This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Lecture Course Feedback
There is a web-based course questionnaire which a student can fill out for any and every course that they take. This has been available since ca. 1995. Responses to the web-based questionnaire are made available to all staff and students via a web-based interface. Until 2003, paper versions of the form were used in parallel but the time required to reconcile paper and web-based feedback led us to withdraw the paper-based version. Advantages of paper-based form: a lecturer can hand them out in a lecture and give everyone five minutes to fill out a form, thus you are guaranteed a large number of responses. Advantages of the web-based form: automatic collation of results; results visible to everyone. Design of the form: a reasonably small number of “tick the boxes” responses and the freedom to write anything that you want. It is the “Best thing about the course”, “Worst thing about the course” and “Further comments” sections of the form which provide the best feedback for lecturing staff. The members of the Teaching Committee keep an eye on the responses and raise any concerns with other members of the Committee. When concerns are raised in another of the myriad feedback paths (directly from a student to the Teaching Committee, via the fast feedback button on the web-site, via a Director of Studies, through the Staff-Student Consultative Committee [SSCC]) then the feedback is scrutinised to gather evidence as to whether the concern is general to all students or specific to the student in question.
There is a departmental newsgroup (ucam.cl.students) which provides a general discussion forum for students for issues including learning and teaching. The Chairs of the SSCC and the Teaching Committee read and contribute to the newsgroup.
Instant Feedback Button
In addition, there is an instant feedback button on the website which relays messages on urgent issues to the Head of Department and other officers who can take prompt action if necessary. This is used about twice a year.
Staff-Student Consultative Committee
Individual feedback from any student can be forwarded to the SSCC via the student representatives of that committee. All student groups are represented on the SSCC, which meets twice a term. Each meeting begins with a digest of actions from the last meeting, and with issues from Teaching Committee and the Syndicate being reported. Minutes are taken by a student member. Significant issues may be communicated to the student body between meetings either by email or through the departmental newsgroup.
Directors of Studies
Students provide feedback informally to their Directors of Studies at their termly meetings. There is an e-mail forum for Directors of Studies. There is a twice-yearly meeting of all Directors of Studies. Directors of Studies provide a good check on the Department’s teaching activities with the great benefit that their personal knowledge of individual student allows Directors of Studies to identify trends affecting many students rather than just issues affecting an individual. Neil Dodgson, 22nd July 2005
Much too specific. Level of material About right. Much too slow. Course: Advanced Graphics Lecturer: Dr Neil Dodgson Interest Tedious. Slightly fast. Assumed too much. Too specific. Fluent. Too slow. Clear. Slightly complicated. Confused. Adequate. Much too basic. Organisation of lectures Chaotic. Brilliant. Too basic. Click on the Submit button at the end when you have finished. Too general. Ease of understanding Incomprehensible. Interesting. Much too general. Much too complicated. Exciting. Too fast. Slightly basic. Much too fast. Halting. Speed About right. Slightly slow. Adequate. Delivery Incoherent. Slightly general. Uninteresting. Breadth of coverage About right. Slightly specific. Too complicated. Assumptions About right. Assumed too little.Comment on Computer Science course Please fill in the details in the fields either by pointing to the shaded areas and typing or by clicking on the check-boxes under the various headings. . Adequate. Confused.
Notes Poor. Thank you. Excellent. Adequate.uk/cgi-bin/lr/form?crsid=is255&code=AdvGraph .ac. http://www. Adequate. Excellent.cl. Best thing about the course: Worst thing about the course: Further comments Press here to submit this comment: Submit .cam. Supervisions Poor.
interesting. too much (1). best: Lecturer's enthusiasm ideas backed up well with examples That it's all maths! Interesting graphical demos dr.about right.about right. notes: poor (1).adequate. assumptions: about right (17).about right. brilliant (8). exciting (5). adequate (7). dodgson kept it interesting and is very easy to listen to! Interesting subject matter Lot's of things in the course I've always wanted to know about! made me finally realise how B-splines work Very well lectured and supervised worst: slightly short & rushed Quite short.about right. overall . adequate (7). slightly complicated (1).adequate. overall . . overall . level: slightly basic (3). clear (10). overall .excellent. slightly specific (3). slightly general (2). delivery: adequate (5). understanding: confused (1). excellent (12). excellent (10).Collected comments on Advanced Graphics Lecturer: Dr Neil Dodgson 18 comments received interest: interesting (13). about right (14). overall .adequate. about right (12). fluent (13). coverage: too general (1). speed: slightly slow (1). overall . slightly fast (3). overall . overall .fluent. overall . supervision: adequate (5). organisation: adequate (10). overall . about right (14).
Dr. A more thorough explanation of some of the new concepts (e. Sometimes I felt that he assumed too little mathematical ability from students (although it must be said that I did maths in the first year). comments: A very enjoyable and well-presented course. or even making clear exactly what they do. As a result some topics (particularly B-splines) weren't very comprehensible in the lectures. really clear explanations .uk/cgi-bin/lr/summarize?code=AdvGraph . have a few small criticisms. As with many courses. Other small things are the poor notation used in the B-spline section (although I believe this is standard and not Dr. however. and most of the ray-tracing material).ac. Others were simple or familiar enough not to have this problem (CSG. the lectures spent too little time emphasising the concepts and principles of each technique or algorithm. http://www. before proceeding into intricate details or less-than-intuitive mathematical representations. Dodgson should not apologise for mathematical content. B-splines) would have helped. and so doesn't cover much apart from ray tracing and polygon meshes.Lack of notes on subdivision surfaces Too much detail obscuring the principles Final lecture slightly rushed no radiosity It's only 8 lectures.cam. I do. Firstly. Dodgson's invention) and the lack of printed notes on subdivision surfaces and marching cubes.cl.but sometimes when he'd written notes on the overhead he moved before people had finished writing it down.g.
Student Feedback Summary Interest 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Tedious Uninteresting Interesting Exciting 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Much too basic Too basic Level of material About right Slightly complicated Too complicated Breadth of coverage Organistation of lectures 10 9 8 Information Theory and Coding (Lent 2003) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Too general Much too general Slightly general About right Much too specific Slightly specific Too specific 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Chaotic Confused Adequate Brilliant Assumptions 14 12 10 8 6 4 1 2 0 0 Assumed too little About right Assumed too much Incomprehensible 7 6 5 4 3 2 Ease of understanding Confused Adequate Clear Speed 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Much too slow About right Much too fast Too slow Too fast Slightly slow Slightly fast 6 4 2 0 Incoherent 8 10 12 Delivery Halting Adequate Fluent Notes 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Poor Adequate Excellent 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Poor Supervisions Adequate Excellent Much too complicated Slightly basic 25/07/2005 .