MT4002 a farse?

deise go deo

NTMK wrote: »

Solids are highly organised structures

Liquids are completely unorganised structure

Crystalline solids are highly organised structures, but this dose not mean that something is not solid if it dosent have an organized structure.

Solids Definition (Collins Dictionary): in a physical state in which it resists changes in size and shape.

Glass is not an organised crystalline solid, it is an amorphous solid, but it is still a solid. It has (Unlike a liquid) definite shape and volume.

amorphous solids are inbetween there organised but not as much as a solids and the can flow albeit very very slowly

this link explains basically what glass is
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fact-fiction-glass-liquid

A mathematical model shows it would take longer than the universe has existed for room temperature cathedral glass to rearrange itself to appear melted.

The kind of 'very slow flowing' they talk about can occur in crystalline solids too, its called creep.

Again the point is glass dose not flow(If it takes longer than the universe has existed then it dosent happen)

There are two forms of solid, crystalline and amorphous, both are solid.

jeremyr62

Reagrding the flow of window glass. See question 20.3 (page 284) in Engineering Materials 1 by Ashby and Jones.

NTMK

deise go deo wrote: »

The kind of 'very slow flowing' they talk about can occur in crystalline solids too, its called creep.

Again the point is glass dose not flow(If it takes longer than the universe has existed then it dosent happen)

just because something takes longer than the universe has existed to appear doesnt mean it doesnt happen
flow at any rate is flow regardless at how long it takes

MicK10rt

I'm still not satisfied that people understand the bottom line. Sulis is not a great tool for accessing students work. What has to be understood is that at the end of the day, if we don't get appropriate marks from sulis, possibly through no fault of our own we fail the module and have to pay to repeat it causing undue stress on the student.

NTMK

MicK10rt wrote: »

I'm still not satisfied that people understand the bottom line. Sulis is not a great tool for accessing students work. What has to be understood is that at the end of the day, if we don't get appropriate marks from sulis, possibly through no fault of our own we fail the module and have to pay to repeat it causing undue stress on the student.

Its far from perfect but its better than having to do a lab write up everyweek considering when i did that module i had 3 write ups every week.
as far as getting answers wrong the correct answer has a range if you're correct you get the mark.

everytime the results in a lab were off spec we were given another groups results.

They also adjust the ranges to depending on results

and overall the module isnt that hard. we got 10% for answering a survey.

Overall this was one of the easier modules ive done so far

canned_ulkc

If this is the module I THINK you're talking about then I say that I agree and disagree with you....

First, the SULIS submissions are a joke. Sulis is fine IMO for certain things and I believe that while the assessment is valid, SULIS is not used well for this module. If the questions still ask for a numeric answer which fits between a certain span set by the lecturer then you are being marked down and it wouldn't surprise me if many in your class are actively seeking out answers from last year.
The reason you will miss out is because you depend on 9 other groups measuring materials accurately and pooling the results for you to do the calculations. If you calculate an answer to be 89.9 and his span is 90 to 100 then you miss out due to classmates miss-noting or being inaccurate.
The better method would be multiple choice and if the lecturer doesn't want to give away 25% to guesses then all they have to do is increase the number of choices.

Second, this is where I disagree with you.....
You're going to be a technology teacher - not a woodwork teacher. The course has relevance and while it goes beyond what will be taught in second level I dare you to challenge Tony Rynne on the depth he covers in TG - way beyond what is in the syllabus. Best of luck on that one....
Also - as an educator surely you'd serve yourself and your pupils better by having a deeper understanding and not just the understanding they need for second level? Don't tell me you want to be the kind of teacher who simply says "don't worry about that" when a curious pupil asks you the tough questions?
Sorry to sound harsh but seriously......

canned_ulkc

Just noticed that Jeremy has provided an earlier reply. I'd like to let you know that I also suggested changes in the survey and wonder if the sulis assessments have changed to multiple choice? I certainly suggested that in my feedback.

One thing's for sure, if it's the same as it was a few years ago then it actively encourages cheating (as I said in my own feedback).


PS. It's "farce"

jk536

I am doing woodwork teaching and I am currently doin this module.
I dont agree that the course has no relavence.we are goin to be technology teachers and metalwork up to junior cert.we need to have a deeper understand of materials than just the sylabus.

However the problem i have with this module is that it needs a introduction module for half of the students before this one.i can speak for a lot of the woodwork and metal people when i say it is pitched way too high and the vast majority goes over our heads.A lot of us have no physics or chemistry behind us.

So much of the information passes us by without anytime to absorb it and with 2 lectures,1 tutorial and 1 lab a week its a constant struggle to keep your head above water.we are being taught at the moment in our education modules that we should strive to acheive "deep learning" of a subject and understand it completely but there is just too much information to process.

It really is a case of just trying to pass this module.I think as a result of giving us such a large amount of new information that we are getting even less out of it.

Im not lazy and got a 3.6 in my xmas exams so this is not a case of me not being arsed to study and research the subject myself but when you go into a lecture and only understand a fraction of it it is very disheartening.

phnompenh72

Hey guys,

I see you are here talking about one of the courses for the Grad Dip in Ed - Technology.. Im looking to start that course next January and am really interested in getting more information about it.. particularly the bench tests, the interview process, the course itself and post-graduation options..
I would like to chat with anyone who just joined the course this past January and those who are in the final year, as well as recent/not-so-recent graduates..

I live in Galway but would happily travel to Limerick and buy you lunch to pick your brain on the particulars for 15-20min.. any help would be great!
Im really interested and excited about the course.. I just want to make sure I cover all the bases in terms of getting in..

If you and to PM me or post on this current thread, we can get in touch.

Many thanks,

Ruairi
Ps. if you have friends on/were on the course, maybe you could put them in touch with me also.. there is such thing as a free lunch you know! lol :-)

jeremyr62

Don't hijack this thread. You will get a better response if you start a new one which people might actually read.

garv123

doing wood sciene and im stuck doing this too, the whole wood science course is a joke though. we're basically doing all the same as construction management and production management and 1 course then that has something to do with wood. we're doing manufacturing and the labs for that are metal work
materials labs are testing metals and glass.
maths labs are doing the maple on the computers
ans design studio is building a bridge from card, road saftey survey and something else unrelated to the course.
so ive no pity for you:rolleyes:

Figerty

Hello Jeremy,

A question regarding teaching quality. One of the problems highlighted at the start of this thread was the disconnect between the Labs and the lectures (lecturers). If there is a problem with teaching in the Uni. could this be down to the fact that there are around 2000 postgrads in UL of which, say 1000 are teaching at anyone time.

I know from connections in UL that they are required to teach 6 hours Labs/Tutorials per week. Now, my bone of contention is that few TA's will have any teaching expierance and are (according to my friends in UL) are dropped in to these hours without any great system.

My point is this, at roughly 1000 Post grads doing 6 hours a week this accounts for somewhere around 6000 hours of teaching where the Teaching assistant has no training or expierance (or perhaps qualification).

How can this be deemed acceptable and reflects badly on the Teaching quality UL promotes? Perhaps this also reflects some of the opinion of this Module.

jeremyr62

Using post grads is common at all Universities. I doubt there is a single decent University in the world that does not use post grads this way.

There are multiple resources to deal with queries about lab work. The discussion forum on SULIS could be a great resource but students don't seem to use it despite my advertising it. I try to respond as soon as questions are posted.

J_E

Was going to make a thread about it but decided to post here instead.

We (Woodwork Ed) have this module now, and while I can appreciate it's values in a better understanding material properties, there is a real sense of hopelessness in the class. Nobody is able to answer the questions asked, the lectures are completely alienating everyone, the labs feel strangely disconnected from everything, not much support is given. I'm going to the Science Learning Center in hope of finding answers because this is a terribly unstructured module which makes assumptions of the student's knowledge in areas like physics and chemistry, which is unfair. I can only hope in the future they at least correct the module or give more support to students because right now I am trying my best to struggle through it. I was asking a PhD student in material science for help and even they were clueless.

jeremyr62

"Not much support is given"

Really?

This module has two lectures a week.

It has one tutorial a week which revisits material covered in class and has quizzes where students can test their understanding.

It has 8 (eight) lab experiments where students can practice the scientific method, use excel and generate real data about the performance of real materials.

The tutorial also goes through the numerical part of the online assessments prior to the students having to submit their answers.

Instuctions on how to do the numerical parts of the online assessments for some labs are also stored in SULIS.

There are currently 11 (eleven) online tutorials that augment the material covered in lectures.

There is a discussion forum in SULIS where students can ask questions.

Some lab assessments have FAQs stored on SULIS.

There is a comprehensive book of notes available.

I think we offer plenty of support. Be happy to hear about any other ways we can help with understanding though.

Chimaera

To those who bemoan the non-specific focus of the module to their field of study:

It'd be ideal if every single course had its own carefully packaged set of modules perfectly tailored to the needs of the course. The reality is that there are limits on funding and teaching resources which mean that common modules must be used across a number of courses. This will lead to compromises for everyone involved.

Also, there will be times where material you cover in the lab will be new to you because it has not yet been covered in the lectures. With only 13 weeks teaching in the semester, it's just not practical to wait until all the material has been covered in lectures in order to complete the labs.

Now if the lab results are to be used in tutorials or assessments before the material is covered in the lectures, this is unfair but I don't know if this is actually the case or not.

J_E

I feel the pace of the module is awfully fast. Most of us are left wondering what on earth was just covered in a lecture then suddenly we're 3 chapters ahead. This sort of pace may suit those with an engineering background but for the rest of us this is all completely new territory and we're struggling to learn and comprehend all of this. I really feel a more basic introductory module covering just the tutorial content would be more beneficial.

I am most certainly not questioning the content of the module by the way, that's not the point here.

jeremyr62

We have a syllabus that was agreed by all the Course Directors when the module was created. That's what we stick to. We have to assume a certain level of background understanding. The relevant Course directors also agreed to this.

Pablo_

Cydoniac,
i done this module, ya its tough, if i understood it all in 2nd year i would have flown thru nearly half of my subsequent modules of my degree.
But can see your point on it being so in depth, for woodwork/metalwork teacher

practical advice to not lose the noodle on this one is

1) pick up the marks on the lab quizzes, mid-terms, etc because the exam is difficult for a non-engineer/science student with time on his/her hands
2) use all the resources put up on solas, the tutorials are great, if u nail them your doin well
3) take it on the chin with some solas answers not being accepted, but really the calculations should be straightforward enough
4) the basic concepts of the module are quite interesting for your own use in the future

this module also makes the student realise ..sometimes egestion happens

wnolan1992

*irrelevant babble*

J_E

That post is from last year!

wnolan1992

Cydoniac wrote: »

That post is from last year!

Ah so it is! :pac: :o:o I don't read timestamps when the thread is at the top of the forum. My bad!


EDIT: I really should have realised when Ginge was talking about being a 4th year. awks.

xxslashxx

I must agree that it is a poorly run module. Im studying it now and even as an engineer I struggle to follow some of the notes. Some of the optional questions on the Sulis assessments seem to have no real connection to the lab or what has been covered in the notes. I often find myself looking on the internet or in my Mechanics of Solids notes from the previous semester to find an answer.

The fact that you are tested based on hundreds of results obtained by other students (1st years / 2nd years from a number of different courses) is absolutely ridiculous. Especially since some people may be hungover or just rushing through the lab to get it over sooner. I agree with the previous poster where an ideal set of results could be provided after the lab is carried out. That way we get the benefit of carrying out the lab, and also we can practise our calculations using correct data. Furthermore, my QCA as an engineer will definately not be affected by some 1st year lad who thinks he might like to do woodwork teaching.

The lectures are quite uninspiring. Im not a big fan of materials /materials science but for our mechanics of solids lectures last semester I found them at least interesting and easy to follow, not to mention more structured. The notes layout is far better also.

Jeremy,

I am currently doing the Weibull modulus lab, and my answers do not seem to be working out. From the lab handout, all my answers regarding probabilites of the chalk breaking at various forces ends up as .99999 or 1. However in the questions asking what stress is needed for a given probability, I can work those out, which suggests to me that the stress calculated by the given force acting on the 9.2 mm diameter chalk for the questions to find probability, is too small? I don't really know where I'm going wrong?

jeremyr62

You haven't read "How to win friends and influence people." have you.

Figerty

He's not trying to be friends... the contributors just want you all to up your game!

A snide comment about reading that book isn't going to help anyone.

Ginge Young

Quite unprofessional really.

J_E

Ginge Young wrote: »

Quite unprofessional really.

This wouldn't be the first time either.

jeremyr62

Cydoniac wrote: »

This wouldn't be the first time either.

Care to elaborate?

J_E

jeremyr62 wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

Apparently telling students "that's life" when asked for clarification on range values? I can feel this turning into a tit for tat sort of thing so I'm not going to say more. I assume you have better things to do also than post here.

jeremyr62

It is easy hiding behind an avatar to accuse someone of unprofessional conduct. Just be aware that you have made a serious allegation. It’s a public forum so you have a responsibility to at least think about what you post.
I monitor this board to counter criticism of the module and to justify the way the module is run, and in this case to refute allegations of unprofessional conduct. If you have convincing proof take it to the students' union or the appropriate Head of Department.
This board is not an appropriate place to ask technical questions about the content of MT4002. There are multiple opportunities for that, including email, the SULIS forum and the tutorials.