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.

Complex Systems Seminar - 2012-2013, FFR141/FIM730

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2013-05-31 - 2013-06-10
Antal svar: 10
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 50%
Kontaktperson: Claes Andersson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs

1. Area overview*

A goal of the course is to provide an overview over research areas and applications of complexity science. Would you say that the course meets this goal?

10 svarande

No»0 0%
Somewhat»1 10%
Yes, it was useful»7 70%
Yes, it was highly useful»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.1 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Some presentations from students were a bit too messy, or not clear enough» (Yes, it was useful)

2. Presentation skills*

Would you say that your ability to produce and present a talk has improved as a result of the course?

10 svarande

No»1 10%
Somewhat»3 30%
Yes, it was useful»5 50%
Yes, it was highly useful»1 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.6 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Its very easy to pass. I find that people make a minimal effort.» (No)
- practice makes perfect» (Somewhat)
- First time I presented in English, it helped me !» (Yes, it was useful)

3. How understandable are the course goals?*

10 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»3 30%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»»1 10%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»»6 60%

Genomsnitt: 3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- i cant remember them at least...» (I have not seen/read the goals)

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»»1 10%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»»9 90%
No, the goals are set too high»»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.9 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

5. Teacher/Course administrator*

How would you rate the Claes Andersson as a teacher/administrator in this course?

10 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 20%
Good»4 40%
Very good»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- He"s a good guy and he has really good insights in many different topics which is impressive, but sometimes he talks a bit too long.» (Ok)
- Good dedication + taking care of students to inform them when someone is not good» (Good)

6. Faculty presentations*

Would it be valuable to have more presentations by faculty of complex systems research performed at Chalmers?

10 svarande

No»2 20%
Somewhat»2 20%
Yes»2 20%
Yes, very much so»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

- Generally bad presenters. Too long presentations. Not all though» (No)
- Not "too much".» (Somewhat)
- Yes, it would have been nice to have spread out the guest presentations more, and also to have more of them! And also if possible (would have rocked) if guest lecturers were ready to jump in as substitutes whenver the lectures was about to be cancelled due to late students.» (Yes, very much so)

7. Communication*

How would you rate the communication between the teacher and the students concerning topics, schedule, goals and other relevant issues?

10 svarande

Poor»1 10%
Ok»1 10%
Good»3 30%
Very good»5 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Many last minute cancellations» (Poor)

8. Peer review #1*

Peer review is one of the pillars of scientific work, and it is represented in this course as a requirement to review and provide comments on other students" presentations.

As a PRESENTER, did you find this system useful?

10 svarande

No»2 20%
Somewhat»2 20%
Yes, it was useful»4 40%
Yes, it was highly useful»2 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.6 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- since we only saw the presentation slides this excersise didnt really give much. I know it is a trade off between logistics and how good it works, but i think one could consider to have a "test presentation" for ones referees mandatory. Maybe its not a good idea for other reasons, but it would be easier for the referees to give useful critics and would probably lift the quality of all presentations if the presenters had practised once with referees.» (No)
- Comments were very basic and to little use to me. I delivered a draft consiting of bullets of my presentation» (No)
- It could be better structured. I think it would be better to have two round of submissions, as in 1 submission 2 referee 3 submission 4 eventual changes» (Somewhat)
- I don"t know if the reviewer know exactly what to do» (Yes, it was useful)

9. Peer review #2*

As a REFEREE, did you find the peer-review system useful?

10 svarande

No»2 20%
Somewhat»3 30%
Yes, it was useful»5 50%
Yes, it was highly useful»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- All we had to do was commenting on a topic we were really not familiar with. I feel that the referees could also evaluate the presentation itself based on guidance lines such as clearness of presentation well defined topic etc» (No)
- We don"t really know what to say, what to check since it may be the first time we do that» (Somewhat)

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

10 svarande

Small extent»5 50%
Some extent»5 50%
Large extent»0 0%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- How much teaching was there?» (Small extent)

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

10 svarande

Very poorly»1 10%
Rather poorly»1 10%
Rather well»3 30%
Very well»5 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Very many last minute cancellations without mailed notifications etc» (Very poorly)
- sometimes we were warned of a schedule change the same day of the presentation» (Rather poorly)
- The web and email information was always good.» (Very well)

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

10 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»1 10%
Very good»5 50%
I didn"t seek help»4 40%

Genomsnitt: 4.3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

10 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»2 20%
Very well»3 30%
I did not seek cooperation»5 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

14. How was the course workload?*

10 svarande

Too low»1 10%
Low»5 50%
Adequate»4 40%
High»0 0%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.3 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

15. What is your general impression of the course?*

10 svarande

Poor»1 10%
Fair»1 10%
Good»8 80%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.7 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Something you just have to attend.» (Poor)
- Fill the course with more guest lecturers.» (Good)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The possibility to be a referee (and sort of a opponent) to another presentation.»
- Everything»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Integrate Complex System seminar with Simulations of Complex Systems, and thus make the project in that course bigger and more important. Then you would pratice and hear "real" presentation instead of minimal effort-presentations...»
- Not much»
- Refereeing, as I wrote in the comments. Topics, sometimes the link with Complexity was VERY feeble»

18. Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.87

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.87
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.58

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från