|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär 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.
Computer graphics, Lp 2 Ht11, TDA361/DIT220Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2012-01-05 - 2012-01-19 Antal svar: 31 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 9% Kontaktperson: Åsa Samdell»
Your own effort1. 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.31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.32 - Towards the end of the course, especially before the exam I spent much more time than during the study period.» (Around 20 hours/week) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.41 - Almost all lectures collided with DIT082, very badly planned!» (75%) Goals and goal fulfilmentThe 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?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.87 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.25 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.04 - I think that some goals are relatively easy to reach while others need considerably more effort. There is some escalation in the difficulty I believe, starting from easier material and moving to more complex topics.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable) 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?25 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.72 - The exam was strange, difficult and covered topics that weren"t mentioned in the slides.» (No, not at all) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.87 - Lectures and slides sort of confusing» (Small extent) 7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.54 - The slides were good, but were they really made for this course? Most of them were signed "Copyright Tomas Akenine-Möller 2003".» (Some extent) 8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?30 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.2 - The course homepage was hosted at a different university. The last lab told us to use a program whose license had expired and it took a couple of days of expensive time for the assistants to fix this. The lab hours were not scheduled in TimeEdit.» (Very badly) Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.03 - Seriously, Ola Olsson is the worst assistant I ever had. He talks 5-30 minutes about something completely irrelevant before asking the question, or says that "I can"t give you the answer". It takes much time from other students and makes a lot of irritation. I don"t think he can think change so use other assistants than him next year. It"s not nice to say, but it is honest. During most of the lab hours there were too few assistants and it could take 30-60 minutes to get help on a simple question. Once, the assistants took care of all demonstrations before helping anybody which took even longer time.» (Very poor) 10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.9 - Since the assistants couldn"t always answer the questions or talked about irrelevant things (Ola) we talked a lot with other students and helped each other with the labs.» (Very well) 11. How was the course workload?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.41 - Excellent work here! The workload is evenly distributed with tutorials during week 1-4, project during 5-6, and exam studies during 7-8.» (Adequate) 12. How was the total workload this study period?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.9 - Two lab-intensive courses is too much to handle.» (Too high) Summarizing questions13. What is your general impression of the course?31 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.67 - I thought a graphics course and Ulf Assarsson would make a nice course but the course was a catastrophe.» (Poor) 14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Lecture notes were comprehensive.»- the lab works» - The last, "summary" lecture was very important.» - The tutorials.» - Lecture material, Final summarizing lecture » - Projektet. Vi lyckades ta oss igenom de första labbarna för lätt och endast skrapa lite på ytan, vilket vi upptäckte när man skulle förstå för att kunna lösa projektet men eftersom vi satt varje dag med projektet så fick man bankat in väldigt mycket man missat men imo lite för sent.» - Lectures» - The course book.» - Assignments were fun but they need to cover much more of what the course teaches. The lectures and the assignments are completely out of sync. In the final weeks you are still coding things the teacher talked about during the first weeks. Still, coding assignments should stay.» - The high-level teaching and lower level lab assignments, this combination gives both a stong theoretical knowledge and practical experience.» - Labs» - Labbarna.» - The quality of the lectures and the approach that you don"t need to learn all the technical details of such big topics in order to succeed at the end.» - the labs, the slides» - Nice graphics demos.» 15. What should definitely be changed to next year?- Skip Ola Olsson as assistant, that will make many students happier.»- Labs! The code style was hideous and they didn"t require any kind of creative thinking or problem solving skills - just copy and paste code from the instructions. Eliminating unnecessary repetition from the code would make it so much easier to refactor it ourselves. Also, the examination seemed to assess memory of random facts rather than actual critical thinking. I think a greater emphasis on problem solving generally would improve this course.» - I feel that the labs were too much "copy-paste" from the lab handouts. Sometimes, I wish they would have focused more on explaining how something worked rather than just providing the solutions. Even so, I realize that this is not a course in graphics programming with OpenGL.» - nothing» - More connections between the labs and the lectures, it felt like two different things. You could totally understand the labs without understanding the lectures.» - More math and less math :) Some slides can be made much more clear. For example, in the intersection test slides, where point/plane intersection is explained –, please tell us what n, p, and d is (it"s actually not explained adequately in the book either).» - Less focus on formulas to calculate lights. More focus on techniques that are actually used instead of learning all possible alternatives.» - Even though the lectures were very good I would have preferred if there were three 2-hour lectures instead of one 3 hour and one 2 hour.» - Some of the lab-pm are incorrect and confusing» - the focus should be more on computer graphics and less on collision detection which did not have as big focus in the book.» - The exam. These kinds of exams are perhaps easy for the teacher to grade but they are very poor at testing knowledge, and can be very frustrating for students. Name random pieces of information from the book, names of algorithms etc. The exam didn"t test if you understood core concepts at all. Scored a high grade so I"m not bitter but it was honestly one of the worst exams I"ve had at Chalmers. Why not ask students to explain concepts, like the real time rendering models, ray tracing etc? More explaining, less 1p name the buzz word.» - I believe that it is unnecessary to have as much, low level, code in lecture slides as there was, and that is excluding pseudo code which is great to explain concepts and algorithms. Coding is learned by doing, not on lectures. It is better to have good coding references in other places than in lecture slides.» - Fler handledare till laborationerna.» - The course slides could be improved a bit, maybe being a little more explanatory without adding too much text. Also the tutorials, at specific points I would like some more theoretical explanation about the technique used and the implementation, again without adding too much material.» - it would bee great if the course could be splitted into 2 or three courses. at least on ray trace course and one real time rendering. There could also be a more theoretical course of the general concepts, and the raytrace, realtime courses could be more hands on.» - Connection between labs and lectures perhaps should maybe be more clear.» 16. Additional comments- very informative and interesting course»- Please correct the small errors in the tutorial instructions (before the course starts). Even small errors create great confusion. » - It was very funny to learn computer graphics. Though I was disappointed with the exam.» - I enjoyed learning the subject, but the course could do with some work and especially the type of exam should be changed.» - Tack för en bra kurs!»
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25%