Visa resultat

MPCOM 1112-3 Wireless communications, SSY135

Read this before filling in the questionnaire

General questions

1. Are the guidelines for the course clear? (Deadlines, mandatory parts, bonus points, examination, web, course-PM)

Yes»		22		100%
No»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1

- In the laboratory PM was not stated to add the work contribution of each member of the group.» (Yes)
- Maybe mention the deadlines of the project on the course homepage rather than in a PDF.» (Yes)
- Yes, because the teacher reminds at beginning of each court all those elements.» (Yes)
- Maybe the lab pm are a bit outdated and a bit confusing» (Yes)

2. How was the course information (web, course-PM, etc)?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		3		13%
Good»		8		36%
Very good»		11		50%

Genomsnitt: 4.36

- The project PM was not clear regarding what we actually should do.» (Acceptable)
- It was hard to find the solutions to some exercises since they could have a number on the paper given in class and another number in the solutions.» (Good)
- In my opinion, the info was very good, and the reminders during the first part of the lecture are good. » (Good)
- Complete and clear.» (Very good)
- I can not see how it could be improved, I rarely saw course of such good quality » (Very good)
- The old exams on the course website have inconsistent and erroneous file names. » (Very good)
- It"s good. I don"t see any changes.» (Very good)
- Comment: The documentation style is very good and useful» (Very good)

3. What do you think about the examination principles (final grade based on project, quiz, and exam scores)?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		5		22%
Good»		13		59%
Very good»		4		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- Generally good to weight in all aspects of the course in the grading.» (Acceptable)
- First of all, the project is overscored, the project should not have more than a max of 30 points. If so, with a project of 46 points, then the examination of it should be more rigorous, because 46 point are quite a lot and can be achieve too easy. Or less points for the project and more in the exam. And also max 3 points for the quizzes. Ex: 30 pj/ 67 ex/ 3 quizzes» (Acceptable)
- To get around 40 points from the projects is good since it is time consuming.» (Good)
- however, I think there is l a big gap between 4 and 5 in the final grade. Cause one can easily get 4 if he/she did a good job in the project, maybe only less than 20 out of 48 points in the exam. But one need around 40 out of 48 in the exam to get 5.» (Good)
- Distribution : it"s good because the project takes a lot of time and it is normal that they have approximately the same coefficient than the exam. Exam : it was different. But the problem is for someone who do not have the mathematic book, it is impossible for him to find the first question of the first exercise because of the Bessel function.» (Good)
- To many points on the oral exam. Would like to get points by handing in calculatiuons on excersise tasks. Proposal: Examn: 48p Quizz: 1*6p Excersise: 2*6p Project: 2*12p Oral exam: 2*5p» (Good)
- To help the students to start solving problems on their own maybe it could be one problem a week to solv and for a correct solved problem gives 0,5 points or something like that.» (Good)
- The examination principles are very good. Some students have problems with examiners instead. The discussion in the project part1 examination didn"t go well for some students. Criticism should be constructive and teachers MUST appreciate students for their good work instead of demoralizing them for the shortcomings in the project. There are good ways to do it! Always start with appreciating the good things in project and then come towards other things. I personally didn"t like the experience of project-1 examniation due to not nice attitude. Teachers MUST play a role of coach instead of judge so they can be liked more.» (Very good)

4. The purpose of the quizzes is to encourage and reward student activities that leads to learning. Have the quizzes helped you to learn wireless communications?

No, not at all»		0		0%
No, not really»		3		13%
Somewhat»		7		31%
Yes, to some extent»		10		45%
Yes, to a large extent»		2		9%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- It was to early in the morning to attend.» (No, not really)
- My other course stoppped me from doing most of the quizzes but the idea is good» (Somewhat)
- It is a good way of learning. Even if some questions were toff.» (Yes, to some extent)
- I think some problems in these quizzes are quite tricky for a 10 mins quiz.» (Yes, to some extent)
- Some questions are difficult. » (Yes, to some extent)
- The principle of the Quiz is very good since it allows us to revise the court and not be late.» (Yes, to a large extent)

5. Estimate your attendance on scheduled sessions

- Since my other course stopped me from going»

Lectures
22 svarande

0-25 %»		2		9%
26-50 %»		0		0%
51-75 %»		5		22%
76-100 %»		15		68%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Exercises
20 svarande

0-25 %»		2		10%
26-50 %»		2		10%
51-75 %»		3		15%
76-100 %»		13		65%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

Teaching

6. How would you rate the quality of the lectures (with respect to your learning)?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		1		4%
Good»		5		22%
Very good»		16		72%

Genomsnitt: 4.68

- It had better complete the content in every lecture. Don"t put the content of this lecture to the next lecture.» (Very good)
- The lectures are very good. The professor makes some recall on each courses of the important part of the previous lecture. The lectures are clears. I don"t see any changes.» (Very good)
- In the lectures there was a very good mixture between power point and making notes on the black board.» (Very good)
- The pacing is really good and I felt very encouraged to ask questions.» (Very good)
- Beside the lecture slides, there should also handed out some lecture notes with a more detailed approach of the course material. The idea is implemented in Digital Communications and was very useful. » (Very good)
- Excellent lectures, I really liked Eric"s teaching style!» (Very good)

7. How would you rate the quality of the guest lectures (with respect to your learning)?

- Maybe by giving paper slides.»
- These guest lectures can be improved by giving a support during the lectures, because we didn"t have any support and it is difficult for us to know what to write on our notes. »
- The Channel Capacity was much more releated to the course and therefore much more difficult to just jump in and continue the "red thread".»
- Giuseppe Durisi lessons were good but it went way to fast»

Channel Capacity, Giuseppe Durisi
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		3		16%
Acceptable»		6		33%
Good»		7		38%
Very good»		2		11%
Did not attend»		4

Genomsnitt: 3.44

Hardware impairments, Thomas Eriksson
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		2		12%
Good»		12		75%
Very good»		2		12%
Did not attend»		6

Genomsnitt: 4

Biological effects, Yngve Hamnerius
22 svarande

Poor»		1		6%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		6		37%
Good»		5		31%
Very good»		4		25%
Did not attend»		6

Genomsnitt: 3.68

8. How would you rate the quality of the exercises (with respect to your learning)?

Poor»		1		4%
Fair»		3		13%
Acceptable»		9		40%
Good»		8		36%
Very good»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- In a retroperspective, I would have gained more understanding by just discussing and solving some tasks with other students. The pedagogic was not so great.» (Poor)
- Give points on hand in tasks. » (Fair)
- Instead of having two or three problems that has to be solved to any cost, you could have two to three problems that you have in case of that the first problems are solved very quick. But I think that it is more important to understand the problem just solved, than having two or three solved problems that i don"t understand.» (Fair)
- Asking students what have they learnt was a good strategy by Tilak! Tilak should lower the speed i.e. he speaks too fast to be understood. It is sometimes very hard to understand him for many students. » (Fair)
- it depends of the exercises. Some of them was easier than others. I think one way to improve them it"s to upload the corrections on the web course, because sometimes during the course we are not able to understand.» (Acceptable)
- Lotfollah had a good pacing but the other TA tried to jam in too much» (Acceptable)
- It is good to have exercises based on previous exams. Unfortunately, answers are sometimes not very clear (for instance, computation of RMS delay spread, ...) and can be confusing.» (Good)
- The assistant gives the students time to solve the problems, before demonstrating the solution. A lot of time is wasted with this, because the whole point of going there is to see how the assistant does the solution. » (Good)
- The pace of the sessions was sometimes too high.» (Good)

9. How would you rate the quality of the course material (with respect to your learning)?

- Pay attention on the solutions which are sometimes wrong (for instance, Exam2011-March)»
- Some solutions which the TA gave us at the tutorial lecture are different to the solution to the exam at the same question.»
- Corrections of previous exams have sometimes mistakes, but the professor is trying to settle that progressively»
- Have calculated 4 old exams and in these we found in total 7-8 "big" errors, that is to much!!»
- Start with correct all solutions in the old exam solutions. There are a lot of errors which makes it hard to learn.»
- Many errors and sloppy solutions. I can understand that you skip some simple math during the excersice. But in the paper solution where each student is studying in his own pace, why make solutions so short?»
- Handing out also some lecture notes, more detailed than the lecture slides. »

Text book (Goldsmith)
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		5%
Acceptable»		0		0%
Good»		9		52%
Very good»		7		41%
Did not read»		5

Genomsnitt: 4.29

Selected exercises in SSY135 Wireless Communications
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		6		30%
Good»		12		60%
Very good»		2		10%
Did not read»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.8

Solutions to selected exercises
22 svarande

Poor»		2		10%
Fair»		2		10%
Acceptable»		5		25%
Good»		11		55%
Very good»		0		0%
Did not read»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.25

Exercise solution for course book
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		11%
Acceptable»		5		27%
Good»		10		55%
Very good»		1		5%
Did not read»		4

Genomsnitt: 3.55

10. How would you rate the quality of the projects (with respect to your learning)?

- For the first part, the grading wasn"t too fair. Fortunately, this was not the case for the second part of the project.»
- We need better TA for first part!»
- Theory (math) and practical implementation in Matlab should be more clearly separated in the project memo. There should be some joint consultations about the project for all the groups, because a lot of them ask the assistants the same questions individually. »
- No changing. It permit us a better understanding of the lectures. For the grading i think there are fair and appropriate according to the workload.»
- To much MATLAB programming. Suggest more given MATLAB code and that the project task should focus to do more different simulations. Eg. do simulation on all of the states in the WSS-US big picture, differernt Tcp and N even valuse that doesn"t fulfill the design rules. To get understanding when you design a system wrong.»
- Project was too time consuming. Did not have much time to calculate myself.»
- Make the thesis more clear on specific tasks, especially part 2. Less matlab coding.»
- The grading was not so fair. »

Project part 1: Fading Wireless Channels
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		9%
Acceptable»		4		18%
Good»		11		50%
Very good»		5		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.86

Project part 2: OFDM System
22 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		4%
Acceptable»		1		4%
Good»		11		50%
Very good»		9		40%

Genomsnitt: 4.27

11. The aim with requiring MATLAB programming in the project is to increase understanding of fading channels and OFDM transmitter/receiver algorithms.

22 svarande

No, not at all»		0		0%
No, not really»		2		9%
Somewhat»		4		18%
Yes, to some extent»		12		54%
Yes, to a large extent»		4		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

- All students needs better MATLAB knowledge to do these to projects. If this not the case hand out more MATLAB code. In the work life you will anyway "steel" as much as possible form internet if that code is working. "steel with pride".» (No, not really)
- instead of having to construct all code our self, than maybe the fading_channel.p from last year could be given so that you don"t have to spend so much time och getting the channel to work since I think that it was here all our problem were located.» (Somewhat)
- A framework could be given to focus more on the specific mechanics of the systems.» (Somewhat)
- with one optional MATLAB session » (Yes, to some extent)
- Second project had too much work on Matlab.» (Yes, to some extent)
- Because of a lack of knowledge about Matlab, we sometimes focused on the code rather than the concepts. I think the best way to solve this is to be given some functions or even the channel and then, ask deeper questions based on the understanding to keep the level of difficulty.» (Yes, to some extent)
- The project goal is usually to understand the concepts. The problem is that we spend too much time on coding matlab instead of on the assimilation of the different concepts. I think it will be better if we have some parts of code and increase the concept"s questions .» (Yes, to some extent)

12. How was the workload of the projects?

- As I mentioned, some functions should probably be given.»
- reduce the work load in the project to some extent to have time to read the course materials like the book and other reference materials to increase the knowledge on wireless communications. as of me, there are many interesting topics left to read because of short time. »
- View the amount of assimilated concept, i think the workload appropriate.»
- See above.»
- as said above, give at least some skeleton code on the channel. That would save a lot of time which could be spent on analysing the problem/result instead.»
- More given code or make just one project of it all.»
- Let the report with conclusions have a more significant role.»

Project part 1: Fading Wireless Channels
22 svarande

Too little work»		0		0%
A bit too little work»		0		0%
Just right amount of work»		13		59%
A bit too much work»		7		31%
Too much work»		2		9%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Project part 2: OFDM System
22 svarande

Too little work»		0		0%
A bit too little work»		0		0%
Just right amount of work»		8		36%
A bit too much work»		10		45%
Too much work»		4		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

13. How was the amount of work required in the course?

Too little work»		0		0%
A bit too little work»		0		0%
Just right amount of work»		14		63%
A bit too much work»		5		22%
Too much work»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Defining a project with less coding!! Not whole the quarter just coding and coding!» (Just right amount of work)
- To much work was spent on the project. In total I spent around 230hours on this course.» (A bit too much work)

Summarizing questions

14. How would you rate the quality of the course as a whole?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Acceptable»		3		13%
Good»		7		31%
Very good»		12		54%

Genomsnitt: 4.4

- Less work load on projects! Spend time on theory instead!» (Good)
- reducing the work load on the project to some extent to have time to study the course materials and get enough knowledge of wireless communications.» (Very good)
- Give a glossary on all the abbreviations and all symbols. So you don"t have to sit clueless when there is a new symbol that is used, or maybe and old symbol that is reused.» (Very good)
- Should be kept the same, it is balanced.» (Very good)

15. What should definitely be changed in the course?

16. What should definitely not be changed in the course?