Visa resultat

TM: Mathematical modelling, VT13, MVE160

Your own effort

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

13 svarande

<15 hours/week»		4		30%
Around 20 hours/week»		6		46%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		15%
Around 40 hours/week»		1		7%
>50 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

2. Attendance on lectures

13 svarande

<25%»		0		0%
25-50%»		2		15%
50-75%»		3		23%
>75%»		8		61%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- Overlapping courses prevented any more than 75%.» (50-75%)
- I do not know why I kept going to the lectures after realizing, like two lectures into the course, that they gave NOTHING. I guess I still hoped for improvement. There was none.» (50-75%)

3. What is your overall impressions of the course?

1 (Very bad)»		3		23%
2»		6		46%
3»		2		15%
4»		2		15%
5 (Very good)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- This is a really, really bad course. By far the worst one I"ve taken at Chalmers.» (1 (Very bad))
- The topic is intressting, but it lacks structure and a good course book.» (2)

4. How relevant is this course to your education?

1 (Unrelevant)»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		3		23%
4»		4		30%
5 (Relevant)»		6		46%

Genomsnitt: 4.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- It would have been very relevant, if there had been even the slightest amount of pedagogical capacity involved, so that we would actually have been able to take in the material.» (3)
- It felt like a solid ground for ODE, and I did not lack the modelling part. It is possible to learn a very solid ground in ODE by working hard in the course.» (4)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.23

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		6		46%
Some extent»		4		30%
Large extent»		2		15%
Great extent»		1		7%

Genomsnitt: 1.84

- Since the lectures were so poorly structured, I didn"t get anything out of those.» (Small extent)
- The book together with the lecture notes was adequate.» (Small extent)
- The book is too hard.» (Large extent)

6. What is your opinion about the exercise sessions?

1 (Very bad)»		1		9%
2»		5		45%
3»		1		9%
4»		2		18%
5 (Very good)»		2		18%
Did not participate»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.9 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Not possible to distinguish what was exercise and what was not.» (?)
- Firstly, you could never know coming to a lecture whether or not it was an exercise session - the contents of the lectures did not correspond to the schedule on the course homepage. Once or twice I found that the lecturer was mostly doing exercices and figured - only after an hour or so - that this must be an exercice session. Though I was never quite sure.» (1 (Very bad))
- Very few examples of actual calculations. It is very hard to get a feeling for the material when 90% of the time is dedicated to pure theory. » (2)
- Det största problemet anser jag har varit att det inte har framgått när det ska vara en räkneövning eller inte utan man har mitt i lektionen insett att det troligtvis enbart kommer att gås igenom exempel.» (2)
- I liked them, it is good to get advice.» (4)
- The book lacked a key, and the exercise sessions where absolutely required.» (5 (Very good))

7. What is your opinion about the home assignments?

1 (Very bad)»		0		0%
2»		1		7%
3»		4		30%
4»		8		61%
5 (Very good)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.53 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- They were the best thing about this course, which doesn"t mean almost anything at all. The assignments were poorly formulated » (2)
- De var relativt bra och lärorika.» (4)
- All in all some very straight forward assignments, but we had little knowledge and feeling of the theory. Mainly because of the lectures and the book.» (4)

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

Small extent»		4		30%
Some extent»		7		53%
Large extent»		1		7%
Great extent»		1		7%

Genomsnitt: 1.92

- The book is on a very high level and the biggest problem is that there are no answers to the problems.» (Small extent)
- The book was pretty bad. The exercises doesn"t fit the course very well and there are neither solutions nor answers available for any of the exercises. » (Small extent)
- Otroligt dålig bok. Att det dessutom saknades facit gjorde att den blev sämre än den redan var.» (Small extent)
- The course book was way too hard for us. It left many important proofs as exercices, and seemed just like the lecturer to assume that we knew much more than we do.» (Small extent)
- Väldigt avancerad kurslitteratur som kräver väldigt mycket förkunskaper av läsaren. Dessutom saknas facit till uppgifterna vilket gör den närmast oanvändbar när man ska lära sig.» (Some extent)
- Book was absolutely appaling. Lecture notes on homepage where the best method for me.» (Some extent)
- The course literature was very bad, to read in advance of lectures didn"t give much... but the hand written lecture notes from the course homepage was very good! (except from a few typos and sometimes lines got lost during scanning) » (Some extent)
- Sometimes a bit too complicated, but it provides useful information. Good thing Alexei made lecture notes, and it is crucial that the course timetable gives detailed chapter references, so that one only have to read the important parts. » (Large extent)

9. Was the course literature worth its price?

13 svarande

1 (not worth it)»		3		27%
2»		3		27%
3»		1		9%
4»		0		0%
5 (well worth it)»		4		36%
Did not buy the litterature»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- The course literature was not worth its price, despite the fact that it was free..» (1 (not worth it))
- This says alot since it was free. No book at all would probably have been more helpful.» (1 (not worth it))
- Only worth it because it was free. It would not have been worth to pay anything for it.» (2)
- It was for free so of course it was worth it price.» (5 (well worth it))
- Free» (5 (well worth it))
- It was free...» (Did not buy the litterature)

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

Very badly»		4		30%
Rather badly»		3		23%
Rather well»		3		23%
Very well»		3		23%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

- Information came out to late or not at all» (Very badly)
- Not informing about allowed tools for the exam is terribly bad.» (Very badly)
- Det var rörigt och otydligt redan från början men när kursen avslutades med att BETA var tillåten på tentamen trots att det tydligt stod på kurshemsidan att den inte var tillåten var det uruselt.» (Very badly)
- All information seemed to change all the time. The information on the course web page was often incorrect. I was not the only student who did not fathom which role the assignments played in the course until reading week six. I suppose it all climaxed on the final exam when we got the wrong exam - and the not so pleasant surprise that BETA was allowed although it was written THREE TIMES on the course home page that it wasn"t. Please do something about this. You"re not supposed to spend a few hours each week wondering about how the administrative aspects of a course work. It also makes life impossible to plan.» (Very badly)
- It would have been very well if there would been a very serious error, the examination must be clear in all aspects several weeks in advance! If the web page says "During the exam only pencil and eraser are allowed. Books, notes, calculators et.c. are not allowed." then it"s not okay to write beta as an aid on the exam!» (Rather badly)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.25

Study climate

11. What is your opinion about the structure of the lectures?

1 (Very unstructured)»		4		30%
2»		4		30%
3»		5		38%
4»		0		0%
5 (Very structured)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.07 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Väldigt mycket hoppande fram och tillbaka och väldigt otydligt vad som gicks igenom och varför. » (1 (Very unstructured))
- What structure? There was none. You never knew which subject would be treated on beforehand (if you studied the chapter that was given on the course homepage, you more often than not found that the lecture was about something else). Neither was there any coherence in the lectures - I really missed a red line from the beginning to the end of one class (or one half of a class, for that matter). Also, it was vague where theorems and proofs were started and ended. The lecturer kept circling and underlining every single word he wrote until the black board was just a mess. I envy the student who manages to get any information at all from lectures like that.» (1 (Very unstructured))
- Det var svårt att förstå sammanhanget och vad de olika delarna av kursen används till. Fler exempel och tydligare mål hade underlättat.» (2)
- The structure definitely needs improvement» (2)
- Lectures where increadibly unstructured. Specially the first half and the last two lectures.» (2)
- Alexei have a tendency to underline and encircle almost everything on the board, which is most confusing since that usually means extra important... everything can"t possibly be extra important? » (2)
- They where not very easy to follow all the time, Alexei is nice but a little bit unstructured.» (3)

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		5		38%
Very good»		7		53%
I did not seek help»		1		7%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- There was no problem getting to ask your question via e-mail or in person - you just had to be prepared to be treated like an idiot by the lecturer who seemed to think that we were should already know everything. Also the answers often weren"t half helpful (too cryptical or answers to a completely different question that you didn"t actually ask).» (Rather good)
- Quick responses via email very helpful! » (Very good)
- Alexei always helped us when we asked him at his office, and did so very well. » (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		1		7%
Very well»		10		76%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		15%

Genomsnitt: 4.07

- If you don"t have worthwile lectures and a course book that is Chinese to you, who do you turn to? Your friends.» (Rather well)

14. How was the course workload?

1 (Too low)»		0		0%
2»		6		46%
3»		4		30%
4»		3		23%
5 (Too high)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- The crappy book increased the workload from slightly too little, to average.» (3)
- I think it might have been accurate if I could have spent time that I now used to try and understand how the course administration worked, which material was really treated et cetera actually solving problems.» (4)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.07

Summarizing questions

15. How well did the course fullfill your expectations?

1 (not at all)»		4		30%
2»		4		30%
3»		3		23%
4»		2		15%
5 (very well)»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Detta är ingen kurs i matematisk modellering utan en renodlad kurs i ordinära differentialekvationer och dynamiska system och borde namnges därefter.» (1 (not at all))
- Framförallt för att kursen heter ODE och matematisk modellering och det inte fanns något inslag alls av modellering i kursen. Det var en väldigt stor besvikelse.» (1 (not at all))
- I looked forward to this course since it treats an interesting and very important subject. I was gravely disappointed. All I got was stress, some more stress and not learning anything at all. I"m incredibly disappointed.» (1 (not at all))
- I had very high expectations for this course, sadly they were not met.» (2)

16. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		5		38%
Fair»		2		15%
Adequate»		2		15%
Good»		4		30%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

- Dålig kurslitteratur tillsammans med föreläsningar som inte gav något större sammanhang gjorde att kursen blev svår att tycka om» (Fair)
- » (Adequate)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

19. Additional comments