Exam Question–“Least Valuable Portions of CAEE-201”

 

Almost everyone received full credit for both the “Least Valuable” and “Most Valuable” portions of CAEE-201.  The few that lost points were because their entry was too short, had serious grammar errors, or in one case because they pasted  (I assume) a response to the wrong question into the answer.

While grading them I kept notes, about issues you raised, dividing them into general categories.  If the same topic came up more than once I put the word “Again” after the comment and thereafter added a “+” for additional instances.

What follows are my overall comments about the “Least Valuable”, with the detailed notes at the bottom.

Administrative Difficulties

• Several students felt the grading was too harsh on labs that had sequential questions. – We’ll be more careful about this
• Several mentioned the acoustically poor room – I agree and will strive never to meet there again.
• A number of you missed having the lecturer’s slides posted after their lectures. – I depended on the lecturers to provide them – if they did I posted the slides.  In future I’ll pursue the lecturers more actively.

 

Labs

• There were many comments about the lab, but (other than the harsh grading), none were that consistent, and a number that were contradictory. – See also the very positive comments about the labs in the “most valuable” post.
• A number of you felt that Excel was used too much and wanted more of other programs.

 

Discussions

• As has been the case every time we’ve offered the class, a number of you disliked the discussions for a variety of reasons ranging from “worthless” to repetitive, to wrong placement, to too basic, too demanding. – See also the very positive comments about the discussions in the “most valuable” post.

 

Course Focus and Effects

• Several students were adamant that they had little interest in anything other than their major, and thus much of the material was unintersting.
• Several felt that there wasn’t enough Environmental Engineering – My belief is that there was considerable EnvE, but that it overlapped with other topics  (e.g IAQ, Solid Waste, Water Treatment)

---

Full Set of Prof. Mitchell’s Notes on Your Opinions

Administrative Difficulties
Difficulty seeing site at work because blog is blocked - online discussions.
Felt was forced into different time for labs than scheduled [Never raised issue with instructors]
Poor acoustics mentioned repeatedly (Curtis-340) Again++++

Lectures
Post lecturer slides after lecture - particularly Bridge Visit lecture.  Again++++
Some lectures too general and/or simple
Eliminate one lecture per week - have lecturer available in lab for 2-hour sessions.
Early lectures on what careers in field
s would be were worthless [Mitchell  presumably]
Have lecturers explain why they chose the field

Labs
Lab concepts and excel requirements beyond his knowledge.  Led to harsh grading.
Lab TA's poorly prepared - Again
More TA help with Bridge analysis - Again++
More help with Bridge Collision Analysis
SD too technical - perhaps prep and then see or view recorded.
SD too simple - should look at reports.
Wanted more depth in labs. Again
Lecturers didn't explain labs enough. Again++
Suggest have quizzes on labs afterwards
Lecturers explained too much. Again+
Conversion lab too simple.
Another felt that all labs were about conversions.
Mandatory attendance unnecessary
Language of TA's a problem
Wants Excel format for all labs - also more feedback on errors. Again
HVAC portion of first lab too confusing.
Ensure that each lab is tied to a field trip.  Ones that weren't were less effective.
Grading too harsh particularly on Bridge Impact lab - Again++
Didn't fully understand labs
Need explanation of grading
More Revit - Again

Discussions
Discussions repetitive -  Again++
Would like to read articles after class.
Discussions - had difficulty finding good articles.  Suggest fewer. Admit making up article.
Wanted more feedback on discussion - Perhaps Grader post
Didn't like having to identify what was confusing. Again++
Not clear if needed to read other's posts.
Access science too basic - Again++
Many articles too technical - would have preferred applications articles
Would like more interactivity in discussions - Forced to comment on others - Again+
Special questions for discussions were not helpful - just asking general question again.
Would like different format over course of term - too repetetive. e.g. critique each other as in English
Would like to have to perform calculations based on articles read. - Again
Would like assigned articles - not choice
Articles too general
Entirely worthless

Excel
Too much Excel use - wanted other programs - Again+++++
If statements in Excel - want more depth.
Needed more Excel help - transfer student.

Course Focus
Interested only in their major. Several.  Included disliking discussions on other than major. Again++
Want more EnvE [Mitchell note - the students didn't understand that air quality and solid waste were EnvE] Again ++
Too much EnvE - need more CivE Again
Suggest having labs that have multiple components