Visa resultat

Audiotechnology and Acoustics 2012, VTA135

Your own effort

1. What priority did you give this course?

Very high»		6		40%
High»		6		40%
Average»		3		20%
Low»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

- I wrote the last parts of my master"s thesis in parallell, so I could not always prioritize the ATA course. » (High)

2. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

15 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		3		20%
Around 20 hours/week»		5		33%
Around 25 hours/week»		4		26%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		13%
At least 35 hours/week»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.53

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

15 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		0		0%
100%»		15		100%

Genomsnitt: 5

4. How large part of the exercise classes offered did you attend?

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		1		6%
75%»		3		20%
100%»		11		73%

Genomsnitt: 4.66

- Missed one.» (75%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

5. To what extent do you feel you have acquired the knowledge, skills and attitudes stated in the learning outcomes?

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		5		35%
Large extent»		9		64%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- I learned a lot! But according to the "learning outcomes", some chapters were skipped (headphones, signal processing) in the lectures and I did not understand for example the basics of radiation and the idea of working with impedances. I missed working on basic understanding of the subjects.» (Some extent)

6. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		13		92%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		5		35%
Yes, definitely»		9		64%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

Astrid Pieringer"s lectures

8. How to you judge Astrid"s ability to communicate on the right level, with clarity, and enthusiasm?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		3		21%
Average»		11		78%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- I felt there was a lack of communication skills. One was sometimes left wondering the same question one just asked, almost like there was no real "want" for everyone in the classroom to understand. No offense of course, Astrid was good overall.» (Average)
- We can feel that Astrid knows what she is talking about, but she seemed a bit confused to be in front of the students, and jump over some "technical" calculation or explanation about calculation that are obvious for her, but very tricky to get when it is the first time you saw that. I"m especially thinking of trigonometry, introduction to complex number, complex notations for waves (what is the meaning of doing that, why)... However, the small examples she gave in her lectures where really good (calculus of the max sound pressure level, is a negative sound pressure is possible, drawings of waves...)» (Average)

9. How was the presentation speed in Astrid"s lectures?

much too slow»		0		0%
a bit too slow»		0		0%
adequate»		7		50%
a bit too fast»		7		50%
much too fast»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Too fast for explanation about maths and equation, if it is the first time you see this : I think the meaning of these parts should be explained slowly» (a bit too fast)

10. How was Astrid"s ability/will to answer questions?

Very good»		2		15%
Good»		6		46%
Average»		4		30%
Bad»		1		7%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- Sometimes it was difficult to communicate with Astrid since she was gone a lot with her baby. » (Average)
- Referring to previous comment. I thought that the question was sometimes thrown away due to lack of understanding it. » (Bad)

11. How do you judge Astrid"s knowledge within the subject?

Very good»		6		42%
Good»		8		57%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.57

- Can"t say otherwise. She is a smart teacher!» (Very good)

Per Sjösten"s lectures

12. How to you judge Per"s ability to communicate on the right level, with clarity, and enthusiasm?

Very good»		7		46%
Good»		7		46%
Average»		1		6%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.6

- I thought it was good. No real comments.» (Good)
- he is enthusiastic, which is very good.» (Good)

13. How was the presentation speed in Per"s lectures?

much too slow»		0		0%
a bit too slow»		2		13%
adequate»		11		73%
a bit too fast»		2		13%
much too fast»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 3

14. How was Per"s ability/will to answer questions?

Very good»		9		60%
Good»		5		33%
Average»		1		6%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.46

15. How do you judge Per"s knowledge within the subject?

Very good»		12		80%
Good»		3		20%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.2

- Per knew a lot about what he was teaching but didn"t always follow the chapters in the book, which made some of the exercise tasks more challenging since they followed the book more closely.» (Very good)

Wolfgang Kropp"s lectures

16. How to you judge Wolfgang"s ability to communicate on the right level, with clarity, and enthusiasm?

Very good»		11		73%
Good»		4		26%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.26

- One of the best teachers I"ve had.» (Very good)

17. How was the presentation speed in Wolfgang"s lectures?

much too slow»		0		0%
a bit too slow»		0		0%
adequate»		12		80%
a bit too fast»		3		20%
much too fast»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- It was great. A bit slow at times, but that"s only for the best so that everyone can understand. Keep it up!» (adequate)

18. How was Wolfgang"s ability/will to answer questions?

Very good»		11		73%
Good»		4		26%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.26

- Also best. Very good.» (Very good)
- sometimes he starts to answer before the question is finished» (Good)

19. How do you judge Wolfgang"s knowledge within the subject?

Very good»		15		100%
Good»		0		0%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1

- He is a professor in the subject... I"d have to say very good.» (Very good)

Pontus Thorsson"s lecture

20. How to you judge Pontus"s ability to communicate on the right level, with clarity, and enthusiasm?

Very good»		7		50%
Good»		5		35%
Average»		2		14%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.64

- very enthusiastic, and to the point» (Very good)

21. How was the presentation speed in Pontus"s lecture?

much too slow»		0		0%
a bit too slow»		0		0%
adequate»		12		85%
a bit too fast»		1		7%
much too fast»		1		7%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 3.21

22. How was Pontus"s ability/will to answer questions?

Very good»		6		54%
Good»		5		45%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		4

Genomsnitt: 1.45

23. How do you judge Pontus"s knowledge within the subject?

Very good»		7		58%
Good»		5		41%
Average»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
No opinion»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.41

General on the lectures

24. Do you think you could have managed the course without going to the lectures?

Yes»		4		26%
No»		11		73%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

- yes, but would have been more difficult» (Yes)
- yes, but probably not with as good grade/learning» (Yes)
- It was a big course, I doubt it would have been good if I skipped lectures where all theory is presented.» (No)
- No because the slides wouldn"t have been enough : there is no all the comments made bu the teacher, which helps to focus on the important parts» (No)

25. Number of lectures?

Too many»		0		0%
Good»		13		86%
Too few»		2		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

- We could not work on the last subjects (sound reproduction,...) due to lack of time.» (Too few)

Alice Hoffmann"s exercise classes

26. What do you think about the type of exercise classes (i.e. preparation of tasks at home, presentation of the tasks by the students and presentation of some additional tasks by the course assistant)?

Very good»		3		20%
Good»		5		33%
Average»		5		33%
Bad»		2		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- I think it was a good way. It really made you study during the whole period (which, honestly, would not happen otherwise)» (Very good)
- I thought it was good. That way one has to be involved, and not slack behind.» (Good)
- I think it is something that is worth having» (Good)
- The idé of preparation of tasks at home was good even if it took some time that we did not have some of the weeks. I think we had the advantage of it for the exam. The presentation of tasks by the course assistant was not always clear and I got an expression that she wasn"t sure about some of the used technics and answers. » (Good)
- I"m not very fond of the ticking concept. It took very much time from other more important tasks a couple of times.» (Average)
- It is good to look at the exercises before the lectures, but this "ticking" was annoying, and for some of us stressful.» (Average)

27. How was the level of difficulty of the tasks that you had to prepare?

Much too high»		1		6%
Too high»		7		46%
Adequate»		7		46%
Too low»		0		0%
Much too low»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- Very varying level of difficulty, some were easy and some you had no idea what to do» (Too high)
- As it is the first course in the program much more help was needed to complete the tasks to get good understanding. Maybe other tasks could have been chosen than those in Mendel"s book as I had a very hard time understandning them coming from a vibration not within the subject.» (Too high)
- It was hard to do some of them and the book didn"t help so much sometimes. I felt that the some of the tasks didn"t belong to the book and we had to know it from head. It was a little bit too confusing sometimes. » (Too high)
- Sometimes too high, but overall pretty adequate. There are no examples in the book, which makes the tasks even harder...» (Adequate)
- Unfortunately, we often had to look in the book for answers, and not on the lectures notes because the timing was not matching...» (Adequate)
- since there were only three at a time, I think it was OK, but quite hard. It"s good to practice on hard problems though.» (Adequate)

28. What do you think about the percentage of exercises (60%) you had to tick? It was...

Much too high»		2		13%
Too high»		2		13%
Adequate»		11		73%
Too low»		0		0%
Much to low»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- Took too much time from other important tasks sometimes» (Too high)

29. How do you judge Alice"s ability to explain and to motivate solutions?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		2		13%
Average»		8		53%
Bad»		5		33%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- It was more just writing the solutions to the blackboard and quite little explaining. I wished to have explainations for example why we use this or this formula. More explaination of the theoretical background would be very helpful!!!» (Average)
- Tried to answer the questions but could not always give an answer. Said she would look it up till the next lecture but didn"t. Couldn"t sometimes answer to why the solution wassolved the way it was.» (Average)
- Sorry, but it was no good. At the end of each task, the whole board was cluttered with numbers and letters, with no real structure to it - so that one could look back from the beginning. A lot of errors too, but that"s only human. I think a better structure for the exercises is important. » (Bad)
- Sometimes we had the feeling that the knows the answer, but not really why, neither what were the reasons leading to that solution more than an other» (Bad)
- I would have liked her to motivate much more, for example her approaches to problems and choices of equations to use. It is not hard to solve a problem if you know how to start, the hard thing is to realise which method to use, and understand why a certain set of equations can/should be used. » (Bad)

30. How was Alice"s ability/will to answer questions?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		4		26%
Average»		8		53%
Bad»		3		20%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- OK, but I felt it was hard to really understand everything she explained... I just think she should work on structuring her solutions and way of teaching others.» (Average)
- Her answers to our questions often just repeated what was already said and were quite superficial.» (Average)
- She was a bit confused sometimes, but I can see the difficulties in having a big range of different questions. But she hasn"t the ability to answer some of the questions in a clear way.» (Average)
- could be more patient before answering. Sometimes it was hard to be understood because she was too fast answering the question she thought I was asking. This is something very common among teachers in my opinion, probably because they want so much for the student to understand.» (Average)
- As said before, Alice came with one solution, but if we don"t understand it (why, how, etc), Alice had troubles to explain us, and needed to check it to explain us the next time.» (Bad)

31. How helpful were the exercise classes (including preparation of the tasks at home) for your learning?

Very much»		1		6%
much»		5		33%
moderately»		6		40%
little»		3		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

- working on problems during the whole study period was very helpful. » (much)
- The tasks is at a much much higher level than the exam. Understood the exam perfectly well but the hometasks were sometimes impossible» (little)
- At the end it almost didn"t use my exercises notes to prepare the exam, but the solutions of the book"s task in a PDF provided by the 2nd year"s student, and the old exams provided in the course"s page.» (little)

32. Number of exercise classes?

Too many»		3		20%
Good»		11		73%
Too few»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 1.86

- I think it was too many considering the high workload during the quarter» (Too many)

Behzad Ranjbari"s labs

33. How well was the lab work prepared by the supervisor?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		4		28%
Average»		7		50%
Bad»		3		21%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.92

- Pretty good. But what came after the actual labs was really bad. » (Good)
- There was no grading or feedback provided. No one seemed to be able to adequately answer questions about the home tasks either.» (Average)
- We havent had the lecture on loudspeakers before the lab (bad planning?)» (Average)
- Some equipment didn"t work.» (Average)
- The first lab could have been better prepared. There were things missing so that we couldn"t do everything (roomcapture). The second lab was well prepared.» (Average)
- We had the impression that Behzad read some of the lab tasks for the first time when we were in the lab.» (Bad)

34. How was the supervision?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		5		35%
Average»		7		50%
Bad»		2		14%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- He often had to supervise two groups at the same time. So he had very limited time for us.» (Average)
- Just bad. There was no real order here, people running around not knowing what to do for the lab reports because our supervisors were saying different things all the time.» (Bad)

35. How was the labs" relevance to the course?

Very high»		1		7%
High»		2		14%
Good»		8		57%
Bad»		3		21%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.92

- Some things were very relevant, others much less (such as harmonic distortion).» (High)
- the antique reverberation machine in lab 2 was interesting, but didn"t really contribute to the course. It could have been demonstrated in another context.» (High)
- I think we could have accomplished the same things the lab was trying to teach or even more in SVM.» (Bad)
- Especially the first lab (anechoic chamber) had a rather poor relevance to the course.» (Bad)

36. How much knowledge did you gain from the labs?

Very much»		0		0%
Much»		4		28%
Moderately much»		8		57%
Little»		2		14%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.85

- They were good.» (Much)
- There were some things we already knew, some could not be answered and some seemed not reasonable to us.» (Little)

Course material and administration

37. How do you judge the course book ("Audiotechnology and Acoustics" by Mendel Kleiner, 3rd edition)?

Very good»		0		0%
Good»		3		20%
Average»		9		60%
Bad»		3		20%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 3

- Not enough information provided about the equations required to complete most of the tasks » (Average)
- The book expects the reader to have a higher level of knowledge than at least I had. It"s tempo was too high and didn"t really add to my understandning. The tasks at the end of the chapters were really hard and the answers couldn"t sometimes be found in the book.» (Average)
- Very hard to find relevant information. I think there is other books that are easier to understand, for example Acoustics by Heinrich Kuttruff seems to be on a better level for learning the basics. » (Average)
- It is quite good, except that the exercises" answers are sometimes wrong. At some point, when we do an exercise, if our answer doesn"t match the book"s, we don"t know anymore who is wrong and who is right. However, the lessons in the book are good, and it is nice to have some extra chapters about different subjects (headphones for example)» (Average)
- could be better on explaining concepts. It is good that it contains a little bit of everything, and I liked the parts on room acoustics.» (Average)
- Not good. Not a single example of how to solve some tasks, the text was a bit hard to follow at times, I didn"t really like it that much. I sound pretty dull, I know, but I"m only being honest.» (Bad)

38. How do you judge the additional recommended book ("Acoustics - An introduction" by Heinrich Kuttruff)?

Very good»		1		7%
Good»		6		46%
Average»		6		46%
Bad»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

- I didn"t read it» (?)
- haven"t read it.» (?)
- I checked it out sometimes, and from what I saw it was better than Mr. Kleiner"s.» (Good)
- I did not work with it, but there was to "no opinion"-option.» (Average)
- Didn"t read it.» (Average)

39. Which book would you have preferred as course book?

"Audiotechnology and Acoustics" by Mendel Kleiner, 3rd ed.»		3		21%
"Acoustics - An introduction" by Heinrich Kuttruff»		9		64%
Another book (please specify below)»		2		14%

Genomsnitt: 1.92

- Master handbook of acoustics by Everest and Pohlmann» (Another book (please specify below))

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

Very good»		5		33%
Good»		6		40%
Average»		3		20%
Bad»		1		6%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 2

- Didn"t keep up with the pace of the course» (Bad)

Summarizing questions

41. What is your general impression of the course?

Excellent»		0		0%
Good»		8		53%
Adequate»		4		26%
Fair»		3		20%
Poor»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Good course, interesting and engaging. But the administration (lab reports especially) and exercises should have been much better.» (Good)
- It could have been much(!) better, if the labs and the exercises worked better.» (Adequate)

42. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

43. What should definitely be changed to next year?

44. Additional comments