|
Course Evaluation, FYTN05/TEK267 Theoretical Biophysics, Fall 09, Department of Theoretical Physics |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Course Evaluation, FYTN05/TEK267 Theoretical Biophysics, Fall 09, Department of Theoretical Physics |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 = very negative; 2 = negative; 3 = neutral; 4 = positive; 5 = very positive |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Personal comments will be appreciated! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A. General |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the course? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 have commented on this question Grade = 3 (one comment) — In my opinion a theoretical course should be more deducing, not just using simple models to understand the general bahaviour. (e.g. although the random walk model leads to the correct distributions it is quite far away from the processes that realy happen and with this model the Einstein relation CANNOT be understood (because it is not clear weather there is an aditional factor lets say Pi ost sqrt pi or ln2 or some other constant one could get with an acurate calculation) Grade = 4 (4 comments) — well structured course; close to the suggested literature; computer assignments fit nicely; lecturers answered all question patiently — This course was good but you must have some background in chemistry and biology I think. P.S. I'm erasmus student so all the organisation around this course was very new for me. — Very interesting and relevant course, but quite hectic towards the end. If possible, introducing the lab assignments and maybe also the seminar projects earlier in the course would make things more manageble. — Grade = 5 (one comment) — A interesting course, but it feels like there are alot of physics in the course and not always so much biology. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
B. Literature |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of Nelson's book? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
8 have commented on this question Grade = 1 (one comment) — to expensive, he talk and talks and talks and doesn't tell much with it. for a physicist many of the formulas are too much simplified and not deduced well from realy basic statements Grade = 2 (one comment) — too much historical stuff, not straight-forward in solving problems Grade = 3 (2 comments) — It feels like Nelson says s lot of things that are not really highlighted in the course which makes it some time hard to connect the litterature to the lectures. The litterature could've had more biology examples. — sometimes too much talking Grade = 4 (3 comments) — Very much text, too little mathematical rigour. It's quite difficult to find important formulas if you want to look them up. — This book is very good but I think it's too huge in comparison to the time we have passed on it. The book is expensive and I liked the teachers help us to loan it or maybe buy it in group to have it cheaper. — Good textbook and layout but sometimes too circuitous Grade = 5 (one comment) — Easy to understand and the focus on the big questions and concepts of physics is well done. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
E. Seminar Presentations |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the seminar presentations? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (2 comments) — too many presentation on partly boring stuff. (The Nelson is not a good book for Physicist) — too long! Grade = 3 (3 comments) — 19 presentations on one day are hard to pick up. — Intereseting way to teach the last chapters in the book and it is always good practise with oral assignments. But it was a long day. — It was difficult for me to prepare and present it but it was a good practice. The other group did it nice. Grade = 4 (3 comments) — Between preparing for the oral exam, writing up the computer assignments and preparing for exam in parallel course it was very difficult to find time to work on the presnetation. Introducing the projects one week earlier might be a good idea. — It was way too much too listen to for one day. It was impossible to stay concentrated. — Presentations quite interesting but all in a row is too long Grade = 5 (one comment) — A very useful thing to do. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
F. Oral Exams |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the oral exams? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (2 comments) — That depends on the marks... They seemed to be fair. — I have completly misunderstood what we expected to prepare and do during the exam. I was thinking we only have to prepare the questions and answer it during the exam. Moreover, I didnt know we have to prepare each part of the course because I only received two question sheet =/ By the way I think that this kind of examination could be great if we know what we expected to do Grade = 3 (one comment) — too long (2hours for one lecture!!) Grade = 5 (3 comments) — Not as scary as one might expect. — The oral exams were milder than expected and it feelt like a really good way to examine this course even though it makes you very nervous. It's always good to be able to discuss if one doesn't really understand the question. — very fair; good climate during the exam |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contact person: Stefan Wallin, stefan@thep.lu.se Last modified: 19/05/10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
