Student Feedback Mechanisms in the Computer Laboratory

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.

Newsgroup
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 Departments 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

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. Click on the Submit button at the end when you have finished.

Course: Advanced Graphics Lecturer: Dr Neil Dodgson

Interest
Tedious. Uninteresting. Interesting. Exciting.

Level of material
About right. Slightly basic. Too basic. Much too basic. Slightly complicated. Too complicated. Much too complicated.

Breadth of coverage
About right. Slightly general. Slightly specific. Too general. Too specific. Much too general. Much too specific.

Organisation of lectures
Chaotic. Confused. Adequate. Brilliant.

Assumptions
About right. Assumed too little. Assumed too much.

Ease of understanding
Incomprehensible. Confused. Adequate. Clear.

Speed
About right. Slightly slow. Slightly fast. Too slow. Much too slow. Too fast. Much too fast.

Delivery
Incoherent. Halting. Adequate. Fluent.

Notes
Poor. Adequate. Excellent.

Supervisions
Poor. Adequate. Excellent.

Best thing about the course:

Worst thing about the course:

Further comments

Press here to submit this comment: Submit . Thank you.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/lr/form?crsid=is255&code=AdvGraph

Collected comments on Advanced Graphics

Lecturer: Dr Neil Dodgson 18 comments received interest: interesting (13), exciting (5), overall - interesting. level: slightly basic (3), about right (14), slightly complicated (1), overall - about right. coverage: too general (1), slightly general (2), about right (12), slightly specific (3), overall - about right. organisation: adequate (10), brilliant (8), overall - adequate. assumptions: about right (17), too much (1), overall - about right. understanding: confused (1), adequate (7), clear (10), overall - adequate. speed: slightly slow (1), about right (14), slightly fast (3), overall - about right. delivery: adequate (5), fluent (13), overall - fluent. notes: poor (1), adequate (7), excellent (10), overall - adequate. supervision: adequate (5), excellent (12), overall - excellent. best: Lecturer's enthusiasm ideas backed up well with examples That it's all maths! Interesting graphical demos dr. 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.

Lack of notes on subdivision surfaces Too much detail obscuring the principles Final lecture slightly rushed no radiosity It's only 8 lectures, and so doesn't cover much apart from ray tracing and polygon meshes. comments: A very enjoyable and well-presented course. I do, however, have a few small criticisms. Firstly, Dr. Dodgson should not apologise for mathematical content. 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). Other small things are the poor notation used in the B-spline section (although I believe this is standard and not Dr. Dodgson's invention) and the lack of printed notes on subdivision surfaces and marching cubes. really clear explanations - but sometimes when he'd written notes on the overhead he moved before people had finished writing it down. As with many courses, the lectures spent too little time emphasising the concepts and principles of each technique or algorithm, or even making clear exactly what they do, before proceeding into intricate details or less-than-intuitive mathematical representations. As a result some topics (particularly B-splines) weren't very comprehensible in the lectures. Others were simple or familiar enough not to have this problem (CSG, and most of the ray-tracing material). A more thorough explanation of some of the new concepts (e.g. B-splines) would have helped.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/lr/summarize?code=AdvGraph

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