DD2435 Mathematical modeling of biological systems AND DA7048 Modelling of processes in cell biology

Resultat av kursutvärdering

    Evaluation of both DD2435 and DA7048. If you have attended DA7048 Modeling of processes in cell biology, choose the alternatives labeled DA7048 in questions concerning the other course DD2435 Mathematical modeling of biological systems.

  1. How do you percieve the course?

    1. 20% (1 st) Very easy.
    2. 0% (0 st) Easy.
    3. 60% (3 st) Average.
    4. 0% (0 st) Rather difficult.
    5. 20% (1 st) Difficult.

    Any comments, e.g. on specific parts of the course:

    The course is difficult how ever the exam doesn't reflect so exam is too easy for the course

  2. Was it clear from the start what the goal of the course was?

    1. 40% (2 st) Yes.
    2. 40% (2 st) Not sure.
    3. 20% (1 st) No.

  3. Do you find the course interesting and meaningful?

    1. 40% (2 st) Yes, very.
    2. 40% (2 st) Yes.
    3. 20% (1 st) Neutral.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not particularly.
    5. 0% (0 st) No.

    Any comments, e.g. on specific parts of the course that are missing or could be excluded:

    It could have been more interesting, as a biologist I found difficult to follow lectures and mathematics in it. I think if lectures were made more efficient frequent it would help students like me grasp the concept better as the contents of course is very interesting.

  4. Do you think your preexising knolwedge was sufficient when the course started?

    1. 60% (3 st) Yes.
    2. 0% (0 st) Not sure.
    3. 40% (2 st) No.

    Any comments, e.g. on specific parts of the course:

    Since, I totally come from biology background, dumping me directly to MATLAB without even having any knowledge about it was too tough for me.

  5. How do you find the the pile of printed material (kursbunten)?

    1. 20% (1 st) Very good.
    2. 0% (0 st) Good.
    3. 60% (3 st) OK.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not so good.
    5. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    6. 20% (1 st) Did not use it.

  6. How did you find the course book Johnston and Wu: Foundations of Cellular Neurophysiology?

    1. 0% (0 st) Very good.
    2. 40% (2 st) Good.
    3. 20% (1 st) OK.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not so good.
    5. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    6. 40% (2 st) Did not use it.

  7. How did you find the course book Fall et al:Computational Cell Biology?

    1. 0% (0 st) Very good.
    2. 0% (0 st) Good.
    3. 20% (1 st) OK.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not so good.
    5. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    6. 80% (4 st) Did not use it.

    Any comments on the book (write first Course pile, JW or Fall):

  8. How did you find the reading directions for the course pile and the books?

    1. 0% (0 st) Very good.
    2. 40% (2 st) Good.
    3. 20% (1 st) OK.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not so good.
    5. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    6. 40% (2 st) Did not use it.

  9. What do you think about the other course material?

    1. 20% (1 st) Too much.
    2. 60% (3 st) Sufficient.
    3. 20% (1 st) Too little.

    Any comments on the other course material:

    Most of the information was extracted from other sources, mostly internet.

  10. How large fraction of the lectures did you attend?

    1. 0% (0 st) Less than 50%.
    2. 0% (0 st) 50-70%.
    3. 40% (2 st) 70-90%.
    4. 60% (3 st) More than 90%.

  11. How did you find the lectures? (Is the content explained well? Does the teacher speak and write clearly, etc?)

    1. 40% (2 st) Very good.
    2. 20% (1 st) Good.
    3. 20% (1 st) OK.
    4. 20% (1 st) Not so good.
    5. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    6. 0% (0 st) Did not attend/attended very little.

    Any comments on the lectures:

    I don't know about others but for me I got lost in most of the lectures.

  12. How did you find the level of the lectures? Was the knowledge level of your preexisting knowledge taken inte account? Did the lectures give you anything in terms of knowledge?

    1. 20% (1 st) Too high level, too much or too difficult material.
    2. 60% (3 st) Good level, adequate and interesting material.
    3. 20% (1 st) Too low level, too little or too simple material.

    Any comments on the level of the lectures:

  13. In the second half of the lectures, questions were given and answered with voting (rock, paper, scissors signs). How did you find this kind of student-teacher interaction?

    1. 80% (4 st) I found it stimulating and it provides feed-back on my comprehension.
    2. 20% (1 st) I find it neutral, neither good nor bad.
    3. 0% (0 st) I found it less useful, time and effort can be used on better activities.

    Any comments on the voting exersize:

  14. How did you find the labs?

    1. 0% (0 st) Very good.
    2. 40% (2 st) Good.
    3. 20% (1 st) OK.
    4. 20% (1 st) Not so good.
    5. 20% (1 st) Bad.
    6. 0% (0 st) Did not do the labs.

  15. Was the information you needed to complete the labs sufficient? E.g. was the lab instructions and the information given during lectures sufficient?

    1. 0% (0 st) The information was very good.
    2. 20% (1 st) The information was good.
    3. 20% (1 st) Acceptable.
    4. 20% (1 st) The information was not quite sufficient.
    5. 40% (2 st) The information was not at all sufficient.

    Any comments on the labs:

    Questions on kth social was ignored, the instructions clearly wasnt made for us and just some old lab re-used without adapting it for us.
    ---
    Considering that labs were performed in groups and offered bonus points, each of which could raise a grade, should have rather been scrutinized for every individual. Along with the fact that the question papers with answers of this subject for previous examinations are available on the course webpage, the final grades are not a reflection of a student's understanding but of his/her memory of these papers as most questions were repeated in this year's exam as well.

  16. How did you find the exam, did it reflect the content of the course and the goal of the course?

    1. 20% (1 st) Very good.
    2. 20% (1 st) Good.
    3. 40% (2 st) OK.
    4. 0% (0 st) Not so good.
    5. 20% (1 st) Bad.
    6. 0% (0 st) Did not do the exam yet.

  17. How did you find the project and the project presentation?

    1. 40% (2 st) Very good.
    2. 0% (0 st) Good.
    3. 60% (3 st) Acceptable.
    4. 0% (0 st) Bad.
    5. 0% (0 st) Did not do it, or took part in DA7048.

    Any comments on the project:

  18. How many courses did you study in parallel this period (period 1)?

    1. 40% (2 st) One.
    2. 40% (2 st) Two.
    3. 0% (0 st) Three.
    4. 20% (1 st) Four or more.

  19. How large fraction of your total study time during period 1 did you spend on this course?

    1. 0% (0 st) Less than 20%.
    2. 20% (1 st) 20-40%.
    3. 40% (2 st) 40-60%.
    4. 20% (1 st) 60-80%.
    5. 20% (1 st) More than 80%.

  20. Any additional comments on the course:

    Interesting subject!
    ---
    I did really enjoy the course
    ---
    The level of the exam must be set much higher than the present. The final grade hardly reflects on the understanding of the student. Developing teamwork is a great initiative, however it is required to also find a solution to develop and evaluate individual ability as this can sometimes suffer when working in groups.

    Thank you for filling in the questionare

erikf@csc.kth.se

Denna sammanställning har genererats med ACE.