These are the results of the student survey of teaching on CA305 to CA3 in Semester 1 of 2002/3
A total of 13 questions from the standard University questionnaire were asked, plus 4 open question. 33 responses to the survey were returned. All were anonymous. The results of this survey are presented below:
| Question |
Strongly |
Agree |
Mixed |
Disagree |
Disagree |
| The lecturer is enthusiastic about teaching | 32 | 1 | |||
| The lecturer communicates ideas in a clear manner | 20 | 13 | |||
| The lecturer is well prepared | 27 | 6 | |||
| The lecturer handles questions well | 24 | 9 | |||
| The objectives of the module are clearly stated | 8 | 21 | 4 | ||
| It is clear how topics in the module relate to one another | 7 | 22 | 3 | 1 | |
| I have learned a lot from taking this module | 5 | 24 | 4 | ||
| I am happy with the amount of material | 6 | 14 | 12 | 1 | |
| The pace of the module is satisfactory | 4 | 26 | 3 | ||
| The library is well stocked with relevant books | 8 | 15 | 9 | 1 | |
| The module covers the right amount of material | 2 | 20 | 11 | ||
| The assignment are relevant to my needs | 6 | 17 | 7 | 3 | |
| I would recommend this module to a student for next year | 10 | 20 | 3 | ||
| Topics I liked most on this module are: | Risk management Project planning Resource allocation Most of them Cost estimation Function points |
||||
| Topics I liked least on this module are: | Function points Standards - ISO & CMM COCOMO |
||||
| Other topics which should have been taught or covered in more detail are: |
Case studies Standard - CMM and relevence of standards |
||||
| Other comments: | 2 Hours is too long, would prefer 2 x 1 hour lectures Project was realistic Will do your SPI module in 4th year Too many notes to print off Course beneficial and relevent to real world Hard to understand what was required in project |
||||
Page last updated 04 March 2003