|
Theoretical Biophysics Fall 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Theoretical Biophysics Fall 2012 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 have commented on this question Grade = 4 (4 comments) — It was an interesting course with a lot of good insights and explanations of physical phenomenas. — Informative. I learned many new concepts. As with 99% of all courses, it suffers from lectures being to the most part aloud-reading from the book. Which is a waste of time as I will in any case be forced to read the book to actually understand the material. It would be much more benefitting if the lectures required any actual mental effort by the students. I for one don't learn anything unless I try to do it myself. Listening to a monolog about thermodynamics does very little to shatter my faulty preconceptions. For more thoughts about physics teaching, read: http://www.refsmmat.com/articles/shutup.html — intresting — Interesting but very easy. Grade = 5 (one comment) — Very good course, perhaps you should mention earlier how the grading and exam will work. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
B. Literature |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of Nelson's book? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (one comment) — much unrelated text. (could give the same information in half the pages) Grade = 3 (2 comments) — Too much information. It's difficult to prepeare with it for an exam. I used only my lecture notes. — Didn't like the "your turn" method. Some things werent explained properly Grade = 4 (3 comments) — It was good and interesting for the most part. One problem though was that it was difficult to read the chapters one by one individually as they often used concepts and derivations from earlier chapters. — It starts out quite good but loses some its edge towards the edge. He is unable to present simple explanations in chapters 8-9, which is possible to do in one or two sentences many times. — Didn't use it much, but it was a good read the few times i did. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
C. Lectures |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the lectures with Carsten Peterson? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (one comment) — slow and childishly simple. I guess that they are needed for some who haven't read any biology at all, but had i known that they would not pick up speed i would not have attended any of them and i would still have ace'd the exam. Grade = 4 (3 comments) — Informative — Good and informative. It was easy to follow and I think I understood the most parts, but the speed was a little bit too slow I think. — Perhaps a to small part to have its own exam. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the lectures with Bo Söderberg? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (one comment) — Lost me after 10 minutes in most lectures, after which the lecture can mostly be described as "calculus magic shows". Grade = 3 (one comment) — Quite fast Grade = 4 (2 comments) — A bit fast and confusing but still very interesting of course! — Bo was the opposite to Carsten. He was super fast and showed some nice derivations and tied a lot of theory together which was very nice to see. The speed of his lectures were too fast though it was hard to follow sometimes. Grade = 5 (one comment) — Good! Good pace, lots of information in a short time without(!) crossing the line for what one can take in. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the lectures with Henrik Jönsson? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 have commented on this question Grade = 4 (one comment) — Henriks lectures were good I think good level and adequate speed. Grade = 5 (3 comments) — Very interesting with good examples. — Interesting and inspiring! I do however believe that no one would have lagged behind if the pace were increased a bit. — I liked them very much. Henrik made attempts to engage the audience in the lecture but alas failed to the most part due to an audience which is neither familiar nor prepared for such engagements. Don't take no for an answer. Make it clear that you expect a response. But likewise, make it clear that it is OK to think about the question for two minutes or such. People have to be trained to take part in this fashion. Don't allow them to coast along silently. If no one has an answer after two minutes, point and ask "What do YOU think about this?". People don't understand that the point isn't to get the right answer, the point is to start a discussion. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the lectures with Stefan Wallin? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4 have commented on this question Grade = 3 (one comment) — Felt kind of strictly taken from the book. Grade = 4 (one comment) — Also good lectures. Some of the concepts were quite complicated, and it was hard to follow even though he had a nice pace during the lectures. Grade = 5 (one comment) — Highly comprehensible and pedagogical. Grade not given (one comment) — Missed most so have no opinion |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
E. Seminar Presentations |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the seminar presentations? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
7 have commented on this question Grade = 2 (3 comments) — It was a good way to practice some presentation skills. It would have been better if it was weighted into the grade though. As it was now it was enough to just go there and present and the quality of the presentations were quite poor i think. — i didnt get much out of it... — Since they were not part of the grading I feel that some presentations were lacking. Had the impressions that some groups "just wanted to get it done" Grade = 3 (one comment) — A little too long. Grade = 4 (3 comments) — I learned a lot from my part of the presentation. But it was difficult to learn something from the other parts. — I didn't mind it, but i don't feel that i learned as much from it as i could have done by studying something else rather then prepping for a speech. — There was a benefit in the sense that the part of the chapter I was presenting, I got to know very well. There was no benefit in listening to the presentation of others in terms of learning however. Acceptable though due to the benefit to the actual speakers. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
F. Oral Exams |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is your general opinion of the oral exams? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 have commented on this question Grade = 3 (one comment) — It was very varying difficulty level depending on what section one had to explain and who was the responsible teacher. But it was good to have an oral exam for once even though it was nerve wrecking. Grade = 4 (3 comments) — Two times one hour is quite long. But the atmosphere was very laid back, that's good. — I actually learned new things during the oral exam which was great. But it was also apparent that it depended heavily on who your examiner were. The study questions were good guides in what was expected of your but for some of them the answers could not be found in the book (by me at least). For example "what was the remarkable thing about the Einstein relation?". — It was alright for me, but i belive that a rather large chunk of ones grade depends on who you get on the exam. Stefan's part was by far the trickiest and Bosse is not easily impressed. Grade = 5 (one comment) — Great way of examination Grade not given (one comment) — Oral exams freaks me out! Luckily it helps when all the professors are nice persons. It felt a bit unfair that the grade was based on, basically, which two professors you got since some parts was obviously easier than other. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contact person: Stefan Wallin, stefan@thep.lu.se Last modified: 14/11/12 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
