| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Academic Year: | 2006/2007 |
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Semester: | 1 |
| Module: | PROGRAMMING METHODOLOGY - CS1101S |
| Note: | Feedback on module in general |
| Qn | Items Evaluated | Module Avg Score | Nos Responded |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Overall opinion of the module. | 3.818 | 11 |
| 2 | Grade likely to get for the module. | 3.636 | 11 |
| 3 | Difficulty level of the module. | 4 | 11 |
QN\SCORE | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Qn 1: Overall opinion of the module. | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | Poor |
Qn 2: Grade likely to get for the module. | A | B | C | D | F |
Qn 3: Difficulty level of the module. | Very Difficult | Difficult | Average | Easy | Very Easy |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | Poor |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 2 (18.18%) | 6 (54.55%) | 2 (18.18%) | 1 (9.09%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 136 (12.33%) | 464 (42.07%) | 386 (35.00%) | 94 (8.52%) | 23 (2.09%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 266 (12.60%) | 962 (45.57%) | 737 (34.91%) | 115 (5.45%) | 31 (1.47%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | A | B | C | D | F |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 3 (27.27%) | 3 (27.27%) | 3 (27.27%) | 2 (18.18%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 204 (19.34%) | 430 (40.76%) | 304 (28.82%) | 89 (8.44%) | 28 (2.65%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 386 (18.99%) | 1033 (50.81%) | 482 (23.71%) | 101 (4.97%) | 31 (1.52%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | Very Difficult | Difficult | Average | Easy | Very Easy |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 2 (18.18%) | 7 (63.64%) | 2 (18.18%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 287 (26.00%) | 542 (49.09%) | 245 (22.19%) | 27 (2.45%) | 3 (.27%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 348 (16.49%) | 851 (40.31%) | 816 (38.65%) | 92 (4.36%) | 4 (.19%) |
| Q1. | Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, and suggest possible improvements. |
| 1. | Pace of the course relatively quick but otherwise can be managed. For students without prior background on programming, it can be a little of a challenge. Lecturers are hardworking and willing to give a helping hand. |
| 2. | Please teach as though programming has never been taught before.. dont assume that the student understands whatever one says.. |
| 3. | The logic needed is the strength whereas the lack of coding taught is the weekness |
| 4. | Need more publicising. People nowadays only go for the "in" things. As in Java, rather than the real education. I think this module has really taught me a lot since the start of the Sem. Maybe becoz of the fear, never heard of the word "Scheme", hence making a lot of people to think twice b4 joining. I think there can be more publicising for it, to attract people. |
| 5. | I would say that this module is not difficult but I do not understand why I keep on doing badly in the exams >__ |
| 6. | The assignments are rather heavy. Each assignment should be shorter. |
| 7. | the module is as the professors claim 'cool', but it needs to be made a little easier for the simple reason that it is a bit too demanding!!the problem sets have to be a little more easier so that students can do other subjects aldo but the contests are really good!!! |
| 8. | strength: learn more concepts than cs1101 module weakness: N.A. suggestion: N.A. |
| 9. | In my opinion, this module is quite hard for student who have no prior programming background. My advice would be to start slowly in the begining of the semester so that students who have no programmimng background could adopt the rythm of the module. |