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.

RRY045 Numerical methods in radio and space science, RRY045

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-04-04 - 2008-04-17
Antal svar: 6
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 100%
Kontaktperson: Rüdiger Haas»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

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.

6 svarande

At most 15 hours/week» 3 50%

Around 20 hours/week» 2 33%

Around 25 hours/week» 0 0%

Around 30 hours/week» 1 16%

At least 35 hours/week» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.83

- less than 15h» (At most 15 hours/week)

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

6 svarande

0%» 0 0%

25%» 0 0%

50%» 0 0%

75%» 3 50%

100%» 3 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.5

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?

6 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals» 1 16%

The goals are difficult to understand» 0 0%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 1 16%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 4 66%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- could be clearer....means Cathy part.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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.

5 svarande

No, the goals are set too low» 0 0%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 5 100%

No, the goals are set too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

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

6 svarande

No, not at all» 0 0%

To some extent» 3 50%

Yes, definitely» 3 50%

I don"t know/have not been examined yet» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

Teaching and course administration

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

6 svarande

Small extent» 0 0%

Some extent» 3 50%

Large extent» 3 50%

Great extent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- Large extent in Alessandros part.» (Some extent)
- wavelets part in the teaching, the best.» (Large extent)

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

6 svarande

Small extent» 2 33%

Some extent» 2 33%

Large extent» 2 33%

Great extent» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- If you attended the course regularly, and made notes, it was not necessary to use a lot of other printed literature.» (Some extent)
- Wavelet parts gave many reference, Kalman filter too.» (Large extent)

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

6 svarande

Very badly» 0 0%

Rather badly» 0 0%

Rather well» 5 83%

Very well» 1 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

9. Cathy"s part of the course:

How do you judge the particular content of this part of the course?

6 svarande

Not useful at all» 0 0%

Partly useful» 3 50%

Mostly useful» 1 16%

Very useful» 2 33%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- elementary, not advanced numerical metods.» (Partly useful)
- This part was mostly an introduction to the numerical methods, which I had already known (except some advanced topic), but it"s understandable, that this part was also necessary to have the same base of everyone, and to understand the further parts clearly. The lab part was the most useful for me personally, since I had not been familiar enough with Matlab before. » (Partly useful)
- The lab could be more fun if students and teachers all invovle together, instead, sitting oneself try to solve problem.» (Partly useful)

10. Rüdiger"s part of the course:

How do you judge the particular content of this part of the course?

6 svarande

Not useful at all» 0 0%

Partly useful» 3 50%

Mostly useful» 3 50%

Very useful» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I would suggest to have a presentation form of this part with handouts using projector. This part is quite short in time, so it would be better not to waste the time with writing on the blackboard and in the notebook, but to have more time for the discussion and interpretation. Or the part should be a bit longer. » (Mostly useful)
- The predicition, present and the past are impressive to me mathmatically» (Mostly useful)

11. Alessandro"s part of the course:

How do you judge the particular content of this part of the course?

6 svarande

Not useful at all» 0 0%

Partly useful» 0 0%

Mostly useful» 2 33%

Very useful» 4 66%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- It was great that the part complemented my previous mostly theoretical knowledge with some useful practical aspects. The style of the presentations and the very interactive way of teaching was extraordinarily good. » (Very useful)
- It helps me understand so much until I could not believe I could tell 5 important points in the oral exam. A good start in math part of wavelets.» (Very useful)

Study climate

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

6 svarande

Very poor» 0 0%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 1 16%

Very good» 5 83%

I did not seek help» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

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

6 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 0 0%

Rather well» 2 33%

Very well» 4 66%

I did not seek cooperation» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

14. How was the course workload?

6 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 0 0%

Adequate» 5 83%

High» 1 16%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- But the home exam was very time-consuming. It would have been better either with a little bit fewer tasks or longer time between hand-out and deadline.» (Adequate)

15. How was the total workload this study period?

6 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 1 16%

Adequate» 4 66%

High» 1 16%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

Summarizing questions

16. What is your general impression of the course?

6 svarande

Poor» 1 16%

Fair» 0 0%

Adequate» 1 16%

Good» 3 50%

Excellent» 1 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Mainly Chatys part are poor. The rest if good.» (Poor)
- The course was interesting even without a background in space science, which is very good.» (Excellent)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Kalman filter, Wavelet.»
- Alessandro"s lectures. He is a great teacher. Most of Cathy"s part is quite useful as well.»
- Alessandro"s method of teaching»
- Wavelet and Kalman filter»

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Chaty"s part. It should be more advanced and more examples.»
- I think that the Kalman filtering part had too short time for us to really understand and learn it. It doesn"t fit completely natural with the two other parts, it maybe fits better in another course.»
- The numerical method in Cathy part should be a little advanced.»

19. Additional comments

- Overall, All teachers had been tried very best in the courses, that also includes the teaching assistant in Cathy part. About the exam, I sugguest to have more days to prepare it. Cathy parts questions were not so clear to me, indeed.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från