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.

ESS101 - Modelling and simulation, autumn 2012, ESS101

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-25 - 2013-02-08
Antal svar: 48
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 52%
Kontaktperson: Marie Iwanow»

Your own effort

1. 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.

48 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»6 12%
Around 20 hours/week»16 33%
Around 25 hours/week»11 22%
Around 30 hours/week»10 20%
At least 35 hours/week»5 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- Especially for the Lab and the exam» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

48 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»2 4%
75%»13 27%
100%»33 68%

Genomsnitt: 4.64

- Had another course in the same block so the lectures were always at the same times.» (50%)
- because of collision with some other courses» (75%)
- This was a huge mistake since it was the worst teacher I have ever had during my Chalmers time for 4 years. But I kept hoping that the teacher would get better, unfortunately that was not the case.» (75%) (den här kommentaren har blivit redigerad i efterhand)

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.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

48 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»9 18%
The goals are difficult to understand»5 10%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»20 41%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»14 29%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- Not so many practice..» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- As always. You check the goals the first lecture, and you dont really understand them at that point. Then you forget them.» (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.

43 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 2%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»36 83%
No, the goals are set too high»6 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- The goals are perfectly fine, but I thought that the teacher were supposed to help you reach the goals, not only throw you into the dark and wish you luck.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- I have a mechanical engineering background so I don"t expect anything else» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

46 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»28 60%
Yes, definitely»16 34%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

- I hade the feeling this was a somewhat more practical course, but felt the exam was fairly theoretic.» (To some extent)
- The exam do cover most of what you"ve learned during the course.» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

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

48 svarande

Small extent»13 27%
Some extent»23 47%
Large extent»10 20%
Great extent»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.02

- I would say no extent, Paolos philosophy was that the students were supposed to learn everything the hard way. In the midterm coarse evaluation many wanted the teachers to solve more problems on the board, but Paolo refused to let the other teacher help us. Why are we having a course evaluation if the teacher ignores it to every extent? There is no point in that.» (Small extent)
- The teaching was one of the worst I"ve experienced.» (Small extent)
- Just powerpoint slides. Too much talk. We cant remember everything he says and write it down. It goes too fast» (Small extent)
- Paolo is only teaching with power-point slides which he very fastely changes and doesnt give any chance to understand the lectures. It would be better if he had written more examples of the theory on the board.» (Small extent)
- I have had a hard time listening during lessons and it is much hard to do that when the english is bad or have a difficul accent. I also think that the powerpoints can be easier to understand if some changes are done by explaining methods/laws/equations with one sentence on it. » (Small extent)
- The fact that the lectures was mainly based on power point slides made them redundant, considering that the slides are available on the course homepage. A course dealing with calculations should, in my opinion, have lectures that use the blackboard as the prime medium of teaching. The equations presented on the slides were not even in the slightest proved and very sparsely explained. As a result of this the lectures contributed almost nothing to the understanding of the subject. I think I did good on the exam (probably getting a 4 or 5), but that was only because I realized early that the course book and the lectures were almost useless and instead focused on doing old exams from old course homepages. The old exams were, sadly, the best way of getting understanding of how to solve the problems. Had the book and the lectures not been as bad as they were, this would not have been the case. Note that the lectures were bad because they only presented the material in a shallow way and not because Paolo was a bad lecturer.» (Small extent)
- More important results were not highlighted in the course, and more examples in the course could have helped to understand.» (Small extent)
- The lectures were pretty ineffective, too much material was covered too quickly, without much in the way of examples. » (Small extent)
- Too few exercises and tutorials, but I appreciate not having the complete solutions.» (Some extent)
- Only going through general theory on skides does not give very much. Examples would be goood.» (Some extent)
- It would have been good if Ricardo gave more examples. » (Some extent)
- He (paulo) rushes thru the lectures, and asume that everone understand what understand. When he goes thru the basics/things we know from old courses he takes alot of time, but for the new abstract things he is too fast! The totorial teacher seemed nervous, and couldnt"t really keep track on time.» (Some extent)
- The problem is that the lecturer and the TA:s are both really bad when it comes to teaching during the lecture but when you ask them yourself during breaks and so on they explain it much better and slower.» (Some extent)
- I would like him to give more examples and not just say that this is simple and you should already know that and then just go on.» (Some extent)
- Even though it been hard to follow the lectures» (Large extent)

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

48 svarande

Small extent»8 16%
Some extent»14 29%
Large extent»22 45%
Great extent»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- I think the book has almost been useless, been able to find some things but not much. » (Small extent)
- The course book didn"t have as deep explanations as expected. It was not good to only have answers to the problems, this made it a lot harder to work on your own. For not so complex questions it"s a lot easier to look at a solution instead of asking a TA or lecturer for help.» (Small extent)
- The book was probably the worst I"ve had yet.» (Small extent)
- The book doesn"t help, it"s more like an repeat of what paolo says on the lectures. there should be a book with more examples in it.» (Small extent)
- Didn"t use the book, but the exercises was good.» (Some extent)
- Boken är sådär» (Some extent)
- The book is a good read.» (Some extent)
- Given how hard the lectures were to following, full solutions should have been provided with the exercises given for self-study.» (Some extent)
- This has been the only way to learn something, Glad and Ljung may not be the best writers but I doubt there is any better book on the market.» (Large extent)
- Need to find better wrapping on the literature as they fall apart after 4 weeks.» (Large extent)
- Great book, easily understood.» (Great extent)

8. Are tools like, e.g., the Mathematic handbook necessary or useful for the final exam?

48 svarande

Small extent»24 61%
Some extent»10 25%
Large extent»3 7%
Great extent»2 5%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 1.56

- What need to be memorised are not in Beta, but some of formulas would be nice to have.» (Small extent)
- I would say that a physics handbook would help in a larger extent, especially for the physical modelling and bond graph creation.» (Small extent)
- Almost no of the formualas that you need are to be found in Beta.» (Small extent)
- I have never used Beta on any exam but sometimes I can see the point of using it.» (Small extent)
- Didn"t open it!» (Small extent)
- Not really.» (Small extent)
- I don"t even think I used it. Some other people may have.» (Small extent)
- Could not find all of the relevent formulas, but it was needed» (Large extent)

9. Is the difficulty level of the final exam appropriate for a closed book and notes type of exam?

47 svarande

No»10 25%
Yes»29 74%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 1.74

- I think the difficulty on the exams varies from time to time and that this exam was hard. I think formulas could be given on paper. » (?)
- Too much Formulas ro remember. Would be better to have a formula table and an exam which you were supposed to demonstrate how the different tools and formulas work.» (No)
- But memorize the formulas should not be the aim of the course. Could give a sheet with many formulas, and not specify which should be used in specific questions» (Yes)
- It was surprisingly easy. I regret spending so much time studying.» (Yes)

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

48 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»6 12%
Rather well»32 66%
Very well»9 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.02

- Deadlines and where to send the hand-ins was very unclear. lecture slides online were mixed with old ones. Would also be great to not have the repetition slides from every lecture uploaded again and agian.» (Rather badly)
- The material could be uploaded earlier » (Rather badly)
- Too much beuracracy around the hand in. For an example: for the "challenge" hand in, the maximum number of pages was 3. However when some students had written a 3 page report and added a front page with name and course-name, Paolo actually did not accept the hand in with the argument that it was more than 3 pages long (even though the actual hand in was exactly 3 pages long). This is for me quite bureaucratic, and it didnt feel like the teacher Paolo was reasonable at all.» (Rather badly)
- Course handouts were always on time.» (Rather well)
- There were some probelms in the beginning of the course, but then it was good.» (Rather well)
- Please add information on the course web page on when and where the exam review is» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

48 svarande

Very poor»2 4%
Rather poor»11 22%
Rather good»20 41%
Very good»8 16%
I did not seek help»7 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- The teacher expected to much from the class so general feel of the class was that "there is such thing as a stupid question"» (Rather poor)
- Since we hade to book a meeting with paolo he wsn"t much help. However Maliheh was very helpfull.» (Rather poor)
- Lab session on monday morning were quite inefficient. One teacher for two rooms... only during the compulsory lab of collecting data we were able to get help from the teacher.» (Rather poor)
- Scheduling time with paolo is a bit hard and the TA:s in my opinion were not so good at explaining.» (Rather poor)
- As mentioned, few exercises, but good email conversations.» (Rather good)
- Paolo was not very open for questions but the supervisor where good and helpful. » (Rather good)
- It was a little bit difficult to find persons to ask for help at the institution. For example 2 more hours per week in order to ask questions are needed!» (Rather good)
- Enkelt att få tag på Paolo som gärna hjälpte till. Mycket bra!» (Very good)

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

48 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»13 27%
Very well»35 72%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- really great that you could seek and find laboratory/assignment partners thru the groups on the course homepage» (Very well)
- without the help of fellow students I would never made it through this course» (Very well)

13. How was the course workload?

48 svarande

Too low»1 2%
Low»3 6%
Adequate»21 43%
High»19 39%
Too high»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- But the dumb part is that all of the work comes during the last week before the exam which is bad. They should aim on getting things like the lab assignment to be done at least during the sixth week.» (Adequate)
- The challenge increased it a lot, but it was great anyway» (High)
- Since the Robot arms used for gathering measurment data were crappy alot of time went into just figuring out that the data was bad. The time involved did not reflect the amout of learning!» (High)
- The Challenge was said to be optional but in reality you felt you had to it, since you could get so many extra points to the final exam. 5 ponits out of a total of 25 points is 20% which is a lot. The worload increased a lot due to this challenge.» (High)
- Very high at the end of the course.» (High)
- The lab assignment took too much time to seemingly no use.» (Too high)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

48 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»2 4%
Adequate»19 39%
High»20 41%
Too high»7 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- 3 courses. 1 of them in starts 17-20. Get too tiered. And too many labbs, handin etc for 3 courses» (Too high)
- I took one course extra...» (Too high)
- studied at 125%» (Too high)
- since lp 3 ive been in school 7 days a week approx 8-11 h per day.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

48 svarande

Poor»4 8%
Fair»12 25%
Adequate»13 27%
Good»18 37%
Excellent»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- This is quite sad since the course in itself is really interesting, but the way it is taught is beneath contempt. I mean, power point slides in a math intensive course? At a serious university?» (Poor)
- Paolo is only teaching with power-point slides which he very fastely changes and doesnt give any chance to understand the lectures. It would be better if he had written more examples of the theory on the board.» (Poor)
- the lab was not great, the work stations worked poor. » (Fair)
- The teacher did not convey the material well. It amazes me that he still uses slides from last year when I"m pretty certain, unless he was worse last year, that the last years "teacher evaluation" he probably didn"t get good remarks both the slides and how he conveys it. His method in the exercises is the worst kind for this kind of course that needs a really BROAD knowledge of different materials. He wants us students to show up (We were about 100 I think) to an exercise class where there is one TA. The TA has direct orders not to solve any more than 2 examples and the rest we should do our selves. The second period of exercises were supposed to be used to ask the TA questions about problems... with 100 students.. this is impossible for one TA to handle!!» (Fair)
- The subjects described in the course was interesting, but the planning of the course was not good. Splitting the Physical modeling part and treating the SysId part in between made it hard to see "where the course was going". Maybe it"s better to change the handin so that the Physical modeling part can be completed before the SysId part. After we got bad data from the lab session it felt like a total waste of time. Too much time was used for choosing sampling time and calibrating the equipment, so you didn"t have time to find out why you got bad data. When we asked for good data for the first task we received for the wrong task which we didn"t understood after working with the data for a couple of hours. » (Fair)
- I think the course misses to show why we need to learn this stuff. Needs more practical stuff.» (Adequate)
- Liked the more hands-on elements like Comsol, Simulink and SITB.» (Good)
- The tutorials of the softwares has been really good» (Good)
- Sometimes topics in both lectures and exercises was really confusing.» (Good)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the laboratory experiment»
- The parameter estimation challenge. »
- Challenge. It was awesome»
- Comsol, Simulink and SITB-tutorials»
- 2h exercise lessons per week are good!»
- The lab assignment was quite interesting, but it was difficult to seek help and you always got unsatisfying answers.»
- The problem sessions.»
- The challenge»
- The computer exercises were good but crowded.»
- Not just powerpoint. »
- The exercise sessions»
- A challenge, good tutorials and the lab»
- the book, the laboratory, the challenge»
- The challange idea is good, but it was a little bit to hard to carry out. Much unnecessary time was spent on wrong things.»
- exercises session»
- No oppinions there»
- Labs, the estimation challenge»
- The challenge, it was difficult but I personally learned alot doing it.»
- The basic course idea and in which order it"s teached»
- Bond graphs!»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- the course material focusses too much on theoretical aspects of modelling-simulation, not enough on the practical aspects that as an engineer are more important.»
- More problem solving sessions,more supervision during tutorials and the lab measurements»
- The laboration. Sas not so smooth»
- Number of exercises and tutorials.»
- Do a shorter repetition on beginning of every lecture. More assistents during the lab assignment supervisions and computer exercises are needed. Provide bigger rooms for the exercises. Make deadlines and handin details clearer.»
- The teacher. Definitely. I can"t believe someone like Paolo is teaching at Chalmers. I have nothing against him in person, it is his teaching methods that are totally ineffective.»
- The worst part is definitely the teacher itself (Paolo). I think he doesn"t understand how to teach such abstract course (although I understand too that it is not easy).»
- hand out uploaded 1-2 days in advance, prerequisite knowledge could be more define. Which perhaps would make the introdction part of the course to go more smoothly and more focus could be spent on applications exercises. More soultions to the exercises since there is so few scheduled time for TA held/supporting hours.»
- 90% of the teaching method»
- Not just powerpoint and not too much talk. He should give more examples.»
- The teacher or his way to teach»
- More exercises and teacher solving lectures and solutions to the exercises. TAs should know what type of data that is captured if they hand it to students.»
- The lab exercise has to become better. Things have to work at least. »
- The robot arm lab. Almost no groups managded to get usefull meassurments.»
- The lab assignment. It took too much time and the lab assistant did not seem to know the topic, so there was not much help during the lab process. Also, the data acquisision during the lab failed for many students. The finite elements part do not seem to be a part of the course. - One lecture on this topic could be skipped as one lecture is by far too short time to understand (even as an introduction to) FEM.»
- I think that the students should have access to solutions of the exercise problems given in the course, not just the answers. The students can make their own decisions regarding when to look on the solutions.»
- Paolo should slow down a little bit.»
- The lab assignment. no one seemed to be sure what we were supposed to do, not even the TA»
- The lectures are based on powerpoint slides which makes formulas hard to grasp. It would be better if he had more examples on the blackboard.»
- Less powerpoint based lectures, more interactive problemsolving lectures»
- The lecture method where Paolo is only showing powerpoint slides.»
- The answeres to the problems that you should solve through out the course needs to be more informative so that you can understand how they should be solved. The labassignment is very confusing and could be explaind more.»
- The lab assignment should be more clear, hard to understand what to do. More time to ask questions. Develop the challange. »
- The split-up of the physical modeling part. The lab session.»
- The lectures.»
- slides for this kind of course is probably not adequate. Too much information are skipped with slides, which would not happen with a on board written course. »
- The lab assignment, specially the system identification part. I honestly didn"t learn anything from it since the lab equipment didn"t work, the description in the lab pm was poor and this resulted in that matlab was of no use for the task. As I said, I didn"t learn anything from it»
- More emphasis should be put on the lab. Perhaps more time to do the experiments and more discussion of what expectations were for the final report. »
- I generally thought that the order of the lectures was good, apart from the DAE section. It felt quite rushed and "added on" to the end of the course. I feel that it should probably have been included as final section to the bond graph part of the course.»
- The Challange should be clearer. Things like "you should have used the easiest possible way to solve this task, not the methods from this course" pisses me of. Not all teachers reson like that and I don"t have time for mindgames with the examinator. BE CLEAR. Also, things like "Add noise, i.e. with noise" *I add white noise* "0 points: adding white noise is not realistic. -I KNOW BUT YOU TOLD ME TO DO IT! again... mindgames... be clear, like: "Add noise and motivate your solution." Also: the Lab-PM could use an update. It"s poorly structured. »
- paolo should write on the board that would help a lot, and we should have gotten more information to solve the challenge»
- add one or more lecture to do exercises with a teacher attending.»

18. What master programme are you enrolled on?

We ask this because the course is compulsory for two programmes.

48 svarande

Systems, control and mechatronics»29 60%
Biomedical engineering»15 31%
Other»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 1.47

- Exchange» (Other)
- Mechanical engineering» (Other)

19. Additional comments

- Sometimes it was hard to follow the lectures, but can"t really say why.»
- I"m not trying to disrespect Paulo in anyway and I think he can be a great teacher with slight modifications, I hope I get to take another class where he is teaching and see that this was just a one time thing.»
- I"m not happy to have taken this class...»
- I do not think that the assistants in the Lab assigment was well prepared. »
- The laboratory robot arms didn"t work for 3 of the 4 groups that were on our laboratory occasion where I were booked, so we could get any relevant data, that was rather a disappointment, though I think it were a interesting exercise.»
- For lab session on monday morning, enough chairs should be available for all students to be able to sit, especially when the lab is compulsory and all students have to be present»
- Paolo should aim on explaining better and not to fast. Also I think he should stop being so theoretical in his lectures and instead show how some of the things we learn are used in the industry.»
- Automotive Industry is on current look out for simulation engineers,hence it should be indicated to Automotive students as a optional course especially for vehicle level simulations.»
- The course is interesting and over all Im happy with it.»
- Make sure to book rooms with chairs for all student»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.5

Kursutvärderingssystem från