FUI's course evaluation

IN5210 - Information Systems

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:

Respondents’ overall impression of the course is moderately positive, with most responses between Somewhat good and Very good. The difficulty level is mainly perceived as Appropriate to Difficult, with individual responses at both Too difficult and Easy. The workload is mostly experienced as Large or Appropriate, and the scope of topics is widely seen as Large. Lectures are generally rated from Somewhat good to Quite good, with many students attending Always or Often. Seminars and other teaching offers are overall seen as Quite good to Somewhat good. Ongoing assessments are considered to have appropriate difficulty and workload and to be Important for learning, while the graded assessment is mostly perceived as Appropriate or High in difficulty. The availability of teachers and group teachers is generally viewed as Very good or Quite good, though a minority report a more negative experience.

Students particularly appreciate the lectures and seminars, highlighting good discussions, interesting and relevant material, and the value of hearing from different lecturers. Several describe the field as important and exciting, and many find the course content relevant for further work or thesis. The assessments during the semester are regarded as well‑calibrated in both level and workload, and some students describe the exam as an interesting format that supported learning, including helping them to better understand academic papers. Group teachers and seminar leaders are praised by some for explaining concepts in new ways and facilitating discussion.

Good lectures, good seminars, good discussion, interesting content when you got the hang of it

At the same time, a recurring theme is that the course feels broad, abstract and sometimes confusing, with an unclear “core” and too many topics to grasp in depth. Several students report leaving the course with limited understanding of many of the areas despite full attendance, and ask for fewer topics, deeper focus and clearer connections between themes and to the exam. Some find the content particularly demanding for students with a health background. The seminars are described as uneven: while some found them valuable, others experienced them as confusing, not sufficiently learning‑oriented, or too loosely structured in terms of which questions were covered. There is strong criticism of mandatory seminar attendance, especially from students working part‑time, who feel this requirement limits their ability to prioritise lectures that they perceive as more useful.

Suggestions for improvement include narrowing and structuring the course content more clearly, introducing more real‑world health‑sector examples, clarifying what is and is not relevant for the exam, spacing the assignments better and showing more explicitly how each assignment relates to potential exam questions, as well as relaxing or redesigning attendance requirements so that students can better manage their own learning.

The course contents were relevant for the thesis, but it was a pain to go through because of mandatory attendance, as a person who works part time, that was difficult to plan for.

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.