Last Year's CEQ Responses

I am providing these, including all negative comments, as I believe that they provide valuable feedback to me, and in order to demonstrate that I am taking them seriously. I will take any other constructive feedback equally seriously, whether made anonymously or not.

As you can see, there are a fair number of encouraging comments, but a lot of very critically ones as well. I value both, it is important to know for me what worked well and what didn't. Only with information of this kind can I improve the course.

The critical responses fall into essentially three categories:

The course is hard

I can live with that. Note that many of those said it was hard didn't think that this should be changed. I don't make it intentionally difficult, but I don't believe that I can do a good job at teaching OS if I water it down significantly.
However, I am aware that there were problems with the first assignment last year, which made it unnecessarily hard. This is, unfortunately, something that can happen if changing assignment specs frequently (in order to deter people from copying). Last year we stuffed up, this year we did better (at least with the first assignment.)

Assessment inapproriate / exam expected more than was taught

This is somewhat unexpected, and worrying. I will have a close look at last year's assignment before setting this year's. However, it should be understood that I intentionally have some questions in the exam which test student's ability to draw together various things that have been covered, and draw their own conclusion on things that haven't been covered directly. I don't believe that it should be possible to get an HD just by being able to regurgitate perfectly what has been covered in class. I expect more from a HD, and this is why there are questions whose answers haven't been given before.
Some of these comments also refer to the way assignments were marked. There was a great deal of disstisfaction among students with us marking assignment submissions on style. I believe that we would be failing in our job if we let people submit horrible code unpenalised. However, I have instructed tutors to go a bit easier on style faults (and have it made very clear to students that style is part of the assessment).

Staff unhelpful / unresponsive / rude / sarcastic / derogatory / arrogant / intimidating / obnoxious / had superiority complex / had god complex / ridiculing students

The frequency and consistency of these comments indicate that there was definitely a problem, which needed fixing. Of course, some students feel insulted if they are told that their question is answered in the FAQ, and they should look there first. However, this cannot explain the degree of unhappiness about answering student questions.
I have made it clear to everybody involved in the course that politeness and a professional attitude are essential, and rude behaviour cannot be tolerated. I am monitoring responses to students and will try to ensure that these problems don't reoccur. We have also organised a systematic roster for answering questions, to avoid the frustration of being asked the same questions over and over.
I wished the person writing "lecturer was not helpful at all" was a bit more specific...
If you think that there are problems of this kind I would appreciate if you told me.

Obviously, I also like being told about things that are good (I wouldn't want to change those, would I :-).

Gernot

Last modified: 17 Apr 2002 [an error occurred while processing this directive]