ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

MPSOF 1213-3 Model-driven engineering DAT240|DIT596

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2013-03-18 - 2013-04-02
Antal svar: 13
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 26%
Kontaktperson: Börje Johansson»

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.

13 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»0 0%
Around 20 hours/week»3 23%
Around 25 hours/week»6 46%
Around 30 hours/week»2 15%
At least 35 hours/week»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- We had to spend way too much time on the course assignments, given that they were only worth 3.5hp. With assignments like these, no exam is needed in the course.» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

13 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»3 23%
50%»0 0%
75%»5 38%
100%»5 38%

Genomsnitt: 3.92

- The lessons didn"t provide anything to my learning. They were basically tutorials of how to use eclipse and should in this form preferably be made by each student accompanied by a computer. Unfortunately this was not possible, since the pace of the lecture didn"t allow you to actually make something of it.» (25%)

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?

13 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»1 9%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»4 36%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»6 54%
I have not seen/read the goals»2

Genomsnitt: 2.45

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.

10 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»2 20%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»7 70%
No, the goals are set too high»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 1.9

- cannot answer this question because the goals are not understandable» (?)
- This is not a university level course. Spending 7 weeks in Eclipse was not how I thought a Master course would be.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- This is a master program and the courses given should give students more advanced academic knowledge in the given area. This course was more suitible for a more practical oriented education.» (No, the goals are set too low)

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

13 svarande

No, not at all»3 27%
To some extent»6 54%
Yes, definitely»2 18%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2

Genomsnitt: 1.9

- Unclear exam, did not understan all of the questions.» (No, not at all)
- Examination and entire course was way too tool oriented.» (No, not at all)
- I would have like it a lot more to be tested on Model Driven Engineering rather than various Eclipse plugins.» (To some extent)
- According to the goals set: yes.» (To some extent)
- It was incredibly difficult to realize what was asked for in the exam, and to have all (but one) questions related to each other, when the exam is so difficult to understand, seems like a huge flaw.» (To some extent)
- It was highly focused on Eclipse and was not concered of any of the reading material we were supposed to consume during this course. The reading material felt more suitable for examining the understanding of the area of study.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

13 svarande

Small extent»5 38%
Some extent»7 53%
Large extent»1 7%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.69

- The lecturer spent the theory lectures showing screenshots from Eclipse and pictures of kids and animals... Not OK!» (Small extent)
- The slides were good to use as tutorials while working with Eclipse.» (Some extent)

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

13 svarande

Small extent»8 61%
Some extent»2 15%
Large extent»2 15%
Great extent»1 7%

Genomsnitt: 1.69

- The project, lectures and online documentation gave the most help for my learning.» (Small extent)
- Never opened the books suggested. The tutorials provided from the lecturer was enough to solve the assignment and exam (I think).» (Small extent)

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

13 svarande

Very badly»1 7%
Rather badly»3 23%
Rather well»8 61%
Very well»1 7%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

- We often had to wait for assignments/problems to be published. Instead of working when we had the time, we had to work when the teacher bothered to publish the problems.» (Rather badly)
- Good that the course used PingPong» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

13 svarande

Very poor»2 15%
Rather poor»7 53%
Rather good»4 30%
Very good»0 0%
I did not seek help»0

Genomsnitt: 2.15

- The tutor could either not answer questions or answered badly, which made it hard to work on the assignments. The feedback on each assignment was small or nonexisting.» (Very poor)
- The TA did not know the subject enough. Would be better if Lars attended more of the workshops.» (Rather poor)
- The TA was beyond bad. What was he even doing there? He mislead groups and was responsible for some groups" poor end result.» (Rather poor)
- We had the opportunity to ask questions, just that the answers differed depending on who was asked and by whom. This resulted in all groups understanding the assignments in a different way and therefore doing different things (that varied in difficulty).» (Rather poor)
- The TA wasn"t very knowledgeable but the main lecturer was very helpful. » (Rather poor)

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

13 svarande

Very poorly»1 7%
Rather poorly»1 7%
Rather well»5 38%
Very well»6 46%
I did not seek cooperation»0

Genomsnitt: 3.23

11. How was the course workload?

13 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»7 53%
High»3 23%
Too high»3 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- To much work with the assignments. » (High)
- We had to spend way too much time on the course assignments, given that they were only worth 3.5hp. With assignments like these, no exam is needed in the course.» (Too high)
- Uneven deadline schedule and late&unclear publications of assignments led to very high workload at the end of the course.» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

13 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»5 38%
High»6 46%
Too high»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- My group and I spent around 50h/week on school work this study period. That is only time spent on lab assignments and excluding studying for the exams.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

13 svarande

Poor»4 30%
Fair»4 30%
Adequate»3 23%
Good»2 15%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- This was one of the worst courses I have taken on the Master so far. I would not recommend ANYONE to take this course. Reasons why: * The course is basically just clicking in Eclipse which can"t be regarded as Master quality (I don"t care that some might use Eclipse in the industry, this is not YH). * Lectures was basically tutorials, and as tutorials they were bad and boring. Proposals for change: * This subject does not qualify for a 7.5HP course. Instead, create an "Advanced topics in SE" course were this subject is one of the topics presented (together with SPL). * This course should focus on teaching the theory around MDE and not so much around the tools. I know that there isn"t THAT much theory, hence my suggestion above.» (Poor)
- Felt more like a tutorial than a MDE course.» (Fair)
- The idea of the course is good, just that the work load is not balanced enough and the assignments and answers to questions are not specific enough.» (Fair)
- Exciting area of study.» (Adequate)
- Didn"t really see the connection between xtext and DSL"s because we didn"t use xtext except in the problems for week 1.» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Good guest lectures»
- The project»
- Nothing, or the rumor has it that the theoretical course book on MDE was good. However, everything else can be scrapped.»
- The lab assignments and the way they connect to each other.»
- The book!»
- The structure of the course.»
- First theory lecture was good, perhaps explain that knowing the textual syntax-stuff us very good but that focus won"t be on that during the course (I was tricked into putting lot of time into writing textual syntax).»
- Some insight in different programming tools that can be used when working with Model driven engineering.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- More focus on general MDE and how that workd and less focus on Eclipse . »
- The course should be more teoretical. It feels really wierd to have an advanced course which is based on Eclipse. If we had gotten a more teoretical course then we might actually be able to use the things we learn even if our future employer doesnät use Eclipse in modelling.»
- Basically everything. »
- Remove the exam. It is unnecessary and if you want to keep it together with the lab assignments you should really consider making this a 15hp course.»
- Make the entire course much more theoretical instead of putting so much focus on tools.»
- The lectures should focus on the academic aspect of the study area.»
- Increase the number of TAs. One TA is not enough to answer all groups" question.»
- Better TA. Publish all problems earlier. Some examples that were used during lectures weren"t thought out. For examples, using concepts called boxes and lines in the meta model when showing us how to do graphical editors isn"t very smart, since it mixes the concepts up. The example should include the use of lines in the editor to represent references in the meta model. Also - the graphical editor example should include using the same line tool for several types of references. »
- The whole course focuses on learning and using specific languages and plug-ins for eclipse, even the lectures. The course should much, much more focus on teaching theoretical fundamental ideas concerning Model driven software engineering and its development. The course assistant had little knowledge in the area, and provided very little good help with the enormous amount of plug-in specific bugs that arose during the project.»

16. Additional comments

- Is this really a course (not talking about the topic here) worthy of being part of a SE Master program at Chalmers? I think not.»
- There"s a general problem here. We want to learn modeling, not a specific tool. But in order to apply our knowledge we need to use one tool or another. So in a way it was frustrating to have multiple lectures where you would only hear Lars explain where to click in Eclipse. On the other hand even with this help we wound up spending more time debugging Eclipse than doing actual work. »
- I don"t want the capability to start working with Model driven engineering at Ericson within a day, as soon as I graduate. I want the cabability to work with Model driven engineering after 20 years even if the area has developed. Learning to use specific tools is something we can do when needed, not something that this whole course should be about.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.23
Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.23
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.3

Kursutvärderingssystem från