Report Course Evaluation, FRTF20

Basic facts

Course nameApplied Robotics
Course codeFRTF20   Course syllabus
ECTS credits7.5
Study period the course was finishedHT_LP1
Registrated students58
Number and share of passed students     52 / 90 %
Number answers and response rate18 / 31 %
Number answers from males14
Number answers from females4
Study hours according the curricula
Lectures    28 h
Group work    22 h
Laboratories    8 h
Time with supervisor    20 h
Self study time    100 h

Summary of questionnaires

The CEQ-score span between -100 och +100, there -100 means that "I fully disagree to the statement" and +100 "I fully agree to the statement".

Presence at teaching

Part of teachingNumberShare
0-30 %0 0 %
30-70 %5 28 %
70-100 %13 72 %

Scales and questions

Good Teaching+4849
Clear Goals and Standards+1043
Appropriate Assessment+7325
Appropriate Workload+3327
Special questions
The course seems important for my education+5654
Overall, I am satisfied with this course+5350
Graf of scales and questions

Distribution of the answers from question 26:
"Overall, I am satisfied with this course"

     Graf of question 26

Dissatisfied (<0) 2 11 %
Neutral (0) 2 11 %
Satisfied (>0) 14 78 %
No answer 0 0 %

Mean of CEQ-score+53
Standard deviation (StdDev)50

Distribution of the answers from question 17:
"The course seems important for my education"

     Graf of question 17

Mean of CEQ-score+56
Standard deviation (StdDev)54


Comments by the students' representatives

De praktiska momenten lyfts fram som roligt och givande delar. Engagemanget från föreläsaren och lärare i kursen uppskattas stort och får beröm. Det som eleverna upplever som svårt eller påfrestande är strukturen i kursen. De kommenterar att bättre struktur och informationsflöde hade gjort kursen lättare att följa.

Comments by the course leader

We are happy to see in the CEQ-answers and submitted comments that the
course is considered to be very relevant and that there was a large
value and appreciation in applying the course contents in hands-on
laboratory sessions and in the student projects.

We had some problems with both the simulation software in the beginning of the course and a hardware issue at the end of the hands-on exercises which caused some delays in the schedule, so had to reschedule and delay some parts, but are grateful for the cooperation from the students involved.

There is intentionally a wide variety in the topics of the course projects and thus what is presented, although several fundamental aspects like calibration issues show up in different forms in most projects.
The students signing up for the course come from different study
programs and background. We therefore see a large value being able to
offer projects which can be tailored towards particular interest and
experiences in a certain domain of robotics and have tried to follow
the recommendations to specify the prerequisites with respect to
e.g., previous programming experience etc.
Some projects are still open-ended and the expected outcomes for these
individual projects were to a larger extent decided within the formed
groups together with the supervisors.

Overall we are very happy with the dedicated and fine work within the
projects and it was very nice to see all the demonstrations at the
project presentation to highlight what can be achieved within the

How the questionnaires were filled in

By web forms.