Visa resultat

TME201 - Vehicle and Traffic Safety 2011, TME201

1. Are the learning objectives reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

30 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		2		7%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		25		92%
No, the goals are set too high»		0		0%
I don"t know»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.92

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

No, not at all»		4		17%
To some extent»		8		34%
Yes, definitely»		11		47%
I don"t know»		7

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- The 100 Car Assignment did not give me any new knowledge. » (To some extent)
- It is during the study period before an exam that one learns the most. So it would be nice to have an exam in the Multiple Choice Question(MCQ)format, testing the breath of topic, and carrying 50% weightage for the course. The other 50% can be attendance.» (To some extent)
- Handins work well in combination with mandatory tasks.» (Yes, definitely)
- There was no examination so it is hard to say. Marcos yes/no questions was a good complementary though.» (I don"t know)

3. Was it a good idea to replace the written exam with attendance/individual tasks?

No, there should be a written exam instead»		2		6%
To some extent, but no 100% mandatory lectures»		3		10%
To some extent, but only a few mandatory lectures»		5		16%
Yes, definitely there should be no written exam»		20		66%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- No one listened at the lectures.. Was this not obvious?! There must be an exam..» (No, there should be a written exam instead)
- Keep 75 or maybe 80% of attendance for all lectures (guest lectures included) but none mandatory.» (To some extent, but no 100% mandatory lectures)
- I think that the individual exam (passive safety) should be anonymous like an exam would be.» (To some extent, but only a few mandatory lectures)
- There should be no written exam but maybe better planning for the assignments. Double deadlines are not appreciated.» (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- However, the system need lots of improvements prior to the start of next years course. For the attendance part: Use ONE printed list (long enough) for ALL lectures and hand it out DURING the lecture. Not after when people might need to go to another lecture! Post a detailed course calendar together with course PM BEFORE the course start. (Not in study week 7...) » (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- Better planning on the different assignments would be nice» (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- I definitely believe that tasks show much better whether a student has reached the goals of the course or not. A good student that has learned a lot can have a bad exam for different external reasons (like being nervous or sick during the exam).» (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- During the studio period there were maybe to many deadlines at the same time. The individual tasks, the lab and also in the course of Vehicle Dynamics.» (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- Good with mandatory lectures.» (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)
- I think I have learnt the course using good techniques like lectures,practical training and software usage for assignments.The course was more practical and was easy to understand and visualize.Finally the literature review section has helped to understand the basics of reviewing the scientific publications. » (Yes, definitely there should be no written exam)

4. The course is inclusive: Please mention topics you would like to learn more about and topics you would like to learn less about.

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

Small extent»		1		3%
Some extent»		9		30%
Large extent»		15		50%
Great extent»		5		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

- The difficulty of the topics was very low, the same information can be found in a Volvo manual. » (Small extent)
- Some really interesting lectures!» (Some extent)
- It is tricky when the student knows that there is no exam, only attendance counts. It is easy to just sit through the lectures without accutally attending the lesson. However, the individual tasks aswell as the group divided tasks forced the student to learn. But i guess there is no difference here, you always learn more working on your own, than listening to a teacher. » (Some extent)

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

Very badly»		3		10%
Rather badly»		2		6%
Rather well»		18		60%
Very well»		7		23%

Genomsnitt: 2.96

- There should be ONE course syllabus containing ALL the information such as different objectives, labs, reports, schedules and so on.» (Very badly)
- Confusion about the attendance. No info when the grades for the tasks were to be posted. Handing out a complete course calendar in study week 7 is not preferred when there is no exam. » (Very badly)
- The correction of passive safety is unacceptable! I want the response of the assignments during the course.. » (Very badly)
- The schedule was not updated and was changes severeal times which made the possibility to plan ahead impossible!» (Rather badly)
- Timetable issues (known about)... Greater clarity of exact deadlines for assignments, is it the start of a day, the end of the day etc. » (Rather well)
- A little progress should be done to have the folders updated quickly.» (Rather well)
- Could have been faster grading of assignments. A lot of information on the first lecture, perhaps write a hand out paper about the different assignments and due dates etc..» (Rather well)

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		3%
Rather good»		13		43%
Very good»		15		50%
I did not seek help»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.53

- Easy by email. Not so easy to ask in person since most of the staff are located on Lindholmen.» (Rather poor)
- Both Karin and Marco answered to email very quick which is good.» (Rather good)

8. How was the course workload?

Too low»		2		6%
Low»		1		3%
Adequate»		16		53%
High»		10		33%
Too high»		1		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- an more even spread of deadlines would be nice» (High)
- The course could have a fair work load if the administrative stuff didn"t take half of the time spent on this course.» (High)
- There were too many deadlines for the end of the semester, the students would benefit from spacing out the deadlines more equally. The 100car data assignment for instance could be done earlier. » (High)

9. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		7		23%
High»		14		46%
Too high»		9		30%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- But that is not the fault of this course, I had totally 3 courses that study period.» (Too high)

10. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		2		6%
Fair»		3		10%
Adequate»		7		24%
Good»		15		51%
Excellent»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 3.41

- The course felt a bit flimsy as it is a 7.5 p course that only gives a general view of the safety aspect in automotive engineering. This feels strange as for someone that reads a masters in automotive engineering and has no intention of choosing advanced active safety and biomechanics, this course felt as a waste of university points. Also, it felt like the planning of the course didnt coincide well with the Vehicle Dynamics course. A point is where the week before the exam week hand ins and presentations were due in a window of 3 days, which was abit too much.» (Poor)
- The course was interesting but the organisation was bad.» (Fair)
- Some details have to be modified, but it was my best course since the beginning of my Master.» (Good)

11. What is you general opinion about the exerimental part of the laboration?

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		3		10%
Adequate»		6		20%
Good»		12		40%
Excellent»		8		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- It was some unclear things in the lab. I would have more detailed notes in a lab pm in order to reduce uncertainty» (Fair)
- I didn"t really understand the use of the oral presentation.» (Fair)
- I think the hans on preparation could be improved. We dedicated like 2 1/2 hours to that and it did not feel that much helpful.» (Adequate)
- More guidelines on the report is needed if the same type of demands are put on it. I think that the point of not giving that many requrements are good, if there is room for variations in the conclutions.» (Adequate)
- More clarity is required on the Aims and Objectives.» (Adequate)
- Maybe the test and the simulation are in the wrong order. Shouldn"t the test just backup the simulation? » (Good)
- Probably the best and one of the few things working out well. Felt well structured, with clear objectives. » (Excellent)
- It is always pleasant to see theory in action.» (Excellent)

12. What is you general opinion about the simulation part of the laboration?

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		7		23%
Adequate»		7		23%
Good»		12		40%
Excellent»		3		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.3

- » (Poor)
- There should have been more LSDYNA excercises in which the groups could have done the work and asked for help, not only one "intorduction" lesson...» (Fair)
- Unclear lab pm » (Fair)
- Same than previously» (Fair)
- I would like to have more information about LSDYNA.» (Fair)
- Ok, but hard to get in-depth knowledge about the program.. » (Fair)
- Whilst the simulation was a useful task and showed what could be done, I have come away with little real knowledge about how I would create my own simulation since everything was given to the us» (Adequate)
- Why not IE Ansys/Femap?» (Adequate)
- Unfortunately it felt like the In-house group got a better understanding of the test result than the benchmark group. This is also the reason to why it would be more fair to have one person from both groups when presenting the results.» (Good)
- The Benchmark and In-house tasks had to much deviating workload, the In-house task was too large for this course.» (Good)
- The software learning section could be started earlier,so as to learn the software well and understand the theory based approach» (Good)
- The workload of the groups (in-house & benchmark) was really unfair. However the in-house learned so much more!» (Excellent)
- It is nice to see that it is possible to simulate a can-crash in close resemblance to the real can crash.» (Excellent)

13. What is your general opinion about the individual literature review assignment in passive safety?

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		2		6%
Adequate»		8		26%
Good»		14		46%
Excellent»		5		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- The assignment was unclear, i.e. i didn"t know, with certainty, what to do until the grade came.» (Fair)
- It was ok, but many of us didn"t get why we should correct other students assignments....» (Adequate)
- The assignment was okay, the correction unacceptable» (Adequate)
- maybe clearer instructions on how to write a literature review » (Good)
- Ok, but none feedback we got.» (Good)
- It was a very good exercise. However, guidance is required with regards to format of the review.» (Good)
- Except from taking so long to get back feedback and result.» (Excellent)

14. What is your general opinion about the group assignment with the active safety literature and market survey?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		3%
Adequate»		8		26%
Good»		17		56%
Excellent»		4		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.8

- I felt like the assignment was enough for one person, not for a whole group.» (Adequate)
- Useful assignment but it was not made clear whether the mark was based on the written report or if the presentation was taken into account. » (Good)

15. Were the laborations relevant for the course?

Not at all»		0		0%
Partly»		3		10%
Satisfactorily»		16		55%
Very Relevant»		10		34%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- Got some insight in how to model and simulate crashes.» (Very Relevant)

16. Where the review assignments relevant for the course?

Not at all»		1		3%
Partly»		8		26%
Satisfactorily»		11		36%
Very Relevant»		10		33%

Genomsnitt: 3

- We know after 4 years how to write a report and give feedback, i would suggest to focus more on the subject to be reviewed rather than the report. » (Partly)
- It would help the students in general as well,as it gives the basics of performing literature review.» (Very Relevant)

17. How did you like the demo with the XC60 city safety? Any suggestion for next year?

18. Is there any background knowledge/information which was taken for granted even if you were not familiar with it? If so, can you show some examples?

19. Please comment the teachers involved in the course! Do you suggest any particular change? More or less of any of the teachers?

20. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- good with no exam, good with the demonstration of the volvo city safety.»
- LABORATORY, Interaction with Volvo, assignments, reviews, feedback.»
- Passive: The lab and the simulation! Active: The group assignment!»
- many interesting lectures»
- The laboration and the reviews.»
- The assignments (group and individual)»
- The Laboratory crash and the Active/Passive review»
- Most of the content is fine»
- Your passion for your work.»
- the lab»
- Laboratory, simulations, improved active safety demo.»
- The lab was good and the depth of the different systems regarding active safety was at a good level.»
- the reviews are good. The labreport should eather have clearer guidelines and requirements or a more lenient correction. »
- Assignments,Lab and simulation.»
- Simulation of crash and the real can crash.»
- Attendance of 75% for regular lectures, 100SaferCar Assignment, all guest lectures.»

21. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- If you are in the same lab group, why should you have to be in different actice safety groups?? and was we were presentating the active safety in my opinion it was quite bad to present what feedback the group got and how we "reacted" and what we change. it think that was quite uninteresting.»
- -»
- Passive: See comments above about the assignment. Active: No presentation!»
- I did not like to have a lot of time scheduled after five. »
- Don"t see what the 100 cars assignment gave us. Too short introduction to the software and only answers as report.»
- The lab assignment as such. More consistency betweem the lab and simulation.»
- The In-house part could be reduced. Also the schedule and the course pm should be clearer how the percentage are counted and have a updated schedule at the beginning of the course. »
- It could be beneficial to change the scheduling of the class, during 4 hour lectures (even with breaks after 45 mins) it is hard to remain focused on what is being taught. »
- Nothing, maybe just the administrative stuff about attendance...»
- make a whole new approach of this course, this is a course on master level, it is suppose to be difficult, the level was very low.»
- The 100 car assignment is really interesting and helpful, but it felt rushed at the end of the course... There could be more guidance and get more out of that assignment.»
- It was annoying to work with to groups under the course which only makes the planning harder. The review on the passive safety assignment isn"t necessary either.»
- lab report.»
- be more precise on litterature review, or just remove it. Maybe change the course so that there is an exam and not nearly as much mandatory lectures.»
- 100% attendance for guest lecture should be reduced to 80% to 90%. As the parallel subject in the term can be exhaustive to deal with.»

22. Did the true/false sessions during the active safety lectures help you learning?

Not at all.»		4		13%
A little.»		5		17%
To some extent.»		9		31%
Yes, definitely.»		11		37%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- Too easy questions, a waste of time. Basic questions, and in some cases answers that were overly simplyfied. » (Not at all.)
- Maybe not much but it was fun being involved.» (A little.)
- Too easy questions. Maybe include points for those who actively answer. » (A little.)
- They are great, but not that much for learning but rather to keep us awake and interested during the lecture.» (A little.)
- They reinforced the points that were made. However, since time became an issue perhaps they would just be best used at the start of the lecture sessions for a quick recap from the previous lecture. » (To some extent.)
- It is necessary to roughly divide the class into groups if you need response to the questions. » (To some extent.)
- It kept students awake to some extent.» (Yes, definitely.)
- I thought that was a good way of learning, it helped me to understand what was important.» (Yes, definitely.)

23. Did the preparation tasks proposed for the next lecture during the active safey part of the course help?

Not at all.»		7		26%
A little.»		7		26%
To some extent.»		7		26%
Yes, definitely.»		5		19%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

- didn"t do them» (Not at all.)
- Forgot that we had them as soon as I walked out the class room.» (Not at all.)
- It would have helped, however, with deadlines and assignments for this course and other courses I completely forgot about the preparation task that was given. » (Not at all.)
- Not done.» (Not at all.)
- if no one is dooing them, one has to ask why. I think it has to do with the same thin ans the true false sessions. » (Not at all.)
- They could be written in some kind of a paper with all the questions for all the lectures.» (To some extent.)

24. Additional comments?