Teoretisk fysiks kursutväderingar


Resultat av: Theoretical Particle Physics, SI2400, vt 2013

Status: Avslutad
Publicerad under: 2013-05-15 - 2013-06-07
Antal svar: 10
Procent av kursdeltagarna som svarat: 58%
Kontaktperson: Mattias Blennow

What is your overall impression of the course?

9 svarande

Very positive2 22%
Postive7 77%
Negative0 0%
Very negative0 0%

How would you rate the overall difficulty of the course?

10 svarande

Very high0 0%
High6 60%
Low4 40%
Very low0 0%

- The course was uneven, the seminars was easy while the home assignments were difficult (High)
- it changes a lot throughout the course. it is low in the beginning and high in the end. (High)
- Increased substanitaly over the course (High)
- Much overlap with SI2390 so my prerequisites helped me through more than half of the course. (Low)
- The content of the course in itself is quite hard to understand (and was unfortunately made harder by the fact that the course was not very well given). However it is quite easy to pass the course and it is even possible to do so without understanding the last 2/3 chapters, making it quite easy to pass. (Low)

Has there been much overlap with other courses?

10 svarande

Far too much overlap1 10%
Some overlap - mostly unnecessary1 10%
Some overlap - but useful as repetition6 60%
No overlap2 20%

- The #2-5 "seminars" were just overlap with SI2390 and SI2371. Also the gauge theory part had been covered earlier. So remove seminar 2-5 and go deeper on QCD, GSW, neutrino oscillations etc. (Far too much overlap)
- Many topics are treated in the Relativistc Quatum Physics course, but I think this course has another approach and provides a better physical interpretation (Some overlap - but useful as repetition)
- There is no 'no opinion' here but since I did follow any other theoretical physics courses this semester I don't know if there is overlapping or not. I have however heard from other students that they had already studied all the beginning of the course (up to chapter 3/4). (No overlap)

How were the homework problems?

10 svarande

Very difficult0 0%
Difficult9 90%
Easy1 10%
Very easy0 0%

- All except the first took a very long time to solve. If you had not taken relativistic quantum physics they were very difficult. (Difficult)
- Challenging for sure (Difficult)
- but not too difficult. i think they are at an appropriate level. (Difficult)
- First was easy though (Difficult)
- Easy at the beginning, hard at the end, as could be expected for such a course. (Difficult)
- First set was way to easy, the second one was easy but time consuming and the third set had its difficulties and was also very time consuming. (Easy)

How were the quizzes?

10 svarande

Very difficult0 0%
Difficult2 20%
Easy6 60%
Very easy2 20%

- The quizzes design was really good, because even though you thought you knew a subject or concept the quizzes enlightened your gaps. (Difficult)
- They were easy at the end of the seminar, but that is rather a sign of the seminars being very educational. (Easy)

What is your opinion about the course-PM, homepage, and the administration of the course?

9 svarande

Very good4 44%
Good5 55%
Poor0 0%
Very poor0 0%

- Didnt use them (?)
- Definite and structured plans which is EXCELLENT to know when the course starts:). The homepage's content fills its purpose and everything you need can be found there. Excellent work team:) (Very good)
- My only suggestion would be to put online the questions for the seminars. I lost my sheet once an could not find it again... (Very good)

How did you find the course literature?

10 svarande

Very good2 20%
Good4 40%
Poor4 40%
Very poor0 0%

- A pleasant book and with the provided extra material by email, which was very much appreciated, I think it's a good introduction to the subject (Good)
- very good book! but one could have extra readings covering feynman calculus. (Good)
- Griffiths is in my opinion to much of a child and lays everything forward in a 'why not sentence' which I do not like. However, all the information that you need is to be found in the book and it is a good introductory course literature. To his defence his book on Electromagnetics is way better in the sense of presentation. (Good)
- It is a really good book, easy to read, explains things very well etc. But did not help with the home assignments, it was too basic. (Poor)

How were the lectures?

10 svarande

Very good0 0%
Good1 10%
Poor0 0%
Very poor0 0%
Did not participate enough to have an opinion9 90%

- The lectures were quite bad at the beginning (the teachers was not looking at the students but outside and wrote very small on the board) but some effort were made and it was much better by the end. I would however suggest that he tries to write on the board the most important informations and mostly the titles of the parts, or what he aims at either at the beginning or at the end. For me the most difficult part of the lectures was to take notes and follow at the same time, since sometimes the teacher says important things and don't write them whereas he sometimes write a lot about extra stuff that are not absolutely important for the course. Finally, there are 6 boards in the class room, and chalk is erasable so it would be much clearer and understandable if the teacher could write bigger and on all 6 of them. (Good)
- I usually dont attend many lectures. The first lecture was quite unstructured. (Did not participate enough to have an opinion)
- visited the first one only. got such a bad impression that i chose to stick to the book (which is excellent) (Did not participate enough to have an opinion)
- Double-booked most of the time. (Did not participate enough to have an opinion)

How were the seminars?

10 svarande

Very good7 70%
Good3 30%
Poor0 0%
Very poor0 0%

- Encouraged continous reading of the material and provided great opportunites for assimilating the content of the course. Absolutely my favourite part of the course! (Very good)
- Here I could write a long essay, but I will just say carry on in the same manner:) Excellent:D (Very good)
- really good seminars, one of the best I ever attended! Continue that work, Matthias :) (Very good)
- The seminar were good and really clarified some of the most shadowy notions. However I felt that they were not going deep enough, and certainly not as far as the lectures. I think that the seminar should cover a bit more the hardest notions of the chapters. (Good)

How much time did you spend preparing for a seminar on average? (Including reading the course litterature)

10 svarande

None0 0%
0-15 minutes0 0%
15-30 minutes1 10%
30-60 minutes2 20%
1-2 hours7 70%
More than 2 hours0 0%

How much time did you spend on the homework problem sets on average?

10 svarande

< 5 hours/set0 0%
5-10 hours/set0 0%
10-25 hours/set3 30%
25-50 hours/set6 60%
> 50 hours/set1 10%

- The first one did not take a long time to complete probably ~ 15h, the second >50 and i have not finished the third yet. (25-50 hours/set)
- doing homework problems was the bulk of my study hours. (25-50 hours/set)
- More close to 50 than 25. (25-50 hours/set)
- First set took half the time that the second set took to complete (> 50 hours/set)

Please enter any further comments and opinions about the course:

- I learned a lot, had been very difficult if I had not taken relativistic quantum physics, I really liked the seminars
- I really enjoyed the course!
- Thank you!
- Should run parallel with SI2390, to enhance understanding in both fields

Kursutvärderingssystem från

[Theoretical physics home page] [KTH home page]   webmaster