 |
Seminar on Internetworking
Feedback, fall 2002
Answers given as numbers are averages. Otherwise, numbers denote the amount of students that gave that particular comment.
10 students filled out the feedback form. There were 19 students at the course.
How much time did you spend on this course?
- 131 hours (60-225)
How many credits should be awarded?
- 3,4 (3-4)
What were the most important things you learned at this course?
- Structuring/Writing a paper 7
- My own topic 6
- Presenting a paper/poster 6 (especially poster: 2)
- Other students' topics/IETF's work areas 3
- Current development areas 2
- The English course 1
- Added my interest to learn about different protocols/fields of study 1
- How much work it takes to finish the paper and find all typing errors 1
(Answers all together: 10)
What were the most difficult parts?
- Writing the paper (includes structuring) 4
- Finding material 3
- What to put in the paper/Get the whole picture of my topic 3
- Squeezing all information into the paper 2
- LaTeX 2
- Opponing 1
(Answers all together: 10)
Comment: Writing something of my own, or just like presenting something new like research result is the most difficult parts of this course.
Comments about the conference in Sjökulla
The comments were in general positive. Some more specific comments:
- Good for developing contacts
- The poster presentations needed more work than in other seminars.
- The food wasn't too good.
- Would have been encouraging if more people have stayed over night (especially from the course staff). (2 comments)
- The poster and oral presentation should have been explained better in the course web page.
- Helps preparing for a real conference / It's interesting to see how a conference works.
- The conference should be enhanced towards a real conference, e.g. contain a panel discussion (with the best papers' authors, teaching staff and invited speakers), more (2) lecturers by the professor, and guest lectures.
How useful was the course for you?
- 4,7
How interesting was the course for you?
- 4,4
How much did you learn? Give a grade:
- a lot - very much
Give a general grade for the whole course:
- 4,3
I got enough guidance:
- disagree: 2, neither agree nor disagree: 1, agree: 6, agree strongly: 1
I got guidance on time:
- disagree: 1, neither agree nor disagree: 3, agree: 3, agree strongly: 3
I found all instructions I needed on the web pages:
- disagree: 1, neither agree nor disagree: 1, agree: 6, agree strongly: 2
I would have wanted more instructions regarding:
- LaTeX (some basic classes or instructions) 1
- How to make a poster and oral presentation, before the conference 4
- The opponing instructions (should have been clearer) 1
- What to notice in the conference 1
- The overall conference team. Tutors must emphisise more that the student's topic is directed with the over all topic of the conference.
The schedule was:
- suitable: 9, too tight: 1
The intermediate number of submissions (2: Annotated TOC and Full Paper) was:
- too small: 1, suitable: 9
Comments about your tutor:
The comments were in general positive. Some needed more guidance, and especially missed personal meetings (two of which you were entitled to). The feedback has been passed onward to the tutors.
Comments about the assistant and the professor:
These were, too, in general positive. Thank you :)
Loose comment: "The professor wasn't present all too much, but he sure knows what he talks about."
General comments:
- It would be nice if this course was worth more credits, since it demands a lot of work.
- The first meeting with the tutor is very important, and so is the content of the first submission.
- You could add one more submission round in the first phase.
- Tutors and the professor should agree on the topic to make sure it is inline with the theme of the conference, and make sure the tutor is not left alone to decide this important part of the course.
- Competence of the tutors is important - head hunting is needed.
This page is maintained by Internetworking teaching staff,
E-mail: iwork@tml.hut.fi.
The page has been last updated on December 19th, 2002
URL: http://www.tml.hut.fi/Studies/T-110.551/2002/staff.html