FUI's course evaluation

IN4070 - Logikk

Assessment:

Choose a question to see data from the student assessment Choose a question to see data from the student assessment:
What is your general impression of the course? What do you think of the course's difficulty level? What do you think of the amount of work required in relation to the number of credits given? What do you think about the scope of topics that were covered in this course? How often did you participate in the lectures? What is your general impression of the quality of the lectures? How important was the teaching method or methods to your learning and understanding of the course curriculum? What is your general impression of the quality of the teaching method(s)? What do you think of the difficulty level of the assesments? How important were the assignments/assessments to your learning and understanding of the curriculum? What do you think of the amount of work involved with completing the assessment? What did you think of the difficulty level of the graded assessment? Throughout the course, how did you experience the availability of the course teachers and/or group teachers if you had questions or found something unclear? Show all Hide

Summary:

The course is generally viewed positively, with most respondents rating it as Quite good and only one as Somewhat bad. Opinions on difficulty vary widely, ranging from Too difficult and Difficult to Easy and Too easy, while about a third find the level Appropriate. The workload is largely considered Appropriate or Small, and the scope of topics is mainly seen as Appropriate, though a few perceive it as either Large or Too small. Lectures are mostly rated Quite good to Very good, with one respondent clearly dissatisfied. Mandatory assignments are perceived as Easy to appropriately challenging and manageable in workload, whereas the final exam is experienced by several as technically demanding and overly difficult. Teacher and assistant availability are widely regarded as Very good, and digital communication and the course website are generally functional, with only minor issues noted.

Students highlight interesting topics, a well‑structured course, and a committed and knowledgeable teacher as clear strengths. The logical themes and proofs are appreciated, and both lecturers and group teachers are described as friendly, engaged, and responsive. One respondent notes the lecturer’s clear and well‑paced slides, covering topics in detail without being slow, and praises his quick responsiveness. Group teachers are commended for genuine concern for student success. Overall, the teaching is often seen as well organized and the subject matter as very interesting.

Logikk er egentlig sinnsykt kult, men det hadde vært så fint om det kunne blitt undervist på en bedre måte enn å gjøre tung teori enda tyngre.

Challenges focus on depth, balance and alignment between teaching and assessment. Some students express a desire for more mathematical depth, additional topics and more comprehensive proofs, along with more structured and demanding assignments spread throughout the course. Others find the lectures difficult to follow and request that complex material be made more accessible and engaging, suggesting it be “a little more dumbed down”. The final exam is criticized for being very technical, focusing heavily on narrow topics rather than core concepts such as soundness and completeness, causing many to struggle to pass.

Lag en eksamen som er laget for å hente poeng fra studentene. Det er åpenbart en rar eksamen når sånn halvparten nesten stryker.

Additional suggestions include strengthening group sessions with more structured activities, increasing assignment difficulty and representativeness, and allowing more time for the programming assignment earlier in the semester, which currently has a short deadline despite requiring significant effort.

About the course evaluation

The course evaluation is done by students in FUI (Fagutvalget ved Institutt for informatikk), and is based on questionnaires made at the end of each semester.