| Faculty: | SCHOOL OF COMPUTING | Academic Year: | 2006/2007 |
| Department: | COMPUTER SCIENCE | Semester: | 1 |
| Module: | DATA STRUCTURES AND ALGORITHMS - CS1102C |
| Qn | Items Evaluated | Module Avg Score | Nos Responded |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Overall opinion of the module. | 3.089 | 169 |
| 2 | Grade likely to get for the module. | 3.482 | 168 |
| 3 | Difficulty level of the module. | 4.373 | 169 |
QN\SCORE | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Qn 1: Overall opinion of the module. | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | Poor |
Qn 2: Grade likely to get for the module. | A | B | C | D | F |
Qn 3: Difficulty level of the module. | Very Difficult | Difficult | Average | Easy | Very Easy |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory | Poor |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 5 (2.96%) | 52 (30.77%) | 71 (42.01%) | 35 (20.71%) | 6 (3.55%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 136 (12.33%) | 464 (42.07%) | 386 (35.00%) | 94 (8.52%) | 23 (2.09%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 266 (12.60%) | 962 (45.57%) | 737 (34.91%) | 115 (5.45%) | 31 (1.47%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | A | B | C | D | F |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 26 (15.48%) | 67 (39.88%) | 47 (27.98%) | 18 (10.71%) | 10 (5.95%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 204 (19.34%) | 430 (40.76%) | 304 (28.82%) | 89 (8.44%) | 28 (2.65%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 386 (18.99%) | 1033 (50.81%) | 482 (23.71%) | 101 (4.97%) | 31 (1.52%) |
| Nos. of Respondents(% of Respondents) |
| | | ||||||
ITEM\SCORE | | | Very Difficult | Difficult | Average | Easy | Very Easy |
| | | ||||||
Module | | | 78 (46.15%) | 76 (44.97%) | 15 (8.88%) | 0 (.00%) | 0 (.00%) |
Module at Same Level (Dept) | | | 287 (26.00%) | 542 (49.09%) | 245 (22.19%) | 27 (2.45%) | 3 (.27%) |
Module at Same Level (Fac) | | | 348 (16.49%) | 851 (40.31%) | 816 (38.65%) | 92 (4.36%) | 4 (.19%) |
| Q1. | Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, and suggest possible improvements. |
| 1. | Need more examples and practical exercises to understand the concepts. Webcast is needed for students to revise the concepts |
| 2. | It is really tough, and the teachers assume us to know alot |
| 3. | the strength of this module is the practical labs. the practical labs provide enough practices for the students to keep up with their programming skills. however, it should be taken into note that the current level of difficulty of the lab should be maintained, and not make more difficult, because lab session, although very helpful, is very time consuming. |
| 4. | if they can cover 81 slides in 90mins...students can really understand wat the hell they r teaching..totally useless to teach in lecture..have 4 hrs of tutorial class and teach in those classes instead of lectures |
| 5. | Pace is too fast. Though this module is about data structure, the lecturer assumes we know the language C++, thus we have to learn both data structures and the language within a short period. A good suggestion is to teach C++ in CS1101C for the year 1. And data structures using C++ for CS1102C. |
| 6. | Although this is not a C++ module but a data structure and algo module quoted from the lecturer, a high percentage of the module is contributed from C++ coding, ie. labs, pe, and midterm (i think this already amounts to around 60%). If so, more empahsis then shld be placed on programming in the teaching. Or we can lower the programming percentage on the final grades. |
| 7. | A bridging module could be offered before this module to prepare us from the leap from C programming to C++. Plus this can faciliate the lecturers' teaching as they do not have to spend the first few lectures on the basics of C++ programming but jump straight to the methodology. The labs could start from fri night and end on fri night instead of having the dateline as fri morning as we often have to rush during the sch week/amidst our sch work to hand in the labs on time. Also, i feel that the 1 hr lecture on fri is pointless/ time wasting. I rather it be another 2 hr lecture. |
| 8. | More guidance is needed for the lab session |
| 9. | EE students may not have the fundamentals to take this module, therefore a bridging course is required. |
| 10. | Strength-Ability to do more in-depth and difficult problems using simpler methods. Weakness-Not much practicality unless one goes into such area of expertise. |
| 11. | i feel that the module is designed very well . |
| 12. | I had no basic knowledge of the C++ language before I started in this module. Therefore I hope that I could have had one module about C++ language before this one. |
| 13. | syllabus too too wide. lack of depth in each topics. |
| 14. | It seems that the prior batch is easier. I am not sure if it is sure, but some students say that this is the most difficult batch for C++. |
| 15. | May I suggest to have open-book exams for this module? |
| 16. | the module content is too vigorous. we have to complete one lab every week of the semester starting from week 3.further more each lab is graded and counts towards the final exam. i can understand tht the lecturers is doing this to "force" us to practice. practice is important but i feel that it has done more harm than good as it is really very stressful and difficult to cope with the worry of completing the graded lab everyweek. it is like having to study for a mid term everyweek esp for ppl like me who have merely the programming background of cs1101c. despite so many labs i feel that i did not improve much on my programming skills in proportion with the amount of labs enforced. |
| 17. | providing bridging course from c to c ++ is better |
| 18. | there are too much to learn in merely 4 months, it is a 5 MC course, but it seems that it requires more than two times workload that a 4MC course requires. |
| 19. | Webcast lectures will be very helpful when doing revision especially, preparation for examination |
| 20. | There are labs every week and all are being accessed. This is too tedious. Maybe the labs can be on a fornightly basis or only access the 5 best labs out of the 10. The syallbus is also quite long. Resulting in the rushing of the syallbus by the lecturers. |
| 21. | The pace of the lectures was too fast initially |
| 22. | Too many things included.. maybe this should have been a level 2000 module |
| 23. | 1.Make students implement Linked List at the 3rd Lab to solidify their basics. For example, the Lab that made us implement splay tree really brushed up my basics. If I didn't do that lab i'll probably still be wondering how to implement list. 2.The starting Lectures 0,1,2 were a total MESS. Very put-off by them. Redo and Present them properly. 3.Lectures Notes should have a summary at the start. 4.10% Tutorial Attendance Points |
| 24. | 1st few lectures on C -> C++, too intensive, mainly touch and go. Initially gives me the impression that we have to go a lot in such a short period of time. Situation gradually improves. Students still unsure whether course is focused on C++ language or algorithms & data structures, as 2 lecturers seem to focus differently. |
| 25. | should have more emphasis on STL classes, less emphasis on own implementations eg how to code a linked list, or how to code our own sorting algorithm when there are STL list and STL sort which are confirmed efficient. more emphasis on creating a ADT and how to understand a ADT coded by someone else. The linking between .cpp, use.cpp and .h can be confusing |
| 26. | i feel as though i am only taking this one module this sem. |
| 27. | labs take up too much time.definitely not worth spending so much time on 5 MCs |
| 28. | too much labs. |
| 29. | too much function taught |
| 30. | How can it not be open book exam, last sems C++ wasnt so difficult |
| 31. | allow students to think out of the box. too much things to learnt and apply within one sem's time. should reduce difficulty level to test mainly understanding. |
| 32. | Quite a lot of topics are covered in this module, and all the labs are graded. It would be good if not all labs are graded, as I tend to spend a lot of time on labs and neglected my other modules. Also, the examination should be open book, as it is rather impossible for students to memorize every c++ code and what each function does in the lecture notes or text. |
| 33. | Very confusing, especially with the notes from the first part being so crammed with information that vary from notes to notes causing confusion. there is too much information that causes panic and it's unappetizing to look at lengthy crammed notes. |
| 34. | the module is too difficult for students who do not have computing background and it is too demanding. Slight change in the topics taught might make it better. |
| 35. | nil |
| 36. | More emphaisis should be on Algorithim development and not the data structures. |
| 37. | need to learn a lot in a little time |
| 38. | na |
| 39. | The module is difficult for me. First of all, the textbook doesnt have any programmable codes,thus, we have to figure out on our own what r the codes needed. Also, the lecture notes for the first half contain many errors, and most of the programs are not compilable. The PE is hard, not only that we are only given 2 1/2 hours to solve 2 questions, the questions are not easy too,taking into account the tense environment and the limited time. the weekly lab is very useful,because it tests us to practice our prorgamming skills,but it's very frustating when you keep failing the test cases despite the correct ouput. maybe u can increse the percentage of weekly lab, and decrease the percentage for PE?? |
| 40. | This module is essential for progamming. However, it is not easy to master it. |
| 41. | Plz tell the truth before starting techinh this course, we are not here learn PROGRAMMING, but to learn programming THINKING. |
| 42. | Workload of this module is too heavy, although it's a 5MC course. One lab every week which can take up three days to finish is too much and students have to ignore other modules to just study this course. |
| 43. | the CM for the lab is not very good, and driving students crazy |
| 44. | too difficult |
| 45. | the first part is too difficult. |
| 46. | This module is very interesting and full of fun, althought sometimes the lab is very time costly. |
| 47. | should be open-book! |
| 48. | The workload for the module is too heavy for a 5 MC module. |
| 49. | manage to cover a lot of topics in one sem. |
| 50. | Clearer and more structured learning outcomes |
| 51. | Feel that there is alot to be covered over a short period of time. Lecture notes are too brief and the lecturers speak too fast. Notes are also too disorganised. Will be better if important stuff can be highlighted on. |
| 52. | Less emphasis on C++ coding, pay more attention to the data structures. |
| 53. | I think this part of the course shouldn't be taught to students who have no background of c++ programming. From what I've know, data structures are mid-level programming skills. Though most of the time we kind of understand how to implement the algorithms, it is the coding part that we have problems with. Therefore in the lecture notes it will be better if the c++ codes are provided. Note that we are not major in computing science, hence cant compare us with computing science students and thinking that most of us knows how to implement ALL algorithms using c++. |
| 54. | the questions set are too hard, almost impossible for people to complete without 2hours, as can be seen by the low mid term test results. It is too much to ask of us who have to learn so many stuff within 3 months |
| 55. | Pls have webcast for this module. The moment one misses a lecture it is very difficult to understand. Pls have more example on how programme works rather than expecting the students to know as people like me without programming knowledge struggle |
| 56. | In the beginning of the module, the organization is quite haphazard, with functions of C++ that seem to pop out in random. After linked-list though, things get more stable. |
| 57. | should emphasize more on data structure rather than the coding. |
| 58. | The emphasis of the second part of the course is more on concepts, rather than actual C++ coding for each of the different algorithm. It will be more applicable to give students more hands-on learning by focusing more on C++ coding on these algorithm, so it will be much easier to apprecipate its usefulness. |
| 59. | Too steep a learning curve. Difficult for new students. |
| 60. | This module gives a good overview on data structures and algorithms. However, it does not teach us on how these structures can be applied to practical applications. Perhaps more time should be spent on informing students of the applications of the data structures. Also, slightly more emphasis should be placed on the analysis of algorithms. |
| 61. | Too many things squeezed into 13weeks. Can consider slimmed down syallabus. Weekly labs are useful for pratice, coding improved greatly. However CourseMarker server is a little cranky at times. |
| 62. | it is very heavy for a 5 mc module. tutorials are lenghty |
| 63. | Though the focus is on data structure and algorithm, but more help should be provided on giving applicable programming code and tips as well. |
| 64. | the starting labs are too difficult, should follow the examples of the later labs |
| 65. | Very demanding module and the workload of having one lab per week is far too taxing. The semi-open book exam also makes it difficult as there are too many things to remember. Perhaps it could be reverted back to an open book exam and one lab every other week. |
| 66. | The lecturers are not willing to go through the code with us. They spend more time reading the codes rather than explaining which makes it rather pointless to go lectures. |
| 67. | There is too many labs involve, and all the labs take up too much of the time to finish. It can be cut down to maybe once per fortnight, or tutorial questions can be scraped and have discussion or clinic seesion during tutorials. |
| 68. | It is hard for students to get help to understand the module. Going for clinic sessions to understand more as I know very little about the module but told that i have to ask specific questions. ie there is no way to know more if i dont know anything. |
| 69. | This module has a very steep learning curve as it focusses on how to optimise the use of the programming language when the students have not even had prior experience to the language. The time spent on introducing the language is inadequate. |
| 70. | Very interesting but the weekly graded labs are taxing |
| 71. | this module is challenging |
| 72. | Strengths: -Necessary for engineering students especially for ECE -Broaden the understanding on Computer Science Weaknesses:-Some mistakes made in preparaion for the Practical exam problem. |
| 73. | the module kills time because of the labs. we cant study other modules... All labs should not be graded. |
| 74. | the thoery is not tough to understand but the code and the algorithm wise is not easy. |
| 75. | the syllabus is too long and most importantly it has been made closed book exam for us as compared to previous semester when it was open book which makes it even more tough.Secondly, we had a lab every week which was graded and for that 2% of lab we had to spend the whole week trying to do it which affected other modules of mine atleast to a great extent. |
| 76. | The lecturer expects that we are very good in programming thus expects us to know everything.Some of us may be struggling in understanding the codes or the psedocodes. |
| 77. | The lecturer covers too much in too little time. Most of the teaching assistants are unapproachable and do not know how to explain the concepts taught when asked. I find the whole computing department as a whole very imperceptive to student's needs and leave students to find out every single thing and solve every problem on their own. |
| 78. | This module leads us from basic level of C++ to high level one. At most of the time we would find difficulties to follow the lecture, but after doing lab practice and useful forum discussion, doubts are cleared. |
| 79. | I think the module could reduce the number of C++ code testing as it is an algorithm module |
| 80. | weakness. Lab assesment. By using coursemarker, we have to debug by ourself even the test cases are not given.This increase the difficulty to do the debugging. The lab assignment questions seems like test on our English to really understand what the question want.i think the lab assignemnt should test on the actual programming skills but not on English.I suggest that the question can simplified and at least 2-3 sample input and sample output given.This probem happended in the practical exam too.It makes confusion.Actually,the first half lab assignment questions are difficult to understand.The assigments given in the second are better by stating the requirements clearer. |
| 81. | As the name of the module implies, it is Data Structures and Algorithms, NOT C++. But, 40% is based on C++, which i feel it is too high weightage. 20% will be a good choice. |
| 82. | Lack of Diagrams in the first part of the course to illustrate the concept behind. |
| 83. | nil |
| 84. | more examples and more demostration on how the programs work |
| 85. | i feel that this course should test us on problem solving not how to write c++. |
| 86. | The module is challenging. And Time consuming. It'll be better to provide more practise examples on each topics. |
| 87. | The module is very interesting but every week we have to do the lab which is very time consuming and i dont have any time to study other subjects. |
| 88. | Labs every week make my life tough. It is too frequent. All my time was used to do the lab, I can understand the reason for testing strict I/O, but it is really time consuming. 6 days for a lab is really not enough. Cannot follow in lecture. As if a lot of new things are supposed to be loaded into my brain. I always lost in the 2nd hour for 2 hours lecture, cannot digest all in one time. 8 am lesson is too early for this module because normally mind still stays in blur mode. Can understand the algorithm and theory, but always don't know how to start. Debugging made all my confidence gone because I really don't know what to do after I tried hundred times. Phobia from lab made me lost interesting to this module at all. Maybe we should not be exempted from C? If C is more easier than C++, maybe I can have a warm up in C before I take C++. This module affected my other modules. All the negative thinking, discourage and dissapointed start from here. |
| 89. | Very tough module,need to reduce the programing part. |
| 90. | Students are told to use proper name(meaningful name) to assign variable name , function , etc. Why one of Mr Steven's PE questions , he named " Crazy" ? In PE , especially , I dun feel as if we are tested DataStructure and Algorithm. In fact , i feel like i have having a quiz. Only when i think as the way Mr Steven does, then i'd be able to solve the question.That's not fair( my opinion) CM always have problem. Not a good way of grading Students hard work.Should have more teaching assistants.Sometimes communication is not good enough to understand the lab. |
| 91. | suffering.... have some doubts about how come some many lab assignments we have... |
| 92. | It really help us to practice C++ as there is weekly assigment. but due to 20% weightage is involve. we are too busy to do other modules. |
| 93. | there are too many labs for us, we cannot focus on other subject already. everyday do the lab question. can reduce the questions of lab? |
| 94. | they emphasize too much on the efficieny of the programs we have to write, i am not from the sch of computing, i am doing engineering, they cant simply teach us what they teach in computing sch.. |
| 95. | This module is very tough for an engineering student. I think the expectation for this module is much higher. So i would like to subject that the guideline for this module is not suitable for engineering student and should reduce the difficulty level. |
| 96. | There are too many things to be taught in short period. it's hard to understand all in a short period. |
| 97. | During lesson,especially lab section, it is better if the lecturer or teaching assistant can do a demo like show how to do a related lab queation before we start to do the given lab question.Some more i think this module a bit "rushing".(teaching to fast) |
| 98. | It will be much better that the webcast for this module is also provided |
| 99. | This is a very useful subject in my opinion, but there are too many things covered to follow it up. |
| 100. | The teaching notes is insufficient to teach the engineering students with little programming background |
| 101. | Maybe for future practical exams, the questions set could be more straight-forward. For this semester lab test, i believed that a number of us students have a lot of difficulty understanding the questions and what we actually have to do. I hope this can be improve on in the future. |
| 102. | weakness There are lab assignments are given on every week There are a few examples on the lecture notes Improvemnt I hope that the assignments can given 2 week per assignment |
| 103. | Already feedback to higher division not much improvements have been done... |
| 104. | this module is all about programming...and i just finished my lab test last week..we are given 2.30 hours to solve two questions...be honest,the time is not enough...and i don't think this is a good way to test the student on programming..... |
| 105. | tough!!!tough!!!+tough!!!!!!! difficult!!!!!!!!! time consumer!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| 106. | the exam up to now I have been taken cannot really differentiate students who study hard with those do not study. As I can see luck is more important element on this module. |
| 107. | Lab Assignment shld be given on alternate weeks rather than every week. Students are struggling to meet dateline than learning sth out of it. |
| 108. | The qestions of the practical examinations was very ambiguously written, leading to many students, including myself, to misinterpret the questions. This would defeat the purpose of the exam as it might understate a student's ability and will not be a good measurement of the student's capabilities. |
| 109. | I feel CS1101C is enough for EE. |
| 110. | It will be good if the module has on-line multimedia webcast for the student. exam, in a limit time really can not test out one student's ability. but anyway we still need the exam. is it will be good if the exam can change to project based evaluation |
| 111. | maybe a additional module for C++ language is needed. |
| 112. | good programming subject |
| 113. | The weekly lab assignment helps us alot. |
| 114. | can understand, but practice is not enough, so when come to exercise, need time to verify the function. |
| 115. | The labs that were to be done weekly were quite difficult to handle. I suggest that program skeletons could have been provided first and then increase the difficulty week after week. (Reducing the amount of codes provided in the skeleton) The algorithms were understandable but the problems that I faced was the writing of codes. |
| 116. | CS1102C has too much information that all the students have to absorbed in such a short period of time. The most taxing part in this course are the weekly programming labs that all of us had to do. Alot of students cannot even cope with the lectures itself, hence we cannot even do the lab. The level of difficulty for these labs are too extreme. I feel that the number of labs done should be decreased and level difficulty must be brought down else this will cause failure of students in this course as it consist of 20% of the whole module. In the whole, I feel that this course is a very difficult course in which most students find it hard to manage including myself. |
| 117. | please set the CS1102C lab question easier. now we need to spend most of the time to do it. So we don't have enough time for other mordule. |