FUI's course evaluation

IN5140 - Smarte prosesser og smidige metoder i systemutvikling

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 respondents’ overall impression of the course is moderately positive. The responses range from Somewhat good to Quite good, with most choosing Somewhat good. The difficulty level is largely seen as Appropriate, and the workload is perceived as between Large and Appropriate in relation to the credits. The scope of topics is considered Large but generally acceptable. Lectures are judged from Somewhat good to Very good in quality, and additional teaching offers beyond lectures are mostly rated from Neither good nor bad to Very good. Mandatory assessments are viewed as Appropriate in difficulty and workload and Important for learning, while the graded assessment is considered Appropriate to Low in difficulty. The availability of teachers and group teachers is experienced as from Quite good to Very good.

Students highlight the curriculum and topics as a clear strength, describing the content as interesting and that they learned a lot. Several appreciate the use of a central book, as well as the quality and adaptability of group teachers and the group sessions when they worked well.

I liked that the course centered itself around a book in some part.

At the same time, there is recurring criticism of the quality and clarity of some lectures, especially guest lectures, which some describe as underprepared and not always aligned with the rest of the syllabus. Some students experienced group sessions as unengaging or unnecessary, partly because of low attendance, and group work as unevenly distributed amongst the group members. There is also feedback that some topics, such as DevOps, felt superficial and required extra self-study, and some respondents wanted the lectures to explain and explore this topic further. Some describe the midterm project as confusing and lacking structure, and one group reports problems with the project owner’s communication, which affected their delivery.

The guest lectures this year felt little thought-out and low quality.

Students suggest clearer expectations for each lecture, including what is most important to focus on for the exam, and better preparation and integration of guest lectures so that they contribute more directly to the syllabus. Several want improved structure and context for the midterm project, potentially with a more reliable project owner or a backup solution. There are also wishes for more in-depth and better-organised teaching on certain practical topics such as DevOps, and for group sessions and group work to be organised in ways that ensure better participation and learning outcomes.

The project needs better structure, maybe even a backup project owner that actually knows what he/she is doing.

The midterm project, it needs clearer structure and context.

The exam was fair and good, the only hard part about this course is that there’s a lot of syllabus and at times, some of that syllabus isn’t directly available.

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.