Visa resultat

MPALG 1112-3 Algorithms for machine learning and inference, TDA231/DIT380

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

11 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		1		9%
Around 20 hours/week»		3		27%
Around 25 hours/week»		3		27%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		18%
At least 35 hours/week»		2		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

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

11 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		1		9%
75%»		1		9%
100%»		9		81%

Genomsnitt: 4.72

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

The goals are difficult to understand»		1		10%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		4		40%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		5		50%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- The goals have not been shown in class. Goals on student.portal.chalmers do not describe very well the course content, sadly.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

9 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		8		88%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- The course goals do not represent the content of this course» (?)

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

No, not at all»		2		18%
To some extent»		4		36%
Yes, definitely»		4		36%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		1		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- It only tested a fraction of all course goals. » (No, not at all)
- The goals don"t match the course.» (No, not at all)
- The take home exam involved many parts wich the lectures or provided material covered poorly or not at all wich resulted in that you had to spend alot of time to search for the information yourself.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		3		27%
Some extent»		4		36%
Large extent»		2		18%
Great extent»		2		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.27

- There was absolutely no structure what so ever during the lectures. To start with it was very hard to hear what the teacher said as he talked so fast. Then he kept going forth and back in his slides all the time. When he wrote on the blackboard there was no structure at all, there different formulas (which just the same as on the slides) was overlapping each other and it was almost impossible to see which parts belonging to which formulas and so on. I do not doubt that he is a great researcher but he got no ability what so ever to deliver his knowledge. » (Small extent)
- The teaching was really bad.» (Small extent)
- Where hard to understand lecturer. Both speach and hand writing.» (Some extent)
- in the beginning the lectures wher abit hard to understand but they grew better, except for the last two wich were very fast in the sense that you didn"t get enough information in them. there also was a lack of good examples.» (Some extent)
- Mattias Wahde is a great teacher» (Great extent)

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

Small extent»		2		18%
Some extent»		3		27%
Large extent»		2		18%
Great extent»		4		36%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- the easiest way to find good material was to search for it using a searchengine, the slides offered some help if you understood the first part, however some of the information were not in the provided material. the slides were also available very late.» (Small extent)
- It was kinda hard as there was almost no information on what to read.» (Small extent)
- Other literature (google) mostly, the slides were horrible.» (Some extent)
- It is a good book. Whould be better if teacher told us what to prepear for and gave us reading list in connection to class, and not one week after» (Large extent)
- Enjoyable and interesting!» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		8		72%
Rather badly»		0		0%
Rather well»		2		18%
Very well»		1		9%

Genomsnitt: 1.63

- Lecture slides were often uploaded weeks after the lectures. The last assignment didn"t come out until a few days after the day we were promised to get it. Assignments weren"t corrected in reasonable time.» (Very badly)
- The course did not adhere to the Chalmers rules. All deadlines must be declared when the course starts.» (Very badly)
- The course course administration have been worst by far during my time at Chalemrs. Webside is updated to late and to little. "Student representatives: To be announced. " from today (8 march). Exam was announced on webpage three days before it was. Lecture slides comes after a week. It still says there going to be six progamming assignments, which was said at beginning. Homework 4 was delayed five days after despite it was anounced to be avaible same day. Correcting of labs took far to long time, homework2 29days, homework3 more than 21 days(not been graded yet).» (Very badly)
- It took very long time for the slides and notes on what pages to read to come up on the homepage (like two weeks after a lecture). There was no information on when the exam was supposed to be until the day before the exam. There was supposed to be 6 assignments in the course, there was only 4 where the last one took over 2 weeks to upload on the home page and the deadline was first set in the middle of the exam week and then extended into the next study period. Apparently this was because students asked for "extended deadline" this was nothing that said on any lecture or on the course home page. If that"s the case, which I very much doubt at least inform the students not needing extra time that what is happening. It took five weeks to grade assignment 2, as I"m writing this assignment 3 has not yet been graded. There was no information on how the final grade will is decided until the day before the exam. » (Very badly)
- The handouts were delayed. Slides from the readings didn"t come up on the homepage in time. Only two of four handouts are graded a week after the course. Everything about the examination have been unclear and most disturbing there are promisses from the people responsible for the course that haven"t been held. » (Very badly)
- Examples from the course web page of why this worked badly: "Student representatives: To be announced" "Consultation time: To be announced" "There will be 6 programming assignments, one each week and a final exam." (there were only 4 assignments) "The final grade will depend on the performance of the students in both the assignments and the final exam with equal weightage." (the weights are now score_1 = 6/4 * assignment_score + exam_score, score_2 = assignment_score + 8/6 * exam_score, final_score = max (score_1, score_2)," It also took unreasonably long times for our assignments to be graded (over three weeks for one of them).» (Very badly)
- The fact that the text "Student representatives: To be announced." and some other very outdated facts were still on the webpage the same day as the exam proves that the course administration did not work. And the handouts. What happened to them? We were supposed to get 6. We got number 4 the week before the exam. Very bad.» (Very badly)
- Some examples of how bad it is: The course webpage still says that there are 6 weekly assignments. "Consultation time: To be announced." "Student representatives: To be announced." » (Very badly)
- except for the lack of information it was easy to find information about the assignments.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		1		9%
Rather poor»		2		18%
Rather good»		3		27%
Very good»		4		36%
I did not seek help»		1		9%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- Questions were ignored.» (Very poor)
- At lecture Chiru answer to his best ability and it is okay. But if the question is an course administration question and answer is will be "mail Devdatt". I tried mail Devdatt and I have not yet received any answer (more than one week).» (Rather poor)
- There were a mailing-list but the answers on the list were sometimes realy poor and even incorrect. » (Rather poor)
- The google group was a great media for questions and such.» (Rather good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		1		9%
Very well»		8		72%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		18%

Genomsnitt: 4.09

11. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		9%
Adequate»		3		27%
High»		6		54%
Too high»		1		9%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- When the assignments (some of then at least did) finally came up on the home page we actually had somethings to do. So the workload was pretty much as a sinus curve as there was no notes on what parts to read in the book either it was kinda hard to study without an assignment» (Adequate)
- Very unbalanced lectures. One minute we talk about things that are multivariable calculus or discreate optimization, which are not prerequisites, next 15 minutes we discuss what the probility of getting a head when fliping a coin, normal case.» (High)
- the assignment could have been slightly shorter, it felt like this course had abit to much workload.» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		5		50%
High»		4		40%
Too high»		1		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- the other course didn"t take any time at all.» (Adequate)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		4		36%
Fair»		3		27%
Adequate»		0		0%
Good»		2		18%
Excellent»		2		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.54 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The content seems really interesting, but it was ruined by horrible teaching and organization.» (Poor)
- The assignments were abit heavy, and the structure in the beginning of the course seemed abit sloppy and disastrous in the end, the last assignment was handed out 2 days after what was said wich was about 5 days after I and alot of other people expected.» (Fair)
- The course seemed to be terrible planned even if there were many good ideas. Therefor if one took time replanning the course there are much to hope for. » (Fair)
- Good assignments, very poor administration.» (Fair)
- Great lectures, very interesting labs, bad course structure the last weeks» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

16. Additional comments