| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Academic Year: | 2007/2008 |
| 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. | 4.244 | 45 |
| 2 | Grade likely to get for the module. | 4.07 | 43 |
| 3 | Difficulty level of the module. | 3.978 | 45 |
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 | | | 21 (46.67%) | 17 (37.78%) | 5 (11.11%) | 1 (2.22%) | 1 (2.22%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 206 (12.61%) | 710 (43.45%) | 518 (31.70%) | 145 (8.87%) | 55 (3.37%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 309 (11.23%) | 1224 (44.48%) | 946 (34.38%) | 201 (7.30%) | 72 (2.62%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | A | B | C | D | F |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 16 (37.21%) | 18 (41.86%) | 5 (11.63%) | 4 (9.30%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 360 (22.96%) | 593 (37.82%) | 396 (25.26%) | 165 (10.52%) | 54 (3.44%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 559 (20.91%) | 1254 (46.91%) | 616 (23.05%) | 189 (7.07%) | 55 (2.06%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | Very Difficult | Difficult | Average | Easy | Very Easy |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 10 (22.22%) | 25 (55.56%) | 9 (20.00%) | 1 (2.22%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 487 (29.75%) | 818 (49.97%) | 293 (17.90%) | 30 (1.83%) | 9 (.55%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 533 (19.35%) | 1160 (42.12%) | 956 (34.71%) | 91 (3.30%) | 14 (.51%) |
| Q1. | Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, and suggest possible improvements. |
| 1. | Nothing too much.. other than perhaps the lecture can be held in a seminar room seminar style instead (with tables) since the class size isn't too big.. would be more cozy and learning might possibly be enchanced! |
| 2. | Schemers are thrown into deep pool by the second lesson, so it might be a bit scary to those without prior programming experience. This might be for the best, however, as it sets the tone for this module, and indicates to us that it will only be getting harder. I'm sure many of my classmates will recommend this module enthusiastically to the juniors next time. |
| 3. | This module is very very very good! I have friends in CS1101X and CZ1102, and what we are learning are really worlds apart. This module focuses not so much on the syntax of any one particular language (which is good since programming languages evolve, get superseded or outdated) but instead teaches us the important programming concepts that can be applied to any language. I think that it should be made compulsory at least for those who seriously intend to do alot of programming in the future or pursue a Computing related degree. |
| 4. | This module is one of the most interesting modules that I have. |
| 5. | Great module, great lecturer. Kinda the closest group of students among my modules this sem. Quite good. Encourages interaction among students. Workload a bit challenging. |
| 6. | the module has enhanced my thinking abilities and taught me creative problem solving skills. the pace is rather fast for students without any programming background. though the buddy/mentor system was introduced, earlier implementation would have been better =) |
| 7. | This module really helps us look at a problem with new prespective. Since it is demanding a different way of thinking it is quite challenging. |
| 8. | 6 MC |
| 9. | CS1101S, although a very difficult module according to me but can be really made interesting with the increased interaction of student's with teachers in more practical sessions. Also, the lecturer speaks very fast. So if he could concentrate on that then it would be really nice. |
| 10. | Make the course more practical. ie more practicals. |
| 11. | The strength of the module is the ideas that are inculcated in the students especially those of recursion, which lay a strong foundation in programming. Scheme is cool! |
| 12. | i think the lecturer is quite good. while the module itself is quite difficult. |
| 13. | Pace is fast but exciting and interesting. |
| 14. | Very good for basic background for programming, helps you get in a programming mindset |
| 15. | Very challenging but very interesting as well. Lectures will go at breakneck speed and there will be alot to do, but they are a lot of fun if one likes programming. |
| 16. | Very useful. But requires alot of time to practice. |
| 17. | Strength: - introduces a new light/perspective of programming to students - encourages creativity and participation of students beyond what is required for the module's completion - it's small number enables the students to have more interaction with the lecturer/tutors Weaknesses: - the workload is not proportional to its MCs - the pace might be too fast for the slower students - slower students often get demoralised by the sheer number of better students that are prominent Improvements: - try to introduce more schemes to encourage the slower students so that they can score - make it 6 MCs? |
| 18. | It's really interesting. Prof ben is passionate about teaching and helping students. |
| 19. | Strengths - small lecture group. Easier to learn. |
| 20. | fun and challenging, involves alot thinking. |
| 21. | Pace a little fast, but manageable eventually. More focus can be placed on the theory of computer science in the aspect of programming |
| 22. | This module is generally not fair for students without programming background. Statistic have shown that students with programming background, they generally score better than students without. Please look into improving the life of people with poorer results, or else future batches of students will suffer too. Students who are weak in scheme are not lazy or less talented but this is a new program that cannot be grasped easily by students without background. More time is appreciated. No point squeezing Scheme and Java Script into one module. If the module requires students to sacrifice all form of "life" in order to do well, why not offer it as a six module course? |
| 23. | The strength for this module is good coverage of knowledge needed for basic programmer. The weakness is this module is very heavy for a programming beginner without any programming background. |
| 24. | This module help students think wisely about a problem. |
| 25. | The module is so fast, and a lot of material to be covered |
| 26. | Since only a few students take this module, the students can learn in small class, which is good to them. There is no obvious weaknesses. |
| 27. | It encourages students to learn how to think but students may spend too much time to think the solutions for problem sets. Sometimes, the problem set questions are not very clear that may lead students to wrong ways. |
| 28. | - Interesting lectures - Exciting contests - Tricky exams |
| 29. | It's really an excellent module especially for the scheme part. The lessons are well-arranged and the assignments are fun. |
| 30. | Strength is that this module can really enhance our thinking ability to some extent. |
| 31. | A very good module with a lot to offer. |
| 32. | Encourages higher-order thinking. Good and enriching team projects. Quite fast-paced, doesn't help students with no programming background much. Could be slower and more help given to weaker students. |
| 33. | More emphasis on the weaker students please. |
| 34. | Strengths: Interesting, fun, difficult Weaknesses: Heavily time-consuming |