Aktuella utvärderingar

Visa resultat

Här 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.

MPALG 1112-4 Hardware description and verification, TDA956|DIT780

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-05-24 - 2012-06-10
Antal svar: 10
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 32%
Kontaktperson: Mattias Bingerud»

Opening question

1. Which university do you belong to?

Some of our courses are taken jointly by students of the University of Gothenburg and Chalmers University of Technology. In order for us to be able to look at the answers of each student group separately, we would like you to indicate which university you are registered at.

10 svarande

University of Gothenburg»0 0%
Chalmers University of Technology»10 100%

Genomsnitt: 2

Your own effort

2. 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.

10 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 10%
Around 20 hours/week»5 50%
Around 25 hours/week»4 40%
Around 30 hours/week»0 0%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- Dropped off after the first half of the course» (At most 15 hours/week)

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

10 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»1 10%
50%»1 10%
75%»3 30%
100%»5 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.2

- Dropped off after the first half of the course» (25%)
- I feel bad when skipping lectures, although I wouldn"t have missed a lot in this course.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The 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.

To review the learning outcomes for this course, click here. (Opens in new window)

4. How understandable are the course goals?

10 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»3 30%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»3 30%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- Emil could not draw as a big picture of what the course really is about. » (The goals are difficult to understand)

5. 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.

10 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»9 90%
No, the goals are set too high»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- Having to learn Lava without knowing any Haskell does not work in a few weeks. I think the course is overloaded with the two totally different parts, namely PSL and Lava. As soon as one gets a slight idea about one topic, the course switches to the next one.» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

10 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»3 30%
Yes, definitely»5 50%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- The written exam was fair and so was the PSL home exam. The Lava exam, however, was way beyond fair. In my opinion, an exam"s purpose should be to assess whether or not one has understood what was taught before. The Lava exam on the other hand was not doable with the knowledge we had obtained before. Giving us a task that can only be solved with lots of additional knowledge is fine for a lab, but not for an exam where one cannot get any help. Furthermore, the exam"s outline said it would be advised to ask for help if one got stuck, but Emil was not even available during most of the time. Very frustrating exam.» (To some extent)
- The syllabus says "produce simple circuits by using the Lava system to write circuit generators" The circuits in the take home exam and the Lava lab are not simple.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

10 svarande

Small extent»4 40%
Some extent»3 30%
Large extent»1 10%
Great extent»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- Emil is unfortunately not much of a teacher, and the lectures were really worthless. He did not seem to be prepared for the lectures, and often had to say that he wasn"t sure about the topic he was supposed to teach either. Furthermore, the lecture slides as such are badly structured and that brief that it is not possible to self-study those either.» (Small extent)
- I only attended the lectures up to half the course. My impression is that the teacher was not very well prepared. Therefore, it was hard to understand the concepts of the course. I am sure if he will prepare better (re-write the slides for example) he can be a good teacher. » (Small extent)

8. To what extent did the PSL Lab contribute to your learning?

10 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
A little»1 10%
Resonably much»2 20%
Very much»7 70%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- PSL was interesting and it seemed also understandable, however, the time for it was way too short. I merely got a brief glimpse of what PSL is.» (Resonably much)

9. To what extent did the PSL Take Home Exam contribute to your learning?

10 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
A little»0 0%
Resonably much»3 30%
Very much»7 70%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- This exam was fair and doable and actually assessed the result of our learning.» (Resonably much)

10. To what extent did the Lava Lab contribute to your learning?

9 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
A little»0 0%
Resonably much»5 55%
Very much»4 44%

Genomsnitt: 3.44

- Did not participate in this » (?)
- Again, it is really hard to understand Lava without knowing Haskell, but it is doable in pairs and with the possibility to ask questions.» (Resonably much)

11. To what extent did the Lava Take Home Exam contribute to your learning?

9 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
A little»4 44%
Resonably much»3 33%
Very much»2 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.77

- Did not participate in this» (?)
- It contributed a lot to my frustration level, though. The exam should definitely not be harder than the lab, which was the case here. » (A little)
- The tasks in the exams are too difficult which makes this exam extremely hard to pass.» (A little)

12. The course covered two distinct topics (VHDL/PSL and Lava). Do you think this was a good idea?

10 svarande

No»5 50%
Neutral»1 10%
Yes»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 1.9

- Bad idea. Course is overloaded, and instead of knowing two topics, one ends up knowing none really.» (No)
- The PSL was okey but the Lava part was really bad. It was too hard I do not know why but it feels like there is something missing from the teaching. » (No)
- I think it would be better if one verification language which is currently used in industry is taught. Such as system-verilog etc.» (No)

13. Would you prefer to concentrate on one of them and if so which?

10 svarande

No, keep both»5 50%
VHDL/PSL»5 50%
Lava»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.5

- I like the idea of learning an advanced, different approach as Lava represents. But it does simply not fit into this course.» (VHDL/PSL)
- The Lava part was not good» (VHDL/PSL)
- The VHDL/PSL part was really interesting» (VHDL/PSL)
- Since the main objective of the course is to learn how hardware verification is performed, therefore it is better to master one language rather try to learn many. » (VHDL/PSL)
- VHDL and PSL is more directed towards industry.» (VHDL/PSL)

14. The course deliberately covered both theory and practice. Do you think this was a good idea?

10 svarande

No»1 10%
Neutral»3 30%
Yes»6 60%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- The theory behind this stuff just feels pathetic. » (No)
- Might be a good idea with a lecturer that is capable of explaining the theory. The only lecture that really brightened the mist a little was the one with koen Claessen.» (Neutral)
- Good structure with labs and take home exam» (Yes)
- Theory part should be enhanced and should include more examples and case studies.» (Yes)

15. Would you prefer to concentrate on one of them and if so which?

10 svarande

No, keep both»8 80%
Theory»0 0%
Practice»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 1.4

- Maybe less about the old CTL and LTL» (No, keep both)

16. Did you find the guest lectures useful?

10 svarande

Yes»8 88%
No»1 11%
Did not attend»1

Genomsnitt: 1.11

- Koen Claessen"s lecture was great, the others were interesting.» (Yes)

17. Do you think that we should change the prerequisites of the course, based on your personal experience?

If yes, please leave a comment about suggested changes to prerequisites.

10 svarande

Yes»1 14%
No»6 85%
Don"t know»3

Genomsnitt: 1.85

- You CAN pass the course without Haskell knowledge but I think it is required. The VHDL knowledge does not compensate for lack in Haskell.» (Yes)
- The best change would be to make a different course for the Lava part. But I don"t think one would have to have Haskell knowledge before. You just can not expect us to learn Lava by doing an exam on it. That is a sink-or-swim method and I don"t need to go to University for that.» (No)

18. Has the course increased your interest in research?

10 svarande

No»2 20%
Neutral»2 20%
Yes»6 60%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- I think the field of Hardware Verification is an interesting one. This course, however, has lead to a really high fustration that spoils the fun of it. » (Neutral)
- I"m very interested in continuing to study the patterns in Lava» (Yes)

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

10 svarande

Small extent»3 30%
Some extent»3 30%
Large extent»2 20%
Great extent»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- As the lectures did not make for any learning results, it was really left to our additional reading to gain any knowledge whatsoever. Each Wikipedia article is more useful than the entire lecture series.» (Large extent)

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

10 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 10%
Rather well»7 70%
Very well»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

- The info and links on the course page are a bit spread out. Some documents are found in the schedule and some under tools and some under links...» (Rather well)
- No complains here.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

10 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»3 30%
Rather good»3 30%
Very good»4 40%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

- the scheduled lab time is clearly too short, and an additional teaching assistant would also be of great help. It was hard to get hold of Emil to ask questions, especially during the Lava Exam where it would really have been needed.» (Rather poor)

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

10 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»2 20%
Very well»6 60%
I did not seek cooperation»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 4

23. How was the course workload?

10 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»7 70%
High»3 30%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.3

- Some parts of the course, like the Lava TH-exam, took longer time than the other parts, so it felt a bit unbalanced.» (Adequate)
- Dropped when the LAVA part was taking too much of my time» (Adequate)
- The lava take home exam was a nightmare » (High)

24. How was the total workload this study period?

9 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»4 44%
High»3 33%
Too high»2 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

- Only becuase of this course» (High)
- Deadline for the DAT096 Final report and LAVA take home exam in the same week - not a good idea.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

25. What is your general impression of the course?

10 svarande

Poor»2 20%
Fair»3 30%
Adequate»1 10%
Good»2 20%
Excellent»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.9 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Very poor. Bad teacher, way too hard Lava exam, bad lecture slides, bad communication with the teacher.» (Poor)
- Cannot say that I have any positive experiences of this course at all» (Poor)
- Fair/Poor. Missing all structure and very,very,very... confusing lecture series. The only proper lectures were the guest lectures.» (Fair)

26. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The labs.»
- Will there be a next year for this course?»
- Seems pointless to write anything here, since we know that the course will not be given again next year. Hyphotetically speaking, it would be useful to keept the VHDL/PSL part.»
- The PSL part was okey. »
- The title of this course.»

27. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The slides were confusing and hard to understand when reviewed. Because they are our "course book", it had been good with more extensive slides. Also it was hard to practise and understand the theory assignments. I think some kind of compendium with exercises would have been good in order to be better prepared for the exam.»
- The lectures»
- The teacher. It seems all like the fact that the course won"t be given again made the responsibles not care about it this year either. That inevitably affected our learning and of course also our grades.»
- No Lava part or easier Lava that is do-able. »
- I don"t know why I chose to study LAVA. Maybe there should be more information on the LAVA language on before hand. I would have liked a course focusing only on VHDL/PSL, design for testability. »
- Syllabus, It needs revision. »

28. Additional comments

- The written exam felt a bit misplaced. I think it would have been better to have more extensive TH-exams, that you have maybe two weeks to finish, and that also include the theory in the written exam. That way you get a better connection between theory and practise.»
- Very disappointed by this course, it was one of the main reasons that I selected Chalmers, but it turned out to be a flop. But my interest in the area of functional verification has increased.»
- I dropped the course after the VHDL/PSL part (which I really enjoyed). For me, this was my last semester at Chalmers. Learning an entirely new language (Lava) a couple of weeks before I would start my Master Thesis seemed like a complete waste of energy and time. Also, I don"t think I would use this knowledge ever again.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.9

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.9
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.47

Kursutvärderingssystem från