| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Academic Year: | 2003/2004 |
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Semester: | 1 |
| Qn 1 | Qn 2 | Qn 3 | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S/No | Module Code | Module Description | Score | NR | Score | NR | Score | NR | |||||
| 1 | CS3241 | COMPUTER GRAPHICS | 3.757 | 103 | 4.196 | 102 | 3.786 | 103 | |||||
Note:
Qn 1: What is your overall opinion of the module ?
Opinion: | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | Poor |
Score: | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Grade: | A | B | C | D | F |
Score: | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Difficulty Level: | More difficult | Of the same difficulty level | Less difficult | ||
Score: | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Q1. | Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, and suggest possible improvements. |
| 1. | Hmm...there was no evaluation for the ta:s in the labs here, but I feel that I must say that there is one guy in there that I don't like. Unfortunently I don't remember his name, but I am in lab 2 sp you should be able to guess. He is always saying that we have to hurry up otherwise our grade will be lowered for the lab. I have only asked him for help two times, but I have heard him help other students and his most common response is "You haven't got any futher?! You better hurry up!" or "This is something you have to figure out by yourself (followed by a big smile)" I'm not asking that he should tell the answer to the questions, the otherones don't do that. But he should learn how to behave or be removed from the lab! He should make a good Natzi! |
| 2. | Labwork was interesting and useful. Tutorials I don't know much about, but the few I went to were not very good. |
| 3. | very interesting. |
| 4. | the contents are good; however the teaching and explanation is not clear and comprehensive |
| 5. | Interesting. Fun. Especially the videos shown during lectures. Labs are very rushed though. |
| 6. | More tut exercises needed |
| 7. | Stricter rules should be enforced during lab as there are many students cheating. Some ppl from later sessions copy whole sale the code in the harddisk left behind from earlier sessions. |
| 8. | The labs are too hard. |
| 9. | Strength: nice fundamentals with mathematical explanations. One can understand the inner workings of a 3d graphics engine. Weakness: Theoretical, most rendering is done by hardware now. Usually only the cream of the crop will get to meddle with rendering or effects. |
| 10. | The lectures were very interesting, and was interspersed with lots of videos showcasing some new developments of computer graphics which really livened up the lecture atmosphere. Maybe we could have more time on difficult topics like Ray tracing, bump mapping and Bezier Curves, to better understand the underlying mathematical background and concepts behind them. |
| 11. | PLS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE AUDIO IN LT 34, SOC. |
| 12. | very interesting module. |
| 13. | Interesting module |
| 14. | Lecture syllabus coverage too extensive such that there is no time to go into depth. |
| 15. | good ... practicals are good |
| 16. | If the module is project-based instead of lab every week, it may be better. |
| 17. | I think that for this module, the lab sessions are very important, as that is when the things learned are used. I would suggest that the lab sessions be held first before the tutorials, as this happened to in the later part of the semester, and I found it easier to learn. |
| 18. | Coursework is very interesting and the labs help reinforce the concepts learnt |
| 19. | very useful lab sessions. The lecture theatre which was used for this module has a very lousy sound system. |
| 20. | Interesting lectures by Dr Alan Cheng, supplemented with videos which capture my interest in the topic |
| 21. | Interesting and perhaps more lab sessions |
| 22. | Possible improvements: Take home lab so that students can have more time to work and learn on doing graphics programming. |
| 23. | The module is very interesting, especially for students who have had some prior experience in Computer Graphics. It could, however, cover more topics, especially the advanced ones. |
| 24. | need to improve the teaching style of the lectures |
| 25. | The module content is interesting bu the lectures were a bit boring when demonstrations were not going on |
| 26. | Perhaps change lecturers. |
| 27. | Very good module teaching the basics of computer graphics. A lot of maths,spatial ability involved. Good - Learn the evolutiion of computer graphics Downside - Hard to invoke interest due to the dryness of the module as its too technical |
| 28. | I was very disappointed with the administration of this module. The lectures in the first half of the semester always finished too late for me to get to my next class at another faculty. This continued even though many students had to start leaving before the lecture finished every week. The course website was very poorly maintained. While I can understand some mistakes in the dates and links due to copy and pasting, the mistakes were left there for weeks. When the midterm results were released the links were not working. The solutions for the labs were released so late so much so that those who were weaker in programming would not have benefitted at all. The solution for lab 4 was released one month after the lab, just one day before lab 8, the final lab. I get the impression that no-one was really bothering with the course website. I don't understand why tutorial 5 was rescheduled so that it would occur after the midterm especially since the topics covered in that tutorial was covered in the midterm. I also don't understand why IVLE was not made use of for this module. I felt that the forum would have been very useful for discussion the concepts taught in this module. The tutors did not seem very clear on what they were teaching. I can understand this however, since they had only taken the module 1 or 2 sems ago and had to become tutors in the same module. |
| 29. | the microphone is LT34 is not working very well... and that makes the lecture a less pleasant experience. the question for the lab could be released earlier so that students have time to prepare for the laboratory. the various expectation should be stated. it would be the lab a better learning experience if the students understand what is it that they are expected to know / learn from the lab |
| 30. | The lecture notes should be more detailed in explaining the derivation of certain formulae and more examples on questions should be given in the notes itself. The notes doesn't give good insight into tutorial questions. |
| 31. | Speed of lectures can be slower, improve on the way things explain |
| 32. | interesting subject |
| 33. | A lot of technical details! |
| 34. | NA |
| 35. | Very boring :( ... although, the teachers are friendly and everyone tries to help ... lecture material is exceedingly boring and the books are not very helpful. If NUS wants to be at the forefront of graphics technology, then perhaps we need to think of new innovative ways of learning about graphics and breaking out of the box ... rather than adopting standard books and doing the usual thing. |
| 36. | The first half part of the lecture is quite boring. The second half is nice. |
| 37. | The first part of the module when taught by prof Teh is boring. It became more interesting when prof Cheng took over. |
| 38. | More usage of 3D graphics to demonstrate the point to bring across instead of relying on just hand movements and students' imagination. |
| 39. | The marking of the lab are not very fair. Apparently there is no marking guidelines for the TAs to follow. As for the additional functionality that the students were suppose to provide for the lab assignment, we found it hard to think of something that would guarantee us the bonus marks that we should get. Every one had their own extra implementation and it is up to the TAs to award marks. This gives rise to discrepancies in the markings. Some students got higher marks implementing something simple that others who spend more time implementing other features. I would rather the lab assignment explicitly state what other features (bonus marks) they would like to see before awarding marks. This will ensure fairness in the marking scheme of the students. |
| 40. | Students need to have a lot of time to take this module. A lot of the programming techiques have to be picked up by the student himself. If he doesn't have the time to expriment at homne he will lose out to the other students who do. |
| 41. | the lecture material is detailed and well-structured. use of video is effective. but the lab is a little unfair. there is always this part asking us to implement extensions and flexibility, without telling us what is considered an extension or flexibility. as a result, sometimes i waste time implementing something that the graders don't appreciate, worse still, i get the same grade as another person who implemented less stuff. it will be better if the task is stated explicitly for students to implement. it will also be better to put the marks beside the questions. for example, part 1 (0.5 marks), part 2 (0.3 marks), bonus part (0.2 marks) etc. then we will know roughly what is expected. |
| 42. | too hard |
| 43. | No comment |
| 44. | Die die die!! Should make MA1101R as the prerequisites. |