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.

MPCSN 1213-1 Computer networks, EDA387|DIT663

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-25 - 2012-11-09
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 42%
Kontaktperson: Maria Sörner»

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.

32 svarande

University of Gothenburg»4 12%
Chalmers University of Technology»28 87%

Genomsnitt: 1.87

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.

33 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»7 21%
Around 20 hours/week»16 48%
Around 25 hours/week»7 21%
Around 30 hours/week»2 6%
At least 35 hours/week»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.21

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

33 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»1 3%
50%»4 12%
75%»11 33%
100%»17 51%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

- Had overlapping courses» (50%)
- So this course does not respect its block schedule, I were not able to come to practises on mondays because it overlapped with other course. Please, respect the courses block scheluding, otherwise any semester planning done by a student(specially international ones that can mix courses from different plans) will have no purpose.» (50%)
- I missed the security part as I need to prepare another exam.» (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?

33 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»1 3%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»20 60%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»12 36%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- could be clearer on self-stabilization algorithms» (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.

32 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 3%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»28 87%
No, the goals are set too high»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 2.06

- This course gives a very fragmented impression, some parts too low goals and some things very hard.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- My background is not so good for this course.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- The self methods part and network security could have been left out for exams as it is being taught in other courses later in the programme. Both these topics were good for brushing up basics but was too much to study for exams.» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

33 svarande

No, not at all»2 6%
To some extent»21 63%
Yes, definitely»10 30%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.24

- 40% of the points on the exam was concerning one topic, which I find to be a problem. If you did not fully understand this part of the course you are almost certain to fail.» (To some extent)
- I don"t think self-methods were so important so they cover more than 33.33% of the scoring of the exam.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

33 svarande

Small extent»3 9%
Some extent»12 36%
Large extent»14 42%
Great extent»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

- I mean in the aspect of API, it really disappointing» (Small extent)
- The teachers felt very confused except from Marina.» (Small extent)
- The last few lectures were more like to just finish the syllabus than to explain things to the students.» (Some extent)

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

33 svarande

Small extent»9 27%
Some extent»9 27%
Large extent»11 33%
Great extent»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- I did not use anything but the provided sheets. I did purchase the self-stabilisation book out of interest though.» (Small extent)
- I mean in the aspect of API(programming parts), it really disappointing» (Small extent)
- For some parts of the course there were not enough materials or they were given late.» (Some extent)
- For most part. Some parts not at all. » (Large extent)
- The lecture slides for all the courses apart from for the self methods were good. The self methods slides were hard to understand for first time readers.» (Large extent)
- The course book is great and you can see clearly than lecture content is based on book content.» (Great extent)

9. Were the post-lecture questions useful?

33 svarande

No, not at all»6 18%
To some extent»12 36%
Yes, definitely»14 42%
I don"t know/have not done them yet»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- Didn"t like the post-lectures at al. Found the questions as well as the answares confusing. » (No, not at all)
- I"d say the questions are good, but answers were presented out of order (e.g "None of the above" being the first option). At some point checkboxes should have been used instead of radio buttons. Correct answers were NOT presented after answering, which was counter productive.» (No, not at all)
- I would like to have more questions but I don"t like the format of the post/pre lecture questions. I would like to have questions to work with for each week and not multiple choice.» (To some extent)
- The practice with pre and post lecture question was very useful for me. Though it would be great if there are answers for all of them even if you miss one session.» (Yes, definitely)

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

33 svarande

Very badly»3 9%
Rather badly»6 18%
Rather well»19 57%
Very well»5 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- No structure at all!!! Just a big mess. A CLEAR readinglist is a MUST for next year!» (Very badly)
- A lot of reconstructions went on in the beginning of the course but eventually it worked out so that it was managable atleast.» (Rather badly)
- Hopeless to find things on pingpong. The self*-handouts was good.» (Rather badly)
- The pingpong page isn"t inuitive. It would be better if all subpages was exposed in the left tree menu.» (Rather badly)
- The course webpage is not intuitive at all. Handouts were desorganized until almost the very end and course content were diseminated in so many diferent places. Sign up for practises and assignments were tricky too.» (Rather badly)
- Fragmented, hard to find since no solid structure. » (Rather badly)
- Some handouts was only avalible in print would have liked them in digital form» (Rather well)
- I liked the idea of pre- post- questions, but they have to be better organised.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

33 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 6%
Rather good»9 27%
Very good»19 57%
I did not seek help»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

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

33 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 3%
Rather well»7 21%
Very well»25 75%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

13. How was the course workload?

32 svarande

Too low»1 3%
Low»3 9%
Adequate»23 71%
High»3 9%
Too high»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- I mean Protocol aspect. I thought the Protocol aspect (i.e Ali part) should be more treated in this course than the programming part » (Too low)
- The networking course as a whole had too many things put together. Was good for students to learn and brush up basics but as a quarterly course it was too much to cover for exams.» (High)
- The methods part are hard to learn and hard to understand.» (Too high)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

33 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 3%
Adequate»19 57%
High»12 36%
Too high»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

- As a quarterly course it was too much to cover for exams.» (High)
- Self stabilization is too high/much with high disappointing topics» (High)
- I cannot catch up the speed of this course.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

33 svarande

Poor»2 6%
Fair»7 21%
Adequate»10 30%
Good»12 36%
Excellent»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.15 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The course was too splintered between the three parts (interconnections, sockets, self-*). One of the three parts should be removed in favor of the two others.» (?)
- Course is so divided it seems like to different courses. Changes to the course was made in the middle of the term and some topics were totally removed from the course (routing protocols). The exam was too heavy on self methods. Was not told of how many points the different parts of the course would compose the exam. » (Poor)
- To much focus on self*. Would have been nice to do more on apis .» (Fair)
- Too little of too much. Socket API introduction was good.» (Fair)
- The course seems to be a "lot of things" that has not so much in common. One day we discussed IPv6 and the next day self-stabilizing algorithms. There is to much small things in the same course.» (Fair)
- Protocol aspect (i.e Ali part) should be more treated in this course than the programming part because the programming part is disappointing » (Fair)
- If the course would be more structured, it should be an good course. » (Adequate)
- Still, I can learn quite a lot.» (Good)
- Programming labs were a bit too easy. Not sure what I learned except the names of C functions. Let us develop more of the content. I spent about 3 hrs in total programming.» (Good)
- A broad and interesting course covering a lot of network related topics. Nice introduction to the Msc programme.» (Excellent)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The api section as well as protocols»
- pre/post lecture questions was good. But make sure to upload all questions and answers after the deadline to give students ability to catch up if a deadline is missed. C-programming review was great!»
- Labs, pre- -post reviews, »
- Labs»
- The lab on DNS was a good hands-on experience (although as noted below I"m not convinced that old material like DNS should be part of the course). The lab on IPv6 was also useful but would have benefited from better course literature (in fact, finding good overviews of IPv6 seems to be difficult wherever you look).»
- The IPv6 especially and all parts of Ali"s lectures»
- The programming part of the course was very helpful. The IPV6 and DNS lab was very helpful. »
- The labs were great!»
- Self-stabilization»
- Reduce Programming part and more of Protocol part (i.e Ali part)»
- everything is fine, but self method seems very tough»
- Everything»
- The course structure. »
- I think in general that the course has a good structure and I believe that the labs and post-lecture questions are very good.»
- everything is ok»
- yes»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Please upload answers to previous exams, and more exams if possible. »
- The design of the Exam.»
- Elad needs to work on his lecturing skills. He were not able to explain network api or self methods in a way that was comprehensible or enjoyable. The self method part is confusing why its even in this course. No good reading material can be found in the topic. Exercises are hard to understand. This course really need to change.»
- Less focus on self stabilization»
- Please respect course block schedule(do not schedule activities or lectures out of your block)»
- there was some bad luck this year with illnesses etc, but make sure to have a plan to cover all intended material. It seems like we this year totally missed everything about routing and routing protocols. This is not covered in detail in prerequisite courses either, It would be a great thing to make sure to cover this.»
- Having three course books is really not sustainable. In practice having three books generally means that students for various reasons don"t get any of them, which makes every part of the course suffer. Additionally, the inclusion of topics that we have already studied (in Computer Communication), such as DNS, ARP, and DHCP, is confusing. On the one hand, it seems unnecessary because we have already studied it and so don"t learn anything from reading it again. On the other hand, including it requires us to once again study all the details of it (DHCP lease times, ARP caching, etc.) for the exam, so it"s unclear what the intention behind it is. I would have preferred a much more in-depth look at IPv6, which felt like the most difficult and relevant part to me.»
- The methods parts, sometimes the solutions were very unclear and the teacher was not really good at explaining»
- Try and focus more on programming API as it is required throughout the masters programme. The self methods was a good part but we are repeating all the algorithms in Distributed Systems so could have been cancelled out. For the exams, the course had too much to cover.»
- The teachers of this course need to communicate better with each other about what this course should teach. It is too fragmented and hard to understand what I should learn, which makes it hard to have time to actually study. Too much time is spent on the easy stuff, and not enough on the more challenging parts. Skip the part of internet technologies that everyone should already know and is this an algorithms course? Need to teach the self* parts in another way with more examples and facts not only proofs. »
- Less self*-methods.»
- Two lectures on C syntax is too much. Spend time on network (application) security instead.»
- more of Protocol part (i.e Ali part) should be intensively handle than programming e.g 80% to 20 respectively »
- preferably, you could add some routing protocols »
- Less number of questions from self methods in the exams.»
- The labs. It would be great if there are some labs for self-stabilizing methods, and more freedom in programming.»
- Not so much self * methods I did not like it.»
- I believe that the points on the exam did not correspond very good to the content of the course, it was to many points on self-methods and proves than I think was reasonable.»
- everything is ok»
- A little bit, I don"t understand why in the exam there was a lot of question about the same theme.»
- The part of self-methods should be teached in a different way to get the students to understand. I don"t know anyone that feels secure on that part.»

18. Additional comments

- ---»
- Introduce bonus depending on homework assignment or the pre-/-post reviews.»
- I did not really grasp the Self* part of the course. I have read the Algoritms course but could not really connect the dots between these two.»
- I am very frustrated that we were told there would be no writing of proofs on the exam and yet almost half of the exam turned out to be about proving properties of self-stabilizing systems. It"s good that feedback on the course was openly and actively solicited, but it did not seem to ultimately have any effect on the exam.»
- The slides for Self methods were not at all self explanatory. For a person who is going through them for the first time, it is hard to understand.»
- About 50% of the maxpoints on the exam was about self*-methods. I mean, really? This isn"t a course in algorithms and proofs. 20-30% would be more reasonable.»
- The Exams are disappointing compared to old exams and all what lecturer said we are not going to get in exam all came out. :( i mean in programming aspect.»
- none»
- Self Methods was daunting, we could understand it, but still it was very difficult.»
- I don"t like that the examiner tells us his last lecture that the selt-methods part on the exam will be a very small part OR doesn"t exist att all. And when you writes the exam, it contains about 50% of the total points about self-methods. TOTALLY SICK.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.15

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.15
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.53

Kursutvärderingssystem från