in style between the exam and the lectures. I also though the exam was promoted in the wrong way. Studying the pictures where emphesized so much, but not all questions gave a clear view of what section they where aiming to exam. They where hard to understand. The exam may or may not have covered the content, but it was not a good representation of the course.» (Fair)
- Since the examination didn"t happened they it was described I think it just confused a lot of people and made a lot of them disappointed.» (Poor)

11. Additional suggestions to improve/criticise the content of this course.

- Either skip the oral exam or make it more likee the re-oral-exam when one was actually allowed to look at a figure. Also. Feedback on the reports in form of grades. I have no clue at what grade any of my written reports were. »
- once again time-table, if possible the course in the morning hours»
- Decrease the workload on the course and make sure that the teachers are organized and it will be a great course:-)»
- Remove some of the different parts of the course and stick to fewer, but larger examination forms.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från