Hide menu

TDDC32 Design and implementation of a software module in Java

Muddy card evaluation

Date: 2013-01-28

Number of responses: 30

Lectures/written exam:

  • Interesting/stimulating/well planned lectures (8 persons)
  • Well balanced/well planned/interesting course (6 persons)
  • Good idea to mix theory and code examples during lectures (5 persons)
  • Nice idea to post voluntary homework problems and then work through them at next lecture (5 persons)
  • To much text on slides/slides to heavy (5 persons)
  • Good to have lots of text on slides if you miss a lecture (2 persons)
  • Good tempo on lectures (2 persons)
  • Lecturer does not speak English particularly well/switch to Swedish (2 persons)
  • Applets and visualization of data structures is helpful (2 persons)
  • Good to have suggested reading and example code on course web page
  • Pedagogical/calm/competent lecturer
  • Lectures are a bit to slow
  • Lectures are OK
  • Dull lectures
  • Sometimes context of why we are doing certain things are missing
  • Motivate better the purpose of different ADTs
  • Use the white board more often
  • To many small examination items
  • It would be interesting to know what the exam will look like
  • Maybe have lesson/tutorial sessions for solving problems
  • Maybe have a collection of exercises to practice for exam


  • Project seems interesting (2 persons)
  • It would be nice to be able to see example projects from previous years
  • Want more information on project


  • Fun/interesting/appropriate lab assignments so far (3 persons)
  • More lab assistants needed (2 persons)
  • Lab assistant gives qualified help
  • Need better descriptions of lab assignments
  • Lab 1 a bit dull
  • The description of lab 2 is a bit messy
  • Labs are hard/difficult
  • Lab deadline is to soon
  • Give soft deadlines for labs
  • Have spent 28h on lab 1, will 12h be enough for lab 2?
  • Let lab 3 give bonus points on exam

Tommy's comments:

It is hard to give a course in a manner pleasing to everybody. From your comments above I feel that my aim has been somewhat accurate. Naturally, I will try to incorporate your feedback, and I hope that you will feel that this is the case. Below follows some specific comments.


I agree that the slides, in particular those for lectures 4 and 5, are very heavy. One reason for this is, as I have said during the lectures, that we do not have any recommended reading for this part of the course, making the material presented at the lectures even more important than usual. My hope is that you will be able to go back to those slides when you are starting to look for material concerning specific technologies that you might want to put to use in your project (or lab 2).

My spoken English does certainly come with a heavy Swedish accent, but I thought that it was, at least occasionally, somewhat idiomatic. Perhaps this is not the case. Anyway, the official course language is English, and since all lectures so far have been attended by exchange students I have to address you in English. Also, I believe it would be very confusing to speak Swedish while displaying English slides.

It would be nice to be able to provide lessons and/or some kind of collection of exercises for the theoretical parts of the course. The written exam, however is a very small part of the course (only 1.5 ECTS credits), so you would have to perform very bad on the written exam for me to motivate giving lessons. Historically, the written exam on this course has been considered very easy to pass. Regarding exercises, I guess those would have to be developed until the next edition of the course. For this year, I suggest you use the old exams for practicing (available here). For those of you that have access to the course book I suggest the following set of exercises (as a minimum):

  • Lecture 1: R-10.6, R-10.8-10.9, R-10.22
  • Lecture 2: R-10.15, R-10.16a, R-10.20, R-10.23
  • Lecture 3: R-9.6-9.9, R-9.16


More information on the projects will be given at a forthcoming lecture. Examples of old projects can be found here. (Also linked from the project page.)


The lab groups (A and B) are big. I would also like to have more assistants, so that each lab pair could be given more time. Again this is a question of resources, but I acknowledge your request.

I agree the description of lab 2 is a bit messy. This is partially on purpose (see lab 3 for an explanation of this fact), but maybe something could be done to clear it up a bit.

I try to make it clear during the lectures when we have passed a point where your knowledge should be sufficient for you to start working on the respective lab assignments. If you feel that you will not be able to make the lab deadline, please contact your assistant well in advance.


Page responsible: Tommy Färnqvist
Last updated: 2013-01-29