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.

MPBME 1213-4 Diagnostic Imaging, SSY185

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2013-05-30 - 2013-09-15
Antal svar: 11
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 50%
Kontaktperson: Monika Råberg Hellsing»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Elektroteknik 300 hp

Read this before filling in the questionnaire

Keep in mind that everyone involved in the course will be able to read your comments. Comments and criticism are welcome, but should remain constructive.

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.

11 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»0 0%
Around 20 hours/week»5 45%
Around 25 hours/week»6 54%
Around 30 hours/week»0 0%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.54

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

11 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 9%
75%»4 36%
100%»6 54%

Genomsnitt: 4.45

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?

11 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»4 36%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»2 18%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»5 45%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

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.

8 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»8 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

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

By examination we mean laborations, assignments etc., as well as written exams or larger projects.

8 svarande

No, not at all»1 12%
To some extent»2 25%
Yes, definitely»4 50%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

Teaching and course administration

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

10 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»3 30%
Large extent»6 60%
Great extent»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

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

11 svarande

Small extent»3 27%
Some extent»1 9%
Large extent»6 54%
Great extent»1 9%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

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

11 svarande

Very badly»1 9%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»8 72%
Very well»2 18%

Genomsnitt: 3

9. Comments about teaching and course administration

- Since the material doesn"t change much year to year, releasing an archive of all the old slides would beer good to do in week one so that you can prior everything in advance»
- It"s really bad that the report were handed back 1 day before the exam!!! Andreas had a month to correct them and when they came back there were no comment on what was wrong. There is absolutley no point in doing hand ins if you don"t even know what you did wrong. Extreamly bad!»
- I like the fact of having guest lecturers (who are expertise in their field) for specific lectures. Unfortunately, some of those lecturers are not so good teaching, although this is not a major problem and it"s understandable.»
- I felt *teaching* was not the purpose. We were not allowed to collaborate between groups, which I feel is by far the best way to learn. If you can explain it to someone else you have really learned something and otherwise, discussing a problem is a great way to understand it. Secondly, perhaps more serious, is that we recieved no feedback what so ever on the CT-project. I"m very curious on how we are supposed to learn if no one tells us what is wrong? For me it felt we could just have handed in a blank paper.»
- The time required for correcting labs and project is very long. By the time i"m writing, I"m still waiting for some feedback about some of them. Moreover, the project was not commented, so we had no feedback about our errors.»
- Feedback from the project was given too late and it was useless as no comments were made: a mark itself doesn"t help a student to understand what is wrong»
- Goran Stark wasn"t good in his explanations»
- Would be nice to have results of projects and labs a bit earlier»

Study climate

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

11 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 18%
Rather good»3 27%
Very good»5 45%
I did not seek help»1 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

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

11 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 9%
Rather well»1 9%
Very well»9 81%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

12. How was the course workload?

11 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»10 90%
High»1 9%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

13. How was the total workload this study period?

10 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»9 90%
High»1 10%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

11 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»2 18%
Adequate»2 18%
Good»6 54%
Excellent»1 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.54

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The labs.»
- Guest lectures and visit to Sahlgrenska»
- The labs and the project. It was the best way of learning about the covered subjects.»
- The lab sessions were appreciated as you get better understanding when you actually apply what you learn. The CT-project was also fun, invigorative and helped in understanding the concepts of the back-projection algorithms. The study visit to Sahlgrenska was also encouraging as you was able to see some of the applications and how well they worked out.»
- The labs and project.»
- The project idea»
- Topics covered in the project and the labs»
- The CT project and the labs, visits at hospitals»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Feedback from the CT project needs to be given before the exam! How else will we know what we understood wrong? Regardless of good pace and limiting your writing, the exam is too long. I don"t perform well when rushing through an exam. Less questions will also reflect on your learnimg outcome. »
- The course contains way to much shit. The labs that were supoed to be done in a 2 hour lab really took about 8 to 10 hours. Also having many different lecturers makes it hard to ask questions and some things, like MRI, gets kind of confused.»
- The time for the labs could have been somewhat extended. Also, feedback for the labs and the project should definitively be received within sufficient time so you can discuss why you received certain points and why you didn"t.»
- Teachers deadlines. We recieved the feedback very close to the exam. I wouldnt mind more projects in relation to written exams.»
- The way the exam is administered, it is not easy to understand the level of details required for each question, and because of the length of the exam is dangerous to write too much for a question that doesn"t require many details»
- There should be more introduction before the lab sessions. Also the excersises sessions were too few: in the final exam there were exercises that have never been done during the course (e.g. drawing trajectories), the attention had not been paied to some topics which were instead in the exam which was quite surprising.»
- Maybe the course can be split into two different courses as the modalities that tries to cover are a lot in my opinion and thus a very brief overview is given. I think it can be split in an MRI and X-ray course»
- Spread the labs to different occasions»

17. Additional comments

- I think the assessment style could he changed a bit. Keeping the labs and project,but splitting the exam into two sections. One,as a midterm covering the first half of the modalities and the second covering the final half. There is simply a lot of material for one exam. There are numerous instructor-side benefits as well.students can be asked more detailed questions to assess understanding and we would learn more .plus, having seen the style of questions that the teaching team likes to ask,we can prepare better. Also, why did it take over a month doe the projects to be marked, and then when graded, have no commentary?what nonsense is that?clearly it was marked in a hurry the day before the exam and grades were acquired by spinning a comically large wheel.»
- Very good course over all! Andrew did a great job in putting everything together and gave clear instructions. Andreas teching is very good.»
- The exam is maybe too long. It should be a little bit shorter.»
- Overall, the course was interesting and fun. However, there is always room for improvements. In order to make this course even better and increase people"s understanding of the topic of Diagnostic imaging, decrease the time from due dates to feedback. Otherwise we students cannot take to heart the marking of them and to improve our knowledge. Increase the lab session times. It takes time to understand these concepts if they"re new to you, as it is for us students. Maybe introduce a discussions session regarding the marked lab reports and the project report at the last lab session to even further increase the understanding.»
- Andreas doesn"t seem much interested about this class (late to answer, lazy on projects)»
- Final exam too long!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från