Visa resultat

MPR 271 - Simulation of Production Systems 2012, MPR 271

Your own effort

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

23 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		4		17%
Around 20 hours/week»		8		34%
Around 25 hours/week»		6		26%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		8%
At least 35 hours/week»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.65

- Kind of unequal distribution, towards the beginning the course load was very light. This last week, preparing the project, is looking like a couple 35-40 hour weeks.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- On average. The other course Mtt095 had very short deadlines, and was prioitized» (Around 20 hours/week)
- hade velat lagt mer tid dock tog production management all extra tid man hade» (Around 20 hours/week)
- More in the end when the extra tasks and the report was going to be done.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- I had to spend extra time on the most of the tasks since I was working by myself. But there is always good in every situation, and in this case my learning outcome is extremely high because I solved every part of the project by myself. » (At least 35 hours/week)

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

23 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		2		8%
50%»		2		8%
75%»		8		34%
100%»		11		47%

Genomsnitt: 4.21

- Wanted to attend 100%, but could not attend some lectures due to clashes with other engagements.» (75%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		0		0%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		6		26%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		17		73%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- While working on a project, I barely find some time to consider goals. Probably it is because of me not the course or study-way in Chalmers» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- The new formulated goals, grouped in different categories make more clear to understand the course goals.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- With the proposed new detailed objectives, sufficient clarity is provided! In the last PM it was e.g. not clear how much rough coding and also mathematics behind the model was needed.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

23 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		21		91%
No, the goals are set too high»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- Maybe this is because I found this quite interesting. I would guess people having problems with coding would say there might be too few credits in regards to the needed effort.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- For the background, you should state as a prerequisite in the PM that programming experience is useful. Having coded in other languages before made the coding in automod much easier - it may be another language, but the methodology and way of thinking usually it is the same. I can imagine that it could be very difficult for someone that has never coded before.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		8		36%
Yes, definitely»		14		63%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.63

- Since I was working by myself, the knowledge test was optinonal from my point of view. » (To some extent)
- Considering the examination, as the writting knowledge test on day 13th December, I think that this exam does assess the main objectives of the course, that in my opinion are learning to use Automod.» (To some extent)
- The projekt had earned from more taught knowledge from more narrow tasks. A suggestion is that there should be a oreparative course covering some of the syllabus, and a more extension projekt in a second course » (To some extent)
- Regarding "Manage the necessary input data for Discrete Event Simulation models." it would have been nice to get some kind of exercise in the project where collection of data had to be done like in the extra taks. Unfortunately, implementation of that extra task was tried in the end and it would have been preferable to investigate that working procedure more thorough.» (Yes, definitely)

6. Would you prefer more detailed learning objectives?

23 svarande

Yes, the detailed objectives were good.»		18		78%
Yes, but not as detailed as in the "reading directions".»		1		4%
No, the current objectives are better.»		4		17%
I don"t know/have not read the learning objectives.»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.39

- Absolutely. It is much better for the students to really know what to study. Otherwise the challenge is about guessing what will be examined...» (Yes, the detailed objectives were good.)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		4		17%
Large extent»		13		56%
Great extent»		6		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.08

- Without the guidance of assistants and yours, I would have stuck somewhere and porbably failed.» (Large extent)
- Maybe more coding by hand/livecoding on projector could be done. It is nice to see livecoding, then it is possible to see how to think and where usual error occurs. Is the visualization lecture really necessary???? I would not think so.» (Large extent)
- Especially the lectures in the beginning were important to get an idea for simulation and how automod works. However, a major part of the learning was done by the modeling exercise and gswa or automod user"s guide.» (Large extent)
- The teaching, particularly from Jon was critical for our learning.» (Great extent)

8. To what extent were you satisfied with lectures given by the following lecturers?

Matrisfråga

- Jon - a little confusing and improvable structure at the beginning, but got much better later! Jonatan - excellent demonstration of the 3D scanner, that was really interesting! Nils - Interesting to see how they work in praxis Bertil - not a very pedagogical and good lecturer. Please consider someone else for this. He already has a bad reputation leading to students not attending his lectures or courses.»

Anders Skoogh
22 svarande

Excellent (5)»		16		72%
Very Good (4)»		6		27%
Fair (3)»		0		0%
Weak (2)»		0		0%
Poor (1)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.27

Jon Andersson
22 svarande

Excellent (5)»		14		63%
Very Good (4)»		6		27%
Fair (3)»		2		9%
Weak (2)»		0		0%
Poor (1)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.45

Björn Johansson
21 svarande

Excellent (5)»		12		57%
Very Good (4)»		7		33%
Fair (3)»		2		9%
Weak (2)»		0		0%
Poor (1)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.52

Jonatan Berglund
21 svarande

Excellent (5)»		10		47%
Very Good (4)»		9		42%
Fair (3)»		2		9%
Weak (2)»		0		0%
Poor (1)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.61

Bertil Gustafsson
20 svarande

Excellent (5)»		5		25%
Very Good (4)»		2		10%
Fair (3)»		4		20%
Weak (2)»		4		20%
Poor (1)»		5		25%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

Nils Bengtsson (ÅF)
22 svarande

Excellent (5)»		7		31%
Very Good (4)»		12		54%
Fair (3)»		3		13%
Weak (2)»		0		0%
Poor (1)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.81

9. To what extent has the course literature been of help for your learning?

23 svarande

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		4		17%
Large extent»		12		52%
Great extent»		7		30%

Genomsnitt: 3.13

- I would prefer a more in-depth manual. GSWA is a very basic approach to AutoMod and frequently was insufficient to answer my questions.» (Large extent)
- GSWA was really good even though some information was found in the automod help. Lectures are good as complementary learnings beside the project coding!» (Large extent)
- Especially GSWA was helpful» (Large extent)
- Without the written material, I would not have written a single piece of code.» (Great extent)
- Also a very important part: Automod help. Used excessively!» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		1		4%
Rather well»		9		39%
Very well»		13		56%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- Nice to work with pingpong» (Very well)

11. What is your opinion about the project?

Not good»		0		0%
Acceptable»		0		0%
Quite good»		11		47%
Excellent»		12		52%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- Very time requiring» (Quite good)
- It"s good, it"s challenging while being do-able.» (Quite good)
- It felt like there was a gap in level of the two extra tasks. The order point strategy was much more nice! Maybe this was the intention..? » (Quite good)
- Very interesting to do. Some things were unclear in the beginning, but clarified later, and help was always available. A lot of work to do, but that was known before, so it is ok.» (Excellent)
- It was fun and challenging, especially extra task A was tough. But I think it is good with the challenge to enhance the learning.» (Excellent)

12. How much did you learn from the project?

23 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		0		0%
4»		5		21%
5»		18		78%

Genomsnitt: 4.78 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- A lot of it did boil down to "common sense." Even without the background knowledge, I think I would have done a decent job of "figuring out" what the problems were in the production flow.» (4)
- I suppose this has been the most "value-adding" course of all my student life.» (5)
- Almost all. Very good.» (5)
- First time a "real" production system analysis and improvement was performed. one of the most interesting topics.» (5)

13. How was the coverage of the lab exercises (tutorial and modeling exercise)?

They covered too little»		4		17%
The covered about the right amount»		18		78%
They covered somewhat too much»		0		0%
They covered much too much»		1		4%
Don"t know»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.91

- it can be more explanation and practice on coding, which will help students start to do their project quickly.» (They covered too little)
- Perhaps the modelling exercise not enough for facing later the project if you dont have any knowledge about simulation.» (The covered about the right amount)
- Maybe there could be something about conveyors in the exercises too? » (The covered about the right amount)
- A conveyor could already be added in the modeling exercise. Also some smaller useful things for the project could be included, like nextof distribution or some more little programming tips that were given in later lectures.» (The covered about the right amount)

14. What is your opinion on the "Knowledge test"?

Not good»		0		0%
Acceptable»		10		43%
Quite good»		10		43%
Excellent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

- I think it does not examine at all the main objects of the course (automod). Although you don"t have done anything in the project, you can get full points.» (Acceptable)
- Students have spent a lot of time on coding and lab exercises, while Knowledge test that focuses on theory part does not help to do the project.» (Acceptable)
- The test was as expected I think... But, is it really necessary to remember Bank"s methodology by heart? » (Acceptable)
- rätt lätt» (Acceptable)
- Fair questions and the reading directions were good to follow. Only the banks model task was a little "too much". is it really necessary to name every step? Isn"t the essential point to understand how it works in general and be able to describe this methodology in a way that shows understanding?» (Quite good)

15. What is your opinion on the paper presentations?

Not good»		2		8%
Acceptable»		10		43%
Quite good»		10		43%
Excellent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

- The papers were too basic. Our presentation was nothing new for the audience, and the other presentations bored me. Papers with a more specific focus could have been more interesting. During my undergrad, we had to do similar paper presentations (we had to track down our own paper, though), and the task was to pick a topic that was relevant to the topic of discussion in that week"s lecture. It was student presenting each week during a 15-week term. An approach like that might be worthwhile, otherwise the material in the reports is a little redundant by the time we get around to presenting.» (Not good)
- There may have been some interesting and useful points, but: - the time for the presentations could have been used (and needed) for the project - the presentations appeared to be a little "extra", not connected to the rest of the course, just to have some extra examination criteria - the interest of the students was limited. everybody was focused on the project and I for example felt a little "forced" to listen, or did it just to be polite.» (Acceptable)
- maybe the presentations could be done a little bit earlier, since the papers can help in the project.» (Quite good)
- Nice to know some additional facts. It was nice to have that as an "additional" task which does not required too much time from time project working time.» (Quite good)

16. What is your opinion about the field trip to ÅF?

Not good»		0		0%
Acceptable»		3		13%
Quite good»		8		34%
Excellent»		12		52%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

- Unfortunately, I couldn"t attend, but I think it would have been very interesting.» (Quite good)
- It was good to see industry application of what they do. I think it would have been good to see a bit more, though--perhaps join them when they do a bit of data gathering at an actual location, get a feel for how the field work portion of DES works since we"re already acquainted with the behind-the-desk view of things.» (Quite good)
- Would"ve been nice to actually see more of the practical work, e.g. factory visit + present DES model of the factory.» (Quite good)
- it provides a good chance to contact real industry and understand the application of what we have learnt.» (Excellent)
- You shall definately keep this. It shows this knowledge actually might be necessary in industry.» (Excellent)
- Both very good to get some insight into DES praxis and to get in conctact with a possible future employer!» (Excellent)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 4.78

Study climate

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

Very poor»		1		4%
Rather poor»		1		4%
Rather good»		4		18%
Very good»		16		72%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

- Help was always available, quick, good and nice.» (Very poor)
- There were always assistant teachers in the lab. Nevertheless, some times they have never read the project PM, so their help was not very useful. And also, sometimes two teachers give us different answers.» (Rather good)
- Especially from Jon!» (Very good)
- Very good feedback, especially by email!» (Very good)
- Fast response on hand-ins!» (Very good)
- The staff was very helpful during the course.» (Very good)

18. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow student worked?

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		2		8%
Rather well»		4		17%
Very well»		15		65%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- It"s probably just me. The project didn"t seem complex enough to justify a second group member working on it.» (Rather poorly)
- Very well I think!» (Very well)
- Successful project work!» (Very well)
- I did not have a fellow student.» (I did not seek cooperation)

19. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		2		9%
Adequate»		8		36%
High»		7		31%
Too high»		5		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- Aside from the cake-walk tutorials and modeling exercise, the only thing in the course is the final project, and that was a bit tricky at times but overall easy enough. Most of the time just goes into running simulations (obviously) and trying different scenarios, but that"s just time-consuming and not HARD. » (Low)
- not so balanced, a bit higher at the end.» (Adequate)
- High, but as expected, and adequate for such a project. Could have just been critical if another course would have taken as much amount of work too. One idea - take the average workload of this evaluation and include is at a hint in the course description!» (Adequate)

20. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		6		26%
High»		8		34%
Too high»		9		39%

Genomsnitt: 4.13

- Variance - sometimes low, sometimes quite a lot. in average it was fair.» (Adequate)
- High, sometimes even very high. But this was mostly because of the high workload in the course Production Management which took about 75-80% of study time spent each week.» (High)
- Mtt 095, Peter almström created this» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

21. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Adequate»		0		0%
Good»		8		36%
Excellent»		14		63%

Genomsnitt: 4.63

- Definitely one of the better courses I read!» (Excellent)
- I am very satisfied with the course, partly because I liked the subject and also because the project was fun and the staff was helpful.» (Excellent)

22. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

23. What should definitely be changed to next year?

24. Additional comments