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.

MPR034 - Manufacturing processes, autumn 2012, MPR034

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-26 - 2012-11-22
Antal svar: 45
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 58%
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.

45 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»17 37%
Around 20 hours/week»16 35%
Around 25 hours/week»6 13%
Around 30 hours/week»2 4%
At least 35 hours/week»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- at least 50» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

45 svarande

0%»1 2%
25%»4 8%
50%»3 6%
75%»11 24%
100%»26 57%

Genomsnitt: 4.26

- it where better to read and summarize the with the course literature than be on the lectures. » (0%)
- only because the lectures were colliding with another course.» (25%)
- Good lectures! » (75%)

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?

45 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 6%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»17 37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»25 55%

Genomsnitt: 3.42

- The goals+reading instructions were very useful.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- Good to point out that the course is not going into details that much. That helped alot...» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- really good» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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.

42 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»2 4%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»39 92%
No, the goals are set too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.97

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

43 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»23 53%
Yes, definitely»18 41%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- I think the examination tested some details which were not relevant.» (To some extent)
- The exam was very consistent with the goals» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

45 svarande

Small extent»4 8%
Some extent»10 22%
Large extent»19 42%
Great extent»12 26%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

- It seems that Gustav need to put all areas into their real context, to give better understanding what the process should be used to. in general show more energy to the lectures!» (Small extent)
- The lectures where interesting and well focused on the important parts. The guest lectures was really good, more would be better.» (Great extent)

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

45 svarande

Small extent»2 4%
Some extent»9 20%
Large extent»26 57%
Great extent»8 17%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- Litterature is a bit to complex regarding what the course aims to teach. Maybe consider making a more standard compendium without lots of articles?» (Some extent)

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

45 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 2%
Rather well»27 60%
Very well»17 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- The first Lab where good in pingpong but the next two where not done in the same way, which give none feedback.» (Rather badly)
- Of course there was some trouble with the marks on pingpong for the last two assignments but hopefully it will sort itself out for the best.» (Rather well)
- Apart from some problems with ping-pong and every group member being unable to look at the status of reports everything worked fine.» (Rather well)
- Pingpong is not optimal.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

45 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»11 24%
Very good»26 57%
I did not seek help»8 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

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

45 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 2%
Rather well»15 33%
Very well»28 62%
I did not seek cooperation»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.64

11. How was the course workload?

45 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»5 11%
Adequate»34 75%
High»5 11%
Too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- Only the process comparison really took some time to do.» (Low)
- More labs maybe?» (Low)
- Much to learn!» (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

45 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»4 8%
Adequate»23 51%
High»16 35%
Too high»2 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- because i followed three courses.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

45 svarande

Poor»1 2%
Fair»2 4%
Adequate»8 17%
Good»25 55%
Excellent»9 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.86 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- If the course should focus more on what process to use when instead of how are the process execute it should be more in use for the students» (Poor)
- More labs!!!» (Adequate)
- It is a good course and the professor is very nice/good. However, some more practical exercises would be very helpful. We did have some videos for example to watch on our own but more of that in class, more seeing things etc would be super good. » (Good)
- Focus is not so much on what is "generall knowlegde" but in alternete manufacturing methods used more often on a larger production plant rather than a small workshop.» (Good)
- Very good slides as studymaterial. » (Good)
- Very well organized course! One of the best organized courses during my five years on chalmers. No problems with comunications or handouts at all...» (Excellent)
- I think there is room for adding more content. Add one more lab?» (Excellent)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The labs! They are VERY interesting and makes learning a lot easier and more fun. »
- The content of the course is very interesting, and the binder helpful.»
- Practical laboratories. Getting a machining lab will be great.»
- The labs. They helped a lot to understand what those techniques are and how they work. And also the guest lectures should be preserved. »
- Guest lectures»
- the labs»
- Good labs and exercises. »
- Everything...»
- The weightage given to conventional process rather than unconventional process»
- More or less everything.»
- Labs are good and course materials is also fine»
- The labs and the process comparison. I think it was a valuable lesson in the process comparison to be forced to find data ourselves rather than get everything as usual.»
- The labs»
- Labs and slides »
- The lab work»
- The lab sessions»
- Labs.»
- everything thought thid should be made available for the up coming year»
- The labs are good to understand topics more in details.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Exam just covered some parts. You can have good knowlege of the course content but still preform poorly on the exam.. »
- The slides are not clear enough some time. With the explanations of the teacher it was ok, but I think it"s impossible to read them without attend the lecture»
- Everything was adequate and significant. Maybe the machines from the lab are kind of old but they still work so no complaints there.»
- There were some parts, for instance process selection which was just briefly mentioned and didn"t feel important for the course, only mentioned to say it existed. This could be removed for next year.»
- More guest lectures»
- the 8-10 lecture hours»
- More labs because it was fun and lots have been learned from those occations. »
- Try to figure out if ping-pong can be fixed so all groupmembers can se status and handins.»
- The no of lab exercises can be increased.»
- some of the functions regarding ping pong assignment submissions did not work, it is better to change it.»
- Additional lab work and more precised course material for high strength steels, shearing and surface topography. (also more clear notes and goals for the above topics)»
- More labs and more practical learning »
- This course should not be mandatory, machining is not interesting for most students in this masters program.»
- lectures & context »
- Nothing»
- The visits companies could focus more on processes»
- Have something more than the single exam making up the grade»
- introduction and chapter 12»
- Nothing.»
- not that much change expected»
- More labs»
- Might be nice with more hands-on labs as discussed during evaluation lecture.»
- focus more on demostration during lectures. In this way it"s easier to understand and to memorize things.»

16. Additional comments

- All cred to the professor! Very helpful and knew a lot. »
- To the reading instructions, there were comments about the importance of the various sections, from low to high. When it says low, I assume it is not very relevant for the course, only to be read to get the total picture of the subject and thus no questions on the exam on these sections. Then why is there questions on the exam about this? Shouldn"t the exam test the details of high importance?»
- I consider that the most interesting aspect of the course are the labs. It would be good if there were more lab sessions.»
- Very good class and info that help to fulfill and understand the program. »
- Overall there was not any major problems with this course.»
- This course is to bad for having as a intro course at production, if you chose it by your self OK but not have a mandatory course that not keep this standard...»
- Good course »
- None.»
- nothin to comment»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.86

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.86
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.71

Kursutvärderingssystem från