ENKÄTER

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

TKDAT 1213-1 Concurrent programming, TDA382|DIT390

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-22 - 2012-11-09
Antal svar: 17
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 25%
Kontaktperson: Maria Sörner»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Datateknik 300 hp

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.

17 svarande

University of Gothenburg» 2 11%

Chalmers University of Technology» 15 88%

Genomsnitt: 1.88

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.

17 svarande

At most 15 hours/week» 4 23%

Around 20 hours/week» 8 47%

Around 25 hours/week» 1 5%

Around 30 hours/week» 1 5%

At least 35 hours/week» 3 17%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

- Taking this course during my last year I didn"t need to put in as much effort. » (At most 15 hours/week)
- A lot of hours spent on the assignments and exercises and not so much time over for reading and studying the book. Was too much together with my other course Software Engineering Project which also required a lot of work.» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

17 svarande

0%» 0 0%

25%» 1 5%

50%» 0 0%

75%» 10 58%

100%» 6 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.23

- Last two weeks I wasn"t in Gothenburg. However, I think it worked out well to study by distance.» (75%)
- Went to most lectures and also most exercises/tutorials.» (75%)
- Very good guest-lectures.» (75%)
- I attended every lecture I had the ability to attend.» (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?

16 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand» 0 0%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 5 31%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 11 68%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- ...but, not so clear in the beginning, since you need to understand a lot of the terms and language in order to understand them.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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.

16 svarande

No, the goals are set too low» 0 0%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 15 93%

No, the goals are set too high» 1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.06

- Well, the assignments are really hard but good. Since they are hard for students new to functional programming a lot of time was spent to pass the assignments and took a lot of time from studying the book. A real catastrophe was that the old exams all were 6 of 7 questions to solve in JR and then the exam was completely different this semester. Our exam required a lot more from the book and not so much from the assignments and exercises. Think it was too much to cover both in a good way (in parallel to the Software Engineering Project course which also required a lot of time).» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

16 svarande

No, not at all» 0 0%

To some extent» 6 37%

Yes, definitely» 10 62%

I don"t know/have not been examined yet» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- On the exam there was more focus on knowing parallel algorithms than there was in the course. I realise that it is difficult to make a written exam for programming course like this, perhaps more focus on the labs + an oral exam would be more suitable?» (To some extent)
- Not really sure. I did not do all of them on the exam and did not really point out all of the mentioned states etc in the goals. Perhaps should have...» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

17 svarande

Small extent» 3 17%

Some extent» 4 23%

Large extent» 6 35%

Great extent» 4 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- I think Prasad is good, but most of the time is spent on stuff around, that doesn"t really contribute to understand and learn, I think. The guest lectures was more or less a waist of time. I think it would have been enough to give them each half an hour as we could not get into depth anyhow and some of the time we just sat waiting for the guest lecturers to do it right. » (Small extent)
- Teaching was simply greate. Very positive experience.» (Great extent)

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

17 svarande

Small extent» 4 23%

Some extent» 5 29%

Large extent» 7 41%

Great extent» 1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.29

- I didn"t use the textbook. I had a similar book since before but I found no use to use it. I did read some papers though that helped my learning a lot.» (Small extent)
- As mentioned above, the time to read has been limited due to the many hours spent by the computers and trying to complete the assignments. Many evenings I went from school around 23:30 and couldn"t start reading when I got home.» (Small extent)
- I did not buy the book, google is easier to use. :)» (Small extent)
- Good book, wish I had had time to read it more» (Some extent)

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

17 svarande

Very badly» 1 5%

Rather badly» 0 0%

Rather well» 8 47%

Very well» 8 47%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- Some labs had very long and unstructured descriptions (also, TSim required some weird things to work..)» (Rather well)
- I think it was excellent to have the Google Group where we could exchange problems with the assignments and the web page was good as well.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

17 svarande

Very poor» 0 0%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 4 23%

Very good» 12 70%

I did not seek help» 1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- Bit of a queue some times, otherwise really good» (Rather good)
- The forum was good and answers quick.» (Very good)
- I think it was good with the exercises/tutorials where we could ask questions and get some guidance of what we were doing wrong. We could sometimes also ask on the Google Group and either get answers from fellow students or our teacher in exercise/tutorial.» (Very good)
- Handledarna var både kunniga och hjälpsamma, jättebra! Föreläsaren var sjukt bra!! Hans pedagogik var bra och hans utbildningsfilosofi var extremt bra!» (Very good)

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

17 svarande

Very poorly» 1 5%

Rather poorly» 0 0%

Rather well» 4 23%

Very well» 11 64%

I did not seek cooperation» 1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

- I had a good "lab mate". Sometimes it was hard to find matching hours between us since we had different 2nd course but we managed to work a lot especially during the weekends and also some hours here and there during the week and often worked late evenings.» (Rather well)

12. How was the course workload?

17 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 3 17%

Adequate» 8 47%

High» 5 29%

Too high» 1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- As usual, the labs took very much time from reading etc.» (High)
- If the exam had been more focused on what we learned from the assignments and exercises, I would have been more pleased. But since a lot of it were from the book, I did not have time to study it enough and am worried I will not pass even. I think we spent more than 30 hours together (each that is) on the first assignment only. And the other ones took a lot too...lost track of how many hours, but they were even harder. Erlang felt impossible...took a lot of time just to understand how it worked with such a different syntax.» (Too high)

13. How was the total workload this study period?

16 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 0 0%

Adequate» 9 56%

High» 4 25%

Too high» 3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- The labs in this course are complex and take time to complete properly. Taking this course at the same time as a large programming project course was probably a mistake on my part, and left little time for studying the book.» (Too high)
- As mentioned above several times. Much too high workload with Concurrent Programming and Software Engineering Project (SEP). The first thing the examinator said on SEP was that it will require at least 50 h/week each for the SEP course only. The Concurrent Programming course also had very high workload. Even though it is Chalmers, with the best students and high goals, it should not be required to work 100 h/week, is it? That can only work for some weeks and then all students will be exhausted / burned out before we even get to next semester. This can"t be what you want! After the exam (Concurrent Programming) and presentation (in the SEP course) I have more or less only slept for a number of days and still feel tired!» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

17 svarande

Poor» 0 0%

Fair» 3 17%

Adequate» 2 11%

Good» 5 29%

Excellent» 7 41%

Genomsnitt: 3.94 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I think something has to go. Either be more specific with what we need to read and understand in the book and really help the students understand it and skip all other not primary important or make the assignments easier, since they stole practically all my time. Something has to be removed. I personally think it would be good to get rid of the Erlang assignment (no. 4) since it took a lot of time to understand it and then not really used. Enough with lecturer showing what it is and how you can learn it if interested and which courses that will let you get more experience in it.» (Fair)
- This is one of the best courses I had» (Excellent)
- Really good lecturer, good book.» (Excellent)

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The labs and lectures were very helpful, and the guest speakers rounded things out nicely. Gaining knowledge of the Turing awards and their previous winners was also much appreciated.»
- Some classes ended with generall discussions and thoughts. That was very intressting and made us students to think about the bigger picture. Why do we study computer science at all?»
- The labs»
- I think the three first assignments were good for the understanding. (Skip the fourth, Erlang assignment.)»
- The lectures and the labs, especially the labs are really good. »
- The Labs (except Lab 2, would be nice to do some interesting stuff with Monitors, this one was hilarious).»
- Keep the google group.»
- Lecturer, book...»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Using pseudo code during the exam was confusing after spending so much time with real languages in the labs. It would be easier to still suggest a programming language for solutions, but that pseudo code still would be accepted by those who preferred it instead. In other words, the same conditions worded differently. As it was, I tried pseudo code when I would have been more comfortable otherwise, and I now regret it.»
- Better lecture slides»
- maybe you should go through more lab-related stuff in the course, because it may be difficult for some students to understand what to do.»
- Remove Erlang assignment (no. 4) and replace with some short information and example, just to show it and where students can read more and which classes to attend to study it. Prasad need to focus on the students and get a more pedagogical approach of how to help the students learn Concurrent Programming and stop with all "worldly problems" and philosophic chat. Keep it real by linking problems to real world examples, but as soon as the students get it, explain next thing and link everything together. I feel that he wanted to discuss a lot of chemical/biological stuff instead of actually help us understand the topic sometimes. In other words, be more tied to the real world and how it works in companies etc instead of being so philosophic and academic.»
- More explanation and exercises on proofing that programs work, it was only on the exam that you get feedback on if you know it or not. The last lab in Erlang was much more difficult than the other ones but there was just one week to do it. The reason for the difficulties was that it was an for us new language. It would have been hard enough just to do the program, not also the test program. »
- You have to be clearer about the exam at an earlier stage next year. The exam was nothing like the previous exams. Would"ve been nice to get some weeks to study some of the proofs etc.»
- Remove dead and dying languages (that would be JR and java, respectively)»

17. Additional comments

- Despite the obvious benefit of learning code checking programs, the work burden might increase too much if it was added to the course. A continuation course, or two separate courses for theory and practice, might be better.»
- This was a superb course. It has a position as a stable, good and essential course of computer science.»
- .»
- Remember - even though this is Chalmers, students can"t study 100 h/week all weeks! The departments has to start talking to each other and come up with course plans that work together. You want good and focused students and students want to learn and pass the courses (and even get good grades) but students can"t study 24/7 (100 h/week) and still be unsure of passing the courses. Then the course planning is wrong. »
- I don"t think all the discussion about the future of Computer Science was needed. Also I feel like it was very much about the teachers own beliefs. Who knows what will happen?»
- More erlang!»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.94

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.94
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.73

Kursutvärderingssystem från