main page next

Evaluation Results Språkteknologiska Delområden VT96

This page contains the evaluation results for the course Subareas of Natural Language Processing (in Swedish: Språkteknologiska Delområden VT96) that was taught in the Winter term of 1996 at the department of Linguistics at the University of Uppsala. The purpose of this page if to give a summarized overview of the responses of the students on the course. There were two evaluation rounds:

Only answers to multiple choice questions have been listed here.


Midcourse evaluation

Summary of the answers to multiple choice questions of the midcourse evaluation forms for the course Språkteknologiska Delområden VT97. There were 9 students and 7 have participated in the evaluation.

Questions

  1. What do you think about the course goal description and its contents description?
  2. What do you think about the course organization from a pedagogical point of view?
  3. What do you think about the organization of the lectures from a pedagogical point of view?
  4. What do you think about the organization of the exercises from a pedagogical point of view?
  5. What do you think about the interaction with the teacher?
  6. What do you think about the contents of the course literature?

Answers

             Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q5   Q6
------------------------------------------------------
Very good     0    0    0    0    0    0   Very good  
Good          6    5    4    6    6    5   Good       
Not so good   1    2    3    1    1    1   Not so good
Bad           0    0    0    0    0    1   Bad        
No answer     0    0    0    0    0    0   No answer  
------------------------------------------------------
Average      66   61   57   66   66   57   Average (min: 10; max: 100)


Final evaluation

Summary of the answers to multiple choice questions of the course final evaluation forms for Språkteknologiska Delområden VT97. The course consisted of four parts: Machine Translation, CALL, Language Revision Tools and Speech Processing. All parts were evaluated seperately. There were 9 students and 7 have participated in the evaluation.

Questions

  1. What do you think about the agreement between the course plan and the course content and level?
  2. What do you think about the agreement between the required preliminary knowledge and the course content and level.
  3. What do you think about the correspondence between the course as it turned out and what you had expected from it?
  4. Do you consider the course to be good or bad?
  5. Do you think the lectures were meaningful?
  6. Do you think the exercise/lab sessions were meaningful?
  7. Should there have been more or fewer lectures?
  8. Should there have been more exercise/lab sessions?
  9. What do you think about the arrangement of the lectures from a pedagogical point of view?
  10. What do you think about the presentation of the lectures from a pedagogical point of view?
  11. What do you think about the course literature?
  12. Should the instructions for the exercise/lab sessions have been more detailed?
  13. What result do you expect for this course?

Answers Machine Translation

             Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q9  Q10  Q11  Q13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Very good     1    0    0    0    0    0    0    1   Very good  
Good          3    4    3    3    2    3    4    3   Good       
Not so good   3    2    3    4    3    3    1    3   Not so good
Bad           0    1    1    0    1    0    1    0   Bad        
No answer     0    0    0    0    1    1    1    0   No answer  
----------------------------------------------------------------
Average      61   53   49   53   46   55   55   61   Average (min: 10; max: 100)

Q5:  Meaningful: 1; Not so meaningful: 5; No answer: 1;        Average: 46 
Q6:  Very meaningfull: 1; Meaningful: 5; Not so meaningful: 1; Average: 70
Q7:  No change required: 1; More: 6;                           Average: 23
Q8:  No change required: 2; More: 4; No answer: 1;             Average: 42
Q12: No: 1; Yes: 5; No answer: 1;                              Average: 29 

Answers CALL

             Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q9  Q10  Q11  Q13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Very good     1    1    0    0    0    0    0    2   Very good  
Good          2    5    3    2    0    3    0    4   Good       
Not so good   1    0    1    2    4    2    1    1   Not so good
Bad           3    1    3    3    2    1    4    0   Bad        
No answer     0    0    0    0    1    1    2    0   No answer  
----------------------------------------------------------------
Average      44   66   40   36   34   51   27   74   Average (min: 10; max: 100)

Q5:  Not so meaningful: 6; Bad: 1;                             Average: 36 
Q6:  Meaningful: 2; Not so meaningful: 3; Bad: 2;              Average: 40 
Q7:  No change required: 2; More: 5;                           Average: 36
Q8:  Less: 1; No change required: 3; More: 1; No answer: 2;    Average: 87
Q12: No: 3; Yes: 2; No answer: 2;                              Average: 61

Answers Speech Processing

             Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q9  Q10  Q11  Q13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Very good     3    1    1    3    4    5    1    1   Very good  
Good          3    6    6    3    2    1    5    6   Good       
Not so good   1    0    0    1    0    0    0    0   Not so good
Bad           0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0   Bad        
No answer     0    0    0    0    1    1    1    0   No answer  
----------------------------------------------------------------
Average      79   74   74   79   85   89   72   74   Average (min: 10; max: 100)

Q5:  Very meaningful: 5; Meaningful: 1; Not so meaningful: 1;  Average: 87
Q6:  Very meaningful: 2; Meaningful: 5;                        Average: 79
Q7:  No change required: 3; More 4;                            Average: 49
Q8:  No change required: 6; No answer: 1;                      Average: 94 
Q12: No: 5; No answer: 2;                                      Average: 87

Answers Language Revision Tools

             Q1   Q2   Q3   Q4   Q9  Q10  Q11  Q13
----------------------------------------------------------------
Very good     4    1    2    3    4    5    1    1   Very good  
Good          3    6    5    3    2    1    5    6   Good       
Not so good   0    0    0    1    0    0    0    0   Not so good
Bad           0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0   Bad        
No answer     0    0    0    0    1    1    1    0   No answer  
----------------------------------------------------------------
Average      87   74   79   79   85   89   72   74   Average (min: 10; max: 100)

Q5:  Very meaningful: 5; Not so meaningful: 1; No answer: 1;   Average: 85
Q6:  Very meaningful: 3; Meaningful: 4;                        Average: 83 
Q7:  No change required: 3; More: 3;                           Average: 55
Q8:  No change required: 6; No answer: 1;                      Average: 94
Q12: No: 4; Yes: 1; No answer: 2;                              Average: 73


The following weights have been used in the average computation: very good: 100, good: 70, not so good: 40; bad: 10 and no answer: 55.
Last update: February 19, 1998. erikt@stp.ling.uu.se