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.

MMF062 Vehicle Dynamics, Academic year 2012/2013, Studyperiod 2, MMF062

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-12-20 - 2013-01-28
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 48%
Kontaktperson: Bengt Jacobson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Maskinteknik 300 hp
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Maskinteknik 300 hp

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.

34 svarande

<15 hours/week»7 20%
Around 20 hours/week»12 35%
Around 30 hours/week»13 38%
Around 40 hours/week»2 5%
>50 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.29

- Due to time conflicts with other courses (too many of them)» (<15 hours/week)
- assignments took a lot of time to finsih» (Around 30 hours/week)
- Very time consuming course, especially assignments (Lateral).» (Around 30 hours/week)

2. Attendance on lectures

How many per cent of the lectures did you attend?

34 svarande

<25%»7 20%
25-50%»1 2%
50-75%»5 14%
>75%»21 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.17

- Due to time/schedule conflicts with other courses (too many of them)» (<25%)
- More problem solving sessions to be conducted» (50-75%)
- even though the lecture was not interesting , I had a good attendace. I hardly learnt anything from the class.» (>75%)
- the chalmers lectures were quite boring... It was sometimes just a reading of the compendium---» (>75%)

3. Attendance on assignments sessions

How many per cent of the assignments sessions did you attend?

34 svarande

<25%»8 23%
25-50%»3 8%
50-75%»2 5%
>75%»21 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.05

- Due to time/schedule conflicts with other courses (too many of them)» (<25%)
- Schedule conflicts, we worked mainly in other time.» (<25%)
- Assigments were solved mainly individually, only when we needed help we attend. » (<25%)

Teaching and course administration

4. What is your opinion of the compendium?

34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»9 26%
Rather good»20 58%
Very good»5 14%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- It needs to be more clearly organized in terms of succession and clarity of content.» (Rather bad)
- I think the compendium lack a main line to tell students what is the most important, and what is supplement for the main content. The knowledge sequence in the compendium is not very suitable for the beginner. » (Rather bad)
- It is very hard to find information from the book because of bad structure. Symbols used are rather confusing. For example, "w" is used to replave omega and also for track width.» (Rather bad)
- Something between rather bad and rather good. » (Rather bad)
- Too much information on some topics and formatting made it difficult to read.» (Rather bad)
- It gives no explaination of why. It only says how and what. You can make calculations if you know variables, but to say I want to aim for x value because it will be better than y...is completely absent.» (Rather bad)
- The notations are awfull» (Rather good)
- Some/many equations in the compendium were written in matlab code, I didn"t like it. Im very familier with matlab, but I rather read equations in a normal format. More examples maybe would be nice. » (Rather good)
- You could extend the register in the book.» (Rather good)
- To make it easier to find what you are looking for it would help to put some of the headlines on the top of the next page instead of very far down on page.» (Rather good)
- Much better than previous years. Now it is definitely readable and with some work understandable. Still some typos in it and room for improvement, but all in all a great improvement. » (Rather good)
- Some parts are not clear, the symbols are not explained well. The compendium contains quite a lot of mistakes. » (Rather good)
- I heard from seniors and other students that the compendium is better than last years. But I have not been able to judge this as I have not learnt much from the VD lecture. » (Rather good)
- sometimes it is not very clear» (Rather good)
- It is OK!» (Rather good)
- It should contain more explanations of different symbols etc. Sometimes it is difficult to catch the meaning. One additional revision is needed - also in written text. » (Rather good)
- A lot of mistakes in formulas» (Rather good)

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

32 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»2 6%
Rather well»20 62%
Very well»10 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- It would have been nice if the assignments was on the homepage at least the day before the introduction to it.» (Rather well)
- Some sort of step detailed by step solutions for the problem solving sessions would have been great. » (Rather well)
- Stangely though, the course compendium did help finishing the assignments.» (Rather well)
- Web page was always up to date but there was no coordination between the lectures and the assignment: the lectures were late so they were not useful for completing the assignments. This led to a lot of personal studying instead of guided study, to anticipate he llectures topics in order to start whith the assignments» (Rather well)
- Next year you will hopefully be more skilled with the PingPong system! ,)» (Rather well)

6. What is your opinion of the teaching in lectures?

34 svarande

Very bad»4 12%
Rather bad»10 32%
Rather good»14 45%
Very good»3 9%
No opinion»3

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- The teaching is not upto Chalmers standards. Being an International student paying full tuition fees, I expected something better. 280k SEK is a lot of money and I feel I have not got my money worth for this subject.I have to read Gillespie and other books to understand vehicle dynamics now. » (Very bad)
- I got the impression that the Benqt did not want to share his knowledge with us. I learned more from the old exams than from the lectures. His teaching pace was kind of low in some areas such as vehicle dynamics interaction with active safety and in things that needed more attention he was very fast. He took a lot of time to answer questions which students asked..I think at the first lecture he should say that we have to first read the compendium and the lectures would be a question session. Maybe, he can take a look at the exams to see where the difficulties were and he could insist during the lectures on those parts. I consider the exams as being a very good and accurate feedback to the lecturer because if most of the students do the same mistake at some questions it"s not longer the student"s fault.» (Very bad)
- The teacher wasn"t very charismatic.» (Rather bad)
- A lot of explanation of some things, maybe to much sometimes. No handouts from hand calculations exercises. If missing one, its hard to get the missed calculations solutions» (Rather bad)
- Too many arguments just "touched" and not in deep explanations. I would have preferred to have less topics but well-explained. Maybe the course would need a bigger amount of hours for lectures.» (Rather bad)
- While Mr Jacobson"s knowledge on the subject is vast, I found that he was unable to communicate it to the class effectively and hence I never really found attending the lectures advantageous.» (Rather bad)
- He confused himself on several occasions. That makes it hard to follow, also does not inspire confidence you are learning the correct material.» (Rather bad)
- Perhaps there are too many details, which might be overwhelming for a new comer in this field. Focus on the most important few facts and repeat them again and again, details such as equations and exceptions can come later.» (Rather good)
- Very clear connection to the compendium and a good structure of the with the three main chapters and their subchapters.» (Rather good)
- A little quiet speech, can be prepared better. » (Rather good)
- Maybe teachers should speak louder or the room can be smaller.» (Very good)
- wasn"t there. » (No opinion)
- Attended only at the 1st lecture.» (No opinion)

7. What is your opinion of the material selected for the problem solving sessions?


- They do sort of mirror the content of course and what you might need to know / be able to do at the exam. »
- The exam containts similar problems what is really good. »
- the problem solving was sometimes just the writing of the results and the explanations not very clear»
- Scan solutions and put on home page after classes.»
- The material was good but most of the proposed exercises were easier than the ones in the examinations»

Introduction and Vehicle Interactions
32 svarande

Very bad»1 3%
Rather bad»2 7%
Rather good»17 60%
Very good»8 28%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.14

Longitudinal Dynamics
34 svarande

Very bad»1 3%
Rather bad»2 6%
Rather good»19 63%
Very good»8 26%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.13

Lateral Dynamics
34 svarande

Very bad»1 3%
Rather bad»4 13%
Rather good»16 53%
Very good»9 30%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.1

Vertical Dynamics
33 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»2 6%
Rather good»18 62%
Very good»9 31%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.24

8. What is your opinion of the teaching in problem solving sessions?

34 svarande

Very bad»1 3%
Rather bad»9 31%
Rather good»15 51%
Very good»4 13%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- The phrase "the rest is just routine" was used a lot. I"m sure this is true for a doctorate student in vehicle dynamics. However, learning it for the first time, repetition improves retention. Seeing a solution only once is not enough.» (Very bad)
- More instructions, more references to the compendium and a lot more equations would be better!» (Rather bad)
- My note is only for the PSS2, as it unfortunately was the only one I managed to attend. The main "faults/drawbacks" were: - Too many steps are skipped in the calculation. For understanding detailed step by step solution is good. - The (at least judging by the compendium) uniform nomenclature for eg what one calls the normal force at some point wasn"t followed too well. This was brought to attention, and I guess/hope resolved to the following sessions (what I though don"t have any idea/knowledge about). » (Rather bad)
- It seemed that the assistant did not really know the fundamentals of what she was teaching. The guy who showed up on one of the sessions seemed familiar with the subject.» (Rather bad)
- The "..." solutions with crucial steps missing was very bad, but I think that was discovered during the course. The feedback from the students were implemented during the course, so if it continues in the same way, it will be good!» (Rather bad)
- Maybe I have this opinion due to the fact that the lectures weren"t clear enough. But, I consider the assistant not well prepared. She didn"t use the same notations as in the compendium,it can be confusing some times. Moreover, she used a different coordinate systems in one of the lateral problems, also confusing. I think that the assistants from the assignments session were better prepared and more helpful in explanations. » (Rather bad)
- You have to go through the basic things in the problem solving if we should learn anything. You can"t jump over this things and say that it"s basic, we don"t know the basic things because its the first time we are taking this course.» (Rather bad)
- In the beginning the pace was a little to fast, so it was hard to understand all the steps in the solutions. It would be good with a little more focus on a general methodology for solving the different types of tasks.» (Rather good)
- Maybe a little bit more detailed explanation.» (Rather good)
- The teachers themselves are good, most of times good explenation.» (Rather good)
- Sometimes not very clear because of lack of explanation (theoretical motivations)» (Rather good)
- It could be better if you put solutions to the excercises» (No opinion)

9. What is your opinion of the material selected for the assignments sessions?

34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»2 6%
Rather good»16 51%
Very good»13 41%
No opinion»3

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- Lateral assignment was too difficult. It is not good to work on assignment and don"t have information from lectures... » (Rather good)
- Could be good with a 2 hours matlab tutorial before first assignment. Many that havnt used Matlab much before. This is not a problem only in this course but most of the courses in Automotive master.» (Rather good)
- Description of tasks is clear after studying Matlab codes, not earlier. Should be mentioned somewhere. » (Rather good)
- It has a good connection with the course, exam, and problem solving sessions.» (Very good)
- Helpful in helping us understand.» (Very good)
- Assignments were challenging and useful for deeper understanding but they could have been introduced and explained a little bit more» (Very good)
- What I"ve seen it looks like the stuff that has been used for the last some years, and hence ok, as they have been fairly adequate. » (No opinion)
- Do you mean the three assignments?? They were good.» (No opinion)

10. What is your opinion of the work load of the assignments?

34 svarande

Very bad»1 3%
Rather bad»5 15%
Rather good»18 56%
Very good»8 25%
No opinion»2

Genomsnitt: 3.03

- The workload would be OK, but assignment 3 finish 1 week before exam, and then the exam is really hard, but still not much time to study for it. Before the assignments are done all time needs to be spent on them. Easier assignments or an easier exam is needed.» (Very bad)
- Assignments take too much time.» (Rather bad)
- It took a lot of time just to figure out what value meant what in the "skeleton". Also VERY unhelpful that the naming of certain values was different from script to script!» (Rather bad)
- Lateral was too time consuming. » (Rather good)
- hopefully we had the matlab code in the last assignment. Otherwise it would be impossible» (Rather good)
- Lateral was too long, a lot of time had to be spend. » (Rather good)
- Only the lateral assignment was more difficult. As I said before, this can be connected to the quality of the lectures and the fact that the lectures on the lateral started later than the assignment.» (Rather good)
- It was a bit high work load» (Rather good)
- It was very good that the last assignment had skeleton code, which made the is less time consuming.» (Very good)

11. What is your opinion of teaching in assignments sessions?

34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather good»18 64%
Very good»10 35%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- Adythia was really good, he was more then well oriented in the assigments" tasks. The answers from teachers should be consistent with final corrections of assignments. Maybe it is good to have same teacher during assignment session and then for corrections. » (Rather good)
- the teachers in the assignments were good and helpful» (Rather good)
- The teachers in the assignments are good and helps alot.» (Rather good)
- The assistants knew the subject and were always eager to help.» (Very good)
- Especially Adithya was really good!!! Corrections of assignments should be done by the same teacher as answers in assignments sessions to get consistent results. » (Very good)
- I think the lateral assignment, with benefits, can be orally examinated. I felt that there were so many small things that we discovered during that assignment which best could have been presented during a oral exam. Ask the students to bring plots, to have a discussion about.» (Very good)

12. What is your opinion about using Matlab and Simulink as tool in this course?

- Excellent choice. More focus on Simulink can be entertained. For example, getting us to "make" a model for lateral dynamics, instead of just using it. »
- Most of the code is given, so as long as one can generally use Matlab and understand the code, there will not be much additional work.»
- Good and really helpful!»
- Allways good to get practice with theese tools.»
- Matlab is good and it"s good to get to work with Simulink. But I do not like simulink »
- Um, it"s standard! Nothing wrong with it. (and sure it might even give ppl some understanding for handling when they can simulate it easily)»
- It gives me an idea how to use simulink and link mat files, so it is a bit insightful in a way.»
- Good, no problem.»
- Very useful and indispensable. »
- Needs a strong foundation of Matlab.»
- Very good!»
- Matlab and Simulink might work as tools well if the student had been familiar with the software. However, this was not the case and the course ended up being more about Matlab and Simulink learning than Vehicle dynamics. I did not learn much about vehicle dynamics on this course. More about Matlab.»
- Stuents unfamiliar with Matlab could have been given an introductory course in Matlab and/or Simulink»
- It is nice to learn these programs better, but it is hard to get it to work when I havnt used it so much before. And as mentioned, no tutorial is given in any course to atleast help out for the start.»
- They are relevant tools»
- Ok, no problem. »
- It"s a useful tool, even though most of the code was already written. Maybe it would be more useful to let students write their own code instead of completing an already written one. I would suggest a strongest division between functions (which could be delivered from teachers) and main program (which could be written by students)»
- I found that the assignments taught me more Matlab and Simulink than Vehicle Dynamics.»
- It"s very good, but in some parts the only difficulty was Matlab. »
- I think that was good. But if you are not that familiar with matlab it"s probably quite hard to do the assignments.»
- A necessary evil. As stated before, hard to follow.»
- Great!»
- Learnt quite a lot and they seem to be a very good tools for analysis and simulation.»

Study climate

13. How is the general study climate at Chalmers?

34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather good»16 47%
Very good»18 52%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.52

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

34 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 5%
Rather good»11 32%
Very good»16 47%
I did not seek help»5 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- The assistants from the assignment sessions were helpful. The assistant from the problem solving was helpful to some extent due to the difficulties in explaining some things. With Benqt was difficult because he was most of the time in a rush, but in the following lecture he would give the answer. » (Rather poor)
- You should have som scheduled time for questions at the end of the course.» (Rather good)
- Bengt takes his time when he is around. Derong might need to be bit more pedagogical.» (Very good)
- The PhD:s had always time!» (Very good)

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

34 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»10 29%
Very well»22 64%
I did not seek cooperation»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

16. How was the course workload?

34 svarande

1 (Too low)»1 2%
0 0%
10 29%
19 55%
5 (Too high)»4 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- ok» (3)
- dominating all the aspects of the compedium would require too much time» (4)

Summarizing questions

17. How well did the course fullfill your expectations?

34 svarande

1 (not at all)»3 8%
5 14%
10 29%
9 26%
5 (very well)»7 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.35 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- It is mainly with respect to the teaching.Haven"t learnt anything by attending the lectures.» (1 (not at all))
- As said, the coure taught me more Matlab syntax than vehicle dynamics. I was very disappointed of the course and would"ve dropped it after a few weeks if there hadn"t been group assignments.» (1 (not at all))
- I would have expected more from the lecturer, which I think that it"s the most important part in a course. » (2)
- Again, I learned the how, but not the why, and definitely not the interaction between values and how compromising one might be better for x, y, and z reasons, depending on your goal. Also, one very common disclaimer in the matlab models, and thoughout the compendium was "this will not apply near the limits of grip." As a performance oriented person that said to me "What you are about to do will not be applicable to the real world, unless you want to analyze mundane driving maneuvers."» (2)
- Maybe more detailed then I expected. » (3)

18. What is your general impression of the course?

34 svarande

Poor»2 5%
Fair»8 23%
Adequate»7 20%
Good»14 41%
Excellent»3 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- I cannot evaluate the lectures as I attended only the first one. The only thing that I can say about the lectures is that having them 8 am is not a very good idea. This was one of the reasons I did not attend the lectures. Another reason was that I think the way to handle the course subject was very boring. The compendium and supposedly the lectures too, approached the subject only from a pure mathematical perspective.» (Poor)
- I think that the aims of this course should be lower , in order to acquire good basics, instead of doing a little bit of all quickly» (Fair)
- I think that the problem is that in this course vertical, longitudinal and lateral is put into one course. To much in one, and much is rather complicated. I know from talking to international countries that they have the 3 (vert, long, lat) divided into 3 courses, while we have all in one.» (Fair)
- Teaching has room for improvement.» (Good)
- It"s getting better, and that"s good. » (Good)

19. What is your opinion of the material selected for the exam?

33 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»6 18%
Rather good»22 66%
Very good»5 15%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.96

- Derivations? Why?» (Rather bad)
- The exam were much to hard given the small time there was to study after assignment 3. Spending all days from end of assignment 3 to the exam and still having problems passing it shows the diffriculty with it.» (Rather bad)
- The first problem took a rediculous amount of time to solve because there were too many cases. You had to repeat the same calcs many times to verify the correct answer.» (Rather bad)
- Maybe a little too basic, comparing to the previous ones. Especially we can have the compendium this time. So difficulty is generally reduced.» (Rather good)
- The material covered the course well.» (Rather good)
- adequate, but no questions that test overall understanding of the subject (as in if one is able to compute a number for the answer doesn"t mean that one has understood what he/she have been computing and if the answer is "reasonable")» (Rather good)
- It is difficult to finish the problems with numerical solutions, it should not be required (only minor points).» (Rather good)
- I think that we should have more time to compute all problems to the numerical results or write only some procedure how to get the result and then the time is ok. » (Very good)

20. What is your opinion of the material selected for the lectures?


- Not that interesting to see different types of free-body-diagram and plots...»
- The first guest lecture was really interesting.»

Introduction & Vehicle Interactions
34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»5 18%
Rather good»16 59%
Very good»6 22%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.03

Longitudinal Dynamics
34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»3 11%
Rather good»18 66%
Very good»6 22%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.11

Lateral Dynamics
34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»5 18%
Rather good»16 59%
Very good»6 22%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.03

Vertical Dynamics
34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»2 7%
Rather good»19 70%
Very good»6 22%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.14

Guest Lectures
32 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»3 12%
Rather good»17 68%
Very good»5 20%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.08

21. What is your opinion of the work load during the exam?

33 svarande

Very bad»6 18%
Rather bad»13 40%
Rather good»12 37%
Very good»1 3%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.25

- Deep questions with no much time. » (?)
- It should defenitely be a 5 h exam!!» (Very bad)
- Had the knowledge but didnt have time to solve everything and even though I really hope I did pass with what I wrote. I also think its a underlying purpose of solving fast, but it took me about 1.5h to solve one task, so hopefully I got it right, what I did...» (Very bad)
- Too long questions! I would"ve known all the answers but just didn"t have the time.» (Very bad)
- The first and the fourth problems took me more than two hours.In the first one, I had to do a lot of explanations and in the fourth one the calculation was kind of long for an exam. I didn"t have time to finish the exam due to the fact that these two problems took so much time. » (Very bad)
- I can"t understand why the calculations are needed to be so heavy on an exam (general for all earlier exam I have seen). I think an exam is supposed to show that you have understood how and why you do things. Even though I knew how to derive all steps in task 1 and 5, I spend almost 3/4 of the time to derive those tasks, giving just 2/5 of the total points. I compare with exams from the S2-department. The subjects are often very mathematically complex, but the exam task often only needs half a page, but more thinking!» (Very bad)
- Some tasks took alot of time because you had to do so many calculations.» (Rather bad)
- Would have been nice with a 5hr exam.» (Rather bad)
- It was to much heavy calculations on the exam. You didn"t have time to finish and almost no time to think trough the problems. You have to either extent the exam time or make the exam smaller, you can maybe take problems at the same level but with smaller calculations.» (Rather bad)
- As said above, 1st problem was far too long, especially for the points distribution. (spent an hour and a half on the first one of 5)» (Rather bad)
- Um, bit more time might have been handy as most of the ppl sat the whole 4hrs...» (Rather good)
- Sometimes difficult to compute numerical results.» (Rather good)

22. What is your opinion of the level of difficulty of the exam?

33 svarande

Very bad»3 9%
Rather bad»10 32%
Rather good»17 54%
Very good»1 3%
No opinion»2

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- the hardest among the courses i had this year» (?)
- As mentioned above, to hard exam given the small amount of study time given.» (Very bad)
- A little too easy as is previously mentioned considering the aid available.» (Rather bad)
- The level of difficulty was of ok, but the questions were way too long. » (Rather bad)
- Why is the exam tasks much harder than the assignment tasks? Weird.» (Rather bad)
- Should maybe be more understanding and less solving of large equations.» (Rather bad)
- But not compared to the time...» (Rather good)
- But it would have been good with more time» (Rather good)
- The rear wheel steering (rearwards driving stuff) was a trick one. Otherwise this time the exam felt like adequate and the load was (at least if one had prepared for it) adequate. Not needing to keep a couple of formulas in the head (being able to look them up in the compendium) was good. » (Rather good)
- Maybe more time to compute numerical results. » (Rather good)
- This year"s paper was simple compared to last years paper.» (Rather good)
- I think it was fair.» (Rather good)

23. How well did the course elements (lectures, problem solving sessions, assignments) prepare you for the exam?


24. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- All.»
- Assignments and problem solving sessions.»
- Assignments and compendium.»
- Compendium, assignment»
- Assignments»
- The assignments»
- That one can bring the compendium/formulas to exam. PSS, with some changes assignments»
- Lateral Assignment»
- The exam problems were nice. I think that it was the best exam from all exams in this course. »
- Assignments »
- The assignments was really good!!! Also, all material and course objectives was really clear (maybe to clear because I didn"t see the purpose to attend classes).»
- Nothing.»
- guest lectures, problem solving»
- Type of questions in Examination, Assignments, More Problem Solving Sessions»
- In general the assignments were good, but see comment below. Problem solving session was very good, but scan and put solutions on home page.»
- The compendium»
- Trend in exam, it was corresponding to problems solved during the period. »
- The overall pattern and division of the course.»
- The assignments.»
- The compendium and problem solving sessions»
- 3 assignments»

25. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Have a presentation component in the course. The course is too one way, with Bengt giving the lectures and the students listening. Having something like, presenting a talk on one of the vehicle dynamic issues by the students in groups, could add more dynamism.»
- Teaching that gives too many details in the beginning.»
- problem solving lessons. more time for questions. »
- Some connections to problem solving during the lectures.»
- Make the exam 5 hours or make the problem less time comsuming. »
- The way PSS is/was tough. Step by step (almost for dummies) solutions. Not leaving out any steps in the computation so ppl can easily go over it at home again. If there isn"t time to do all steps in class, somehow distribute/make available notes with step by step solutions. Make all PSS-exercises available at the start of the course, just in case someone want"s do go ahead and give it a try on their own prior the session that it is scheduled for. It would be great with some more "theory" questions on the exam. Too check if ppl have understood the subject. The questions don"t maybe even need to be something out of the compendium but rougher: there is a device like this: (description of device function). Why would one want to have one of these? or When/in what vehicle would it make the best sense to be used? The answers for such questions can be either written or "tricky" multiple choice. I did once an exam where out of 4 or 5 alternatives everything between 1 and 4 (or 5) could be right. The question gave you maximum as many points as choices, but you did get a points deduction within the question for each right answer you missed to mark (though it was set so that you wouldn"t get less than 0 on each task/question). This way one really couldn"t achieve anything useful just by guessing, but it was quick and easy to mark for the examiner (though he needed to put bit of time to come up with the questions and "answers"). »
- Reorganize compendium a bit»
- More descriptive text in the compendium, explain different symbols and correct all mistakes. Well reflected what we did. »
- Problem solving sessions»
- The way of teaching must definitely change. Chalmers has such a high reputation, but after taking VD I feel I have to change my opinion on this. Everyone tells me Bengt is brillaint when it comes to practicals and knowledge but if he is not able to put this up while teaching then it is very hard for the students to get what they have to out of the course.»
- I dont really know. I was really happy with the material and course outline. Even though the assignments was super good, they took very many hours. In fact, just the assignments together with the other course (safety) I did spend more than 45h in school... When it came to dynamic lectures, I didn"t feel the urgency of attend (due to really good material), but I rather felt stressed to work with all the assignments in this or the other course... Good or bad.. We will see when the results comes...»
- Please, for the sake of the students doing the course next year, reconstruct the course completely. It would be nice to learn something about vehicle dynamics instead of just Matlab.»
- the chalmers teacher may be better and the compendiun may be clearer with more explanations and physical interpretation in order to feel better the problems»
- Lecture Material, Teaching pattern, the way concepts are introduced.»
- Easier exams or shorter assignments so there is more time to study for the exam. There was no time during the study period because all time needed to be spent on completing the assignments.»
- PSS, in the same way as they changed during the course»
- One more correction of compendium, lateral assignment should be easier. »
- The assignments could be better directed towards preparation for the examination. Making simpler questions and letting the student do more of the work rather than follow instructions in the Matlab code blindly would better benefit the student. The compendium could be made more readable. »
- Benqt"s way of teaching and a more experienced assistant in the problem solving sessions.»
- The lectures could be more preparing for the exam, everything that comes up on the lectures are already written in the compendium. If you have more examples of how to calculate and more preparing information to the exam it would be worth going to the lectures.»
- There needs to be a connection between what target values you should shoot for and how they interact with each other.»

26. Additional comments

- The course is good. But needs to be more interactive. Most equations are intuitive, when you look at them. Students fail to understand the importance of parameters like yaw rate in certain situations at times though. In teaching, Bengt can pick up live examples of incidents using real data in class to give more perspective to equations. »
- About the assignments: handout codes reduce workload, however it also means that one has to just fill in the blanks to finish the tasks and most of the information needed can be easily found in the compendium. One may not understand the structure of the model itself at all after all this. It"s just typing equations and then everything works and it"s done! Maybe the first task can be building the simplest model ourselves, and then we move on a ready built model to fill in the blanks...»
- I was one of the less "content" ones last year, and this year I can say it"s been a great improvement, at least what compendium + exam goes. With some additional small improvements and tweaks I believe that it is possible to make this course (given some time) one of the more popular ones in the automotive masters. »
- The course gives decent insight into dynamics of vehicle. Thank you»
- I was optimistic and interested in the beginnig of the course and finally i am quite disapointed with this course »
- I think that this course could be a lot better than what it is.»
- There has to be a better way to name values. 4 subscripts gets very confusing.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.35

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.35
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.58

Kursutvärderingssystem från