|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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.
MPPEN VT-12 LP3 Virtual Process Planning, PPU165, PPU 165Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2012-03-13 - 2012-03-30 Antal svar: 16 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 64% Kontaktperson: Jonatan Berglund» Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs Klass: Övriga Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Övriga studenter
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.16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.25 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.43 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?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.06 - When reading it through I thought that the main subject would be the organization of the flow of goods within the production.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer) 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.16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.06 - Hard to answer since it was hard to understand exactly what the goals were.
But I think some areas were good, but some (the CAD part with matrices on the exam for example) were unecessary high.» (No, the goals are set too high) 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.53 - I didn"t get the results back.» (?) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.68 7. To what extent were you satisfied with the following lab assignments and tasks?Grade your answer in a scale from Excellent (5) to Poor (1) for each lecturer.Matrisfråga - Some of the labs are in my opinion to much guided: it"s hard to understand what you"re doing when the instructions are like "click here.. Click there..". If these exercises would be less guided maybe the students would have to think more about what they are doing.
But of course I understant that you have to guide us to some extend since we have few time to handle each software» PPR/DELMIA Project - Jonatan Berglund
Genomsnitt: 1.93 CAD and Fundamentals of Numerical Control - Fredric Cabanettes
Genomsnitt: 2.68 IRB Off-line Robot Programming - Per Nyqvist
Genomsnitt: 2.06 CAM-ProE Exercise - Richard Hedman
Genomsnitt: 2.12 Process Optimization SECO - Sören Hägglund
Genomsnitt: 2.06 CAM-CATIA - Håkan Pettersson
Genomsnitt: 2.12 NC-Machining - Göran Stigler
Genomsnitt: 1.93 Rapid Prototype - Free Forming Machine - Göran Stigler
Genomsnitt: 2.18 CMM Machine - BG Rosen
Genomsnitt: 2.66 Robust Design and Tolerancing - IPS & RDnT
Genomsnitt: 2.06 8. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.06 - Very hard to know what to study for the exam which lead to that the book was not used for studying. Better reading instructions is needed if a course book should be used at all!» (Small extent) 9. How would you rate the main course book - Computer Aided ManufacturingGrade your answer in a scale from Excellent (5) to Poor (1).15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.2 - I didn"t bother to buy/loan the book so I don"t know how it is. Just briefly looking through the pages of BG"s copy, it felt like unnecessary.» (?) Study climate10. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.75 - It was fine for the lab sessions.» (Rather good) 11. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow student worked?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.68 12. How was the course workload?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3 13. How was the total workload this study period?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.62 - Ther other course(Ergonomics) had high workload.» (Too high) Summarizing questions14. What is your general impression of the course?16 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.75 - The administration has been so and so. The "red thread" haven"t been very apparent. It"s been hard to know each week what"s expected to be done. It wasn"t really any information about the labs in beforehand.» (Good) 15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Lab Assignments where great»- Delmia, CAM (ProE or CATIA), IRB, CMM, RD and T, CNC, Rapid prototyping» - The DELMIA lab was very interesting! The interventions of people from SECO tools and Chalmers-Fraunhoffer were also very interesting.» - All the labs. They gave a good feeling of how it is to work with these kind of issues!» - Labs. » - ProE tasks» - Good with different labs. You get a small but broad view of manufacturing technics.» - how the flow of the course is done, the presentation of the guest lecturers and the visit to arcam.» 16. What should definitely be changed to next year?- Slides. Could be more elaborate»- I would be much more satified to do more Delmia tasks insted of others (But this is because I have personal experience in most of other tasks, maybe for those who dont have such experience would be better to do like it was) Maybe it would be great to choose priority. If I have experience in some exercises, I could use this time for exercises where I dont have any experience (do extra tasks)!» - * Better administration and maybe a mail each monday saying how the week looks. * Some more information about the labs in beforehand.» - BG needs to review his slides. They are very confusing and hard to understand when reviewing them after the lectures, even though you attended the lecture. It is also a lot of repetition in many of the slides so it is hard to determine what is new for a specific lecture. The aims and contents of the course must be defined much clearer.» - More questions about NC in the exam.» - less lab tasks, more literature to compare» - The lectures should be more specific and not so, not be drifted away by the lecturer that sometimes was the case. The time for lectures should be more accurate, not realizing 10 minutes past the lecture that we talked more about general things and missed the purpose of the lecture.» - the slides can definitely be improved. Often they were too small, the layout is always changing, and the text which is included is ether too small, too long or not very important. Most of the preparation was done with the notes.» 17. Additional comments- A little more process planning e.g. in a production line could be learned. It is very much CAM oriented. Also other manufacturing options apart from milling could be showed.»- For the CAM part, instead of handling both Pro/E and Catia during the labs, it could be a good idea to choose only one but to learn more how to use it (rather than just having to "click here"..."click there"...). The DELMIA task was very good, maybe you could use the same format for a CATIA or PRO/E task..?!» - The exam was good as it covered the course content in a good way.» - What happened to the "common thread"? It sounded very promising to follow the process of developing a specific product, and I was really disappointed when I realized in study week 7 that we had not seen the "smart phone stand" since the introduction lecture. Please make sure that you put through your ideas next year, or at least decide on how the course should look before the start.» - more ProE and less Delmia in the lab» - Good lecture, I liked it! » - The old exam and the exam facit could be added, I focused wrong old exams.» - It"s good with many lecturers but it felt like there was some lack of communication. For example, what was compulsory to pass the course in terms of assignments, some kind of hints of what"s important for the exam. I know that lecturer"s has different philosophies about information for the exam, but to some extent it"s always appreciated to have some "hints" of what"s important, especially when there are no relevant old exams.»
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
18%