Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

"vote of no confidence" class rep

2»

Comments

  • #52
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    BrenC wrote: »
    I'm a little curious if anyone has actually talked to this rep instead of bitching and moaning constantly, which as I should know, some computer scientists love to do.

    Have any of the first years actually emailed their rep with any problems?
    As I said:
    JC 2K3 wrote: »
    Because we've such a small class that we can communicate with our lecturers on a personal level and organise class nights out ourselves. We don't need a class rep and we don't really see the relevance of the SU. So there is no problem as such, I just think the situation's a bit ridiculous.

    And we don't constantly bitch and moan about him and he's not our rep anymore, we don't have one.


  • #53
    clongriffin128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭clongriffin128


    In a note to what was said on Professor Coffey recently. In agreement with Boston comments, Professor Coffey is one of the most outstanding people within the college. He is still very much old school. Student's complain that he dictates notes rather than writing them, however they don't realise/appreciate that unlike all their other lecturers who copy directly from notes which are copied directly from books, Professor Coffey does everything in his head. Such genious is hard to come by.

    In reality the complaints made about his semiconductor course previously show an inherent reduction in the requirements asked of engineers. The first sign of complicated theory, its all well and good using an alalogy of water flow for current flow but it is too basic. In reality what Prof. Coffey teaches is actually what is happening.

    I had Professor Coffey for 3 modules during my Undergraduate study in TCD. I also agree with Boston that the stuff went straight over my head, however you come to realise that the level expected from him is the level you're probably going to need in the real world.

    In truth, it is sad that ye were able not to answer his section on the recent 2e8 paper. It is however not just a problem that engineers have with Prof. Coffey but that of learning electronics in the first place. Anything which doesn't involve anything flacky like concrete, seems a bit too extreme. In reality given that most people choose Civil because of the vast differences in mathematical competency required between Civil or Electronic, Prof. Coffey maybe thought a historical essay might be more in line for those people.


  • #54
    BrenC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 364 ✭✭BrenC


    JC 2K3 wrote: »
    As I said:


    And we don't constantly bitch and moan about him and he's not our rep anymore, we don't have one.


    Oh ok, you kinda do have a class rep whether you like it or not, so why the vote of no confidence then? Surely the current situation is fine since you don't need a class rep...


  • #55
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    He didn't start the thread.


  • #56
    M450
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 677 ✭✭✭M450


    clongriffin128 wrote:
    In a note to what was said on Professor Coffey recently. In agreement with Boston comments, Professor Coffey is one of the most outstanding people within the college. He is still very much old school. Student's complain that he dictates notes rather than writing them, however they don't realise/appreciate that unlike all their other lecturers who copy directly from notes which are copied directly from books, Professor Coffey does everything in his head. Such genious is hard to come by.
    I agree with everything you say about Prof Coffey, he is unbelievably clever...

    But that doesnt change the fact that he taught us the wrong material and resulted in us being unprepared for Martin Burke's course in third year. I think it made a big difference to my level of understanding throughout Martin Burke's course and ultimately had a negative impact on how I performed in the exam...
    clongriffin128 wrote:
    In reality the complaints made about his semiconductor course previously show an inherent reduction in the requirements asked of engineers. The first sign of complicated theory, its all well and good using an alalogy of water flow for current flow but it is too basic. In reality what Prof. Coffey teaches is actually what is happening.

    I dont agree with this at all... It's quite a big jump between learning "water flow" analogies and the material Coffey was lecturing to us. It's not a matter of "the first sign of complicated theory", more like unnecessary complicated theory at the stage of electronics we had experienced. Maybe if Coffey had presented us the proper material for that course, and then in third year we continued on with Martin Burke's course, then maybe the material Coffey was lecturing us on would be appropriate.



    And I believe that the college made no changes to the 2E8 structure for this year, even after conceding to our demands, and Martin Burke acknowledging to our class that the material Coffey was teaching us was inappropriate.


  • #57
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    M450 wrote: »
    I agree with everything you say about Prof Coffey, he is unbelievably clever...

    But that doesnt change the fact that he taught us the wrong material and resulted in us being unprepared for Martin Burke's course in third year. I think it made a big difference to my level of understanding throughout Martin Burke's course and ultimately had a negative impact on how I performed in the exam...

    And I believe that the college made no changes to the 2E8 structure for this year, even after conceding to our demands, and Martin Burke acknowledging to our class that the material Coffey was teaching us was inappropriate.

    Do you blame the man or the person that gave him that course? You seem surprised that no change has been made to the 2e8 course. Do you think this is the first year this type happened or that it will be the last? The undergraduate student is the one that will always get shafted.


  • #58
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    Boston wrote: »

    The undergraduate student is the one that will always get shafted.

    Last year I would have agreed with you but not now


  • #59
    M450
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 677 ✭✭✭M450


    Boston wrote:
    Do you blame the man or the person that gave him that course? You seem surprised that no change has been made to the 2e8 course. Do you think this is the first year this type happened or that it will be the last? The undergraduate student is the one that will always get shafted.

    I suppose I blame a bit of both parties there...

    As far as I've heard, the years before us didn't have Coffey until 3rd Year, so I believe it was a first for our year. The reason I'm surprised no change was made is solely due to the fact that the exam format was changed for us, I interpret this as follows, the course organisers agreed with the many complaints that were put forward to them so they conceded to our wishes. Why else would they have made such a significant modification to the exam format. If they agreed with what Coffey was teaching us then they would have said "tough luck, you're not in school anymore... sit the exam as is!"


  • #60
    jason&arthur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 79 ✭✭jason&arthur


    BrenC wrote: »
    Have any of the first years actually emailed their rep with any problems?

    we have no problems =)


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    M450 wrote: »
    I suppose I blame a bit of both parties there...

    As far as I've heard, the years before us didn't have Coffey until 3rd Year, so I believe it was a first for our year. The reason I'm surprised no change was made is solely due to the fact that the exam format was changed for us, I interpret this as follows, the course organisers agreed with the many complaints that were put forward to them so they conceded to our wishes. Why else would they have made such a significant modification to the exam format. If they agreed with what Coffey was teaching us then they would have said "tough luck, you're not in school anymore... sit the exam as is!"

    Your problem is that you think changing an exam layout is significant in anyway. I'm sure he was delighted at the prospect of making his part optional as its less corrections. There is no way in hell he was over ruled or forced to change that paper. He could have very easily said tough luck and there wouldn't have been a thing the department head could have done about it.


  • #62
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    jason&arthur wrote: »
    we have no problems =)
    Hai gyz!!!11


  • #63
    Señor Juárez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,388 ✭✭✭Señor Juárez


    It is a bit annoying that this person is the faculty covener, and is clearly not interested in being a class rep. I get the feeling he wants the position and the reputation, without the responsibility.

    I have heard that he failed 2nd year science and started again in first year of CS, and has been involved with the SU before - so he has known exactly what he has been doing.


  • #64
    JavaBear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 209 ✭✭JavaBear


    I have heard that brillcream makes you go bald


  • #65
    Danger Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭Danger Bob


    Señor Ju&#225 wrote: »
    It is a bit annoying that this person is the faculty covener, and is clearly not interested in being a class rep. I get the feeling he wants the position and the reputation, without the responsibility.

    I have heard that he failed 2nd year science and started again in first year of CS, and has been involved with the SU before - so he has known exactly what he has been doing.

    Are you STILL talking about this?


  • #66
    scengi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭scengi


    Señor Juárez wrote: »
    It is a bit annoying that this person is the faculty covener

    Faculty convenor is Cathal Reilly (recently elected SU President) which the person in question certainly is not. I think he may be school convenor. big difference. Faculty convenor is rep for the entirety of the EMS (engineering Maths and Science) faculty. School convenor, just for the school of CS.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    jason&arthur
    Closed Accounts Posts: 79 ✭✭jason&arthur


    mayb he is doin loads of work as school conveenor thas why he doesn come 2 class??


  • #68
    aoife-m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭aoife-m


    scengi wrote: »
    Faculty convenor is Cathal Reilly (recently elected SU President) which the person in question certainly is not. I think he may be school convenor. big difference. Faculty convenor is rep for the entirety of the EMS (engineering Maths and Science) faculty. School convenor, just for the school of CS.

    cathals in JS geology
    SOC is it?


Advertisement