MT4002 a farse?

J_E

jeremyr62 wrote: »

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.

If this is the case perhaps you shouldn't make a habit of making unhelpful, sarcastic remarks to people who are trying to give you feedback on your module. You did say that you were open to any comments people had to make.

Chris Martin

It was my belief that boards.ie was a place to express opinions.
As a lecturer I thought you should've known better than to post said comment when genuine points were being made, and that you might try and assist.
Clearly you're a lecturer who does throws out the information as fast as possible and leave the rest to the class.
If that's the case, just throw everything up on Sulis,
Then there would be no need for the senseless "that's life" quotes and the like.
Unprofessional is what I'd call it too.
Not directed at you as a person,
Just your method of teaching.
Nine times out of ten it's because the student is angry about something and is venting his anger of the module and lecture due to it, and doesn't have a leg to stand on.
In this case however, it is clear that your previous comments haven't served you well, and it would seem the students are in the right.
I've had teachers do the same, and can relate entirely to what's being said.
Some claim it's just a method of teaching,
However my definition of teaching is when the students learn from the teacher, not get put down by them.
Just my tuppence anyway,
Not aiming to offend,
Just get my point across about lecturers or teachers,
With this manner of teaching.
It's ineffective and lazy,
And being 49/50 years old,
I'd expect a person of that experience to know a little better.

jeremyr62

We assist students in many ways in appropriate places.
In my opinion Boards isn't one of those places.
Its not the role of the University to assist students wherever they want when academically approved places exist for this.

Most of what gets posted here isn't useful feedback either. If students want to complain about a module, this is as good a place as any. Don't expect it to go unchallenged though.

reunion

MicK10rt wrote: »

Materials Technology 4002 has to be the most useless and poorly run module in UL. For a start Metalwork and Woodwork teachers are forced to take this module even though all of the material taught is completely irrelevant to us as future teachers as this material does not appear at junior and leaving cert level. We are thrown in with enginnering students and archetects and expected to learn the same material. Another gripe I have is with the online tutorials we must complete. We arn't told how to tackle these and when we ask the lab attendants how, they tell us one way, we go and do it that way and it turns out to be wrong. It is clear to me that the Lecturers and lab attendents aren't preaching the same materials. There must be a breakdown in communication somewhere along the line.

With your 1 semester of college under your belt, to say that the material you are being though is completely irrelevant is downright insulting. The course was designed by people with qualifications and years of experience. If you were expecting just reading the LC and JC books and doing LC and JC exams, you didn't research your choice of course properly. It's worth noting that content of a junior or leaving cert course can change and the teacher should know more than if the student read 1 textbook.

The labs are given on a page (or at least were) and explained at the lab and in textbooks. Errors occur when people either 1. don't listen or 2. don't use the correct units.

jeremyr62 wrote: »

We assist students in many ways in appropriate places.
In my opinion Boards isn't one of those places.
Its not the role of the University to assist students wherever they want when academically approved places exist for this.

Most of what gets posted here isn't useful feedback either. If students want to complain about a module, this is as good a place as any. Don't expect it to go unchallenged though.

I agree, boards isn't the best place to post feedback. I did this module 3 years ago, we received 10% for filling in a questionnaire about the module (don't know if that's still around) so everyone in the class gave opinions. It would be interesting to see the results of the questionnaire. You certainly do listen/care about the module with the high number of ways for people to contact you.

SULIS does need some work, what ended up happening was people made groups of about 10 and answered the questions about the lab. the first person made educated guesses, if we scored high, we changed what we thought was wrong until we were getting high marks. This isn't the way to learn, I didn't learn anything from the labs at all as a result. I do remember 1 lab having terrible results which made it impossible to score 100% in the lab assessment on sulis using their results. It would be nice if the TA's were also given the broad range of values for the set of data, so if a group got abysmal results that they could repeat the experiment or be given a more approriate value their and then.

The lectures are boring (no offence!) but I wouldn't have said more boring than other modules.

The exam at the end of the year was multiple choice with no negative marking and it wasn't clear what the exam would be like (as no sample questions were given out). I learnt the book of notes that was given out towards the end of the year but that didn't help for the exam at all as ~50% of the questions weren't to do with that book of notes. I really hope previous exam papers are made available as that would have been quite helpful.

While I don't think the module was useful to me, it has been useful to others and the degree doesn't cater for individuals but for someone with a degree being able to work in a wide variety of roles.

jeremyr62 wrote: »

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

jeremyr62 wrote: »

It’s a public forum so you have a responsibility to at least think about what you post.

jeremyr62

The 10% for feedback at the end of the semester has now been retired. It served its purpose. It gave us a broadly positive response. Some people liked the module, some people hated it. The average was slightly better than indifference. The things we could change we have. The labs are the same and the assessment is the same. This is because we want students exposed to the scientific method, and we want students to be compelled to use Excel early on in their time at UL.
There are more resources available now. More online tutorials. A weekly tutorial is given too, which revisits the material covered in lectures and addresses the more difficult lab assessments. This year we introduced short multiple choice quizzes at the end of the tutorials. These questions are similar to those that will be encountered in the final exam.
I don't really get why you had to make educated guesses when doing the labs. Is this because it just wasn't clear what you had to do? The questions are now on the handouts. Maybe they weren't then.
One major bone of contention in the module occurs when answers given fall outside the tolerance zone. This seems to rankle with students. I appreciate it might annoy but one has to look at the bigger picture and try not to become fixated on marks. We aim to educate. In the grand scheme of things a lost mark equates to a fraction of a percent. It very rarely happens, as the tolerance bands are pretty huge.
I can see how the lectures could be seen as boring. A lot of lectures are. I sometimes think students expect us to entertain them these days. Lecture attendance is really woeful as is attendance at tutorials. The only decent attendance is for labs.
Poor attendance seems pretty endemic these days. Without breaking into a song and dance routine part way through the lecture I have no idea how to fix the attendance issue, but it’s almost certain that lecture attendance will be become monitored throughout the University if this pattern continues.
Getting feedback at the end of the semester is one thing. However I would be very happy to hear from other students who did MT4002 and are in 4th year or who have now left. What do you think now that some time has passed? Still think it was all a waste of time?

reunion

jeremyr62 wrote: »

What do you think now that some time has passed? Still think it was all a waste of time?

For me personally at the moment, yes it was a bit of a waste of time. Other modules covered the same material but was explained better (maybe less content in the module so easier to explain). I also don't use (currently anyway) material from the module after graduating that I didn't pick up in a different module.

However there are some people, who I graduated with, who are using material thought in the module.

For my degree we could choose in 4th year if you wanted to work with fluids (thermal properties, flow fields) or solids (materials). If you picked fluids, the mechanics of solids modules covered enough for materials, while if you picked solids, materials may have helped (I didn't pick solids so can't say).

echomadman

I'm in this module at the moment and I think its pretty interesting and relevant to any technology/engineering related degree (i'm in Pd&T) i wouldnt like to be a future JC or LC student of anyone who wasn't interested in the broader field. And from what i remember of my engineering/metalwork for leaving cert almost all the labs have been quite relevant to the subject, maybe woodwork less so.

As for it being poor on SULIS, compared to any of my other modules its far better

I don't know how anyone can be talking about a disconnect between the labs and the lectures, there's usually ****all people in the lectures, unless not being at the lectures is the disconnect you're talking about.
My main problem is sitting in the labs watching people with zero interest half-arsing the experiments and knowing that the data that I will be examined on later will be corrupt.

I think the worst thing about it is the sheer volume of students doing the module at once, the labs feel like an assembly line a lot of the time, with the TAs moaning about having to be there all day doing the same thing over and over, and Clive being aggressive and presumptive with everyone. I understand that its frustrating for them, but thats no excuse for the attitude.

Nockz

Sarcastic comments or not aside, I think it is pretty clear that this level of interaction between lecturer and student just doesn't exist enough in the college. Gaining some feedback both as a lecturer and as a student can really help guide the Universty to bigger and better places.

Pardon me for intruding

oisin_t

Graduated almost a year ago now, so took MT4002 when it first appeared. Personally, I have never used anything covered in the syllabus, so it was a waste of time. But I do know people who have done so for them it was not. It may perhaps be better to make this an elective for solid stream students in Engineering as there are other modules I personally feel would have been more beneficial for the fluids stream...but that's another discussion entirely!

With regards to the use of sulis, it became a exercise in waiting until the very last possible minute to answer the tests as word would get around about what the answers were. Whenever we did the questions as soon as the lab was over we always ended up with a poor score (normally due to value tolerances in the answers.)

Not going to lie, I never went to lectures after the first few weeks. It seemed like there was no point. When I went and studied and then did the labs on sulis I did poorly. When I stayed in bed and waited till the last minute till correct answers were being handed out, I did great. It felt like the lecturers were basically reading from the book. So I just did that in my own time.

The lectures were boring, but no more so than some other subjects and I can appreciate that it can be a difficult subject to teach, especially to so many students. From the students point of view though, it all felt very impersonal and like echomadman said, it felt like we were being herded about like cattle. The TA's and the technicians definitely had an attitude which made the environment very unpleasant.

I would not say though that the material was over our heads, or was too hard. Actually if I recall the exam was relatively easy. My only other complaints from when I did it (bar sulis) is that the book of notes was pointless. It was just half the book, and therefore half the information. I think it would be better to only use the book and prescribe chapters. Also we were told that sample papers would be provided to give us an idea of the exam (this was written in the notes also) and they were not. I recall getting a snarky email when I pointed this out... I hope that past papers are now provided as they are a great study tool.

ned14

I too am in 4th year, and since the module, I can't recall using anything that we were taught.

As for the SULIS assessments, I know you are trying to be fair by setting tolerance bands high etc. But the main issue was even though you may have used the correct method, learned all the material and used it correctly, the experimental data provided could not be relied upon. What drives people to copy answers is the fact that even if you put in the work with bad data, and you know that answers that will get you the marks are available, those are the ones you will use. It is very disheartening that you won't get rewarded for doing the work.

As for the lectures, I would agree with the comments above. Perhaps something that would help would be notes which need some filling in of the blanks. Should boost attendance and keep the pens busy throughout.

Sample papers would be a great help, or at least a considerable number of sample questions.

Chimaera

It sounds to me like the main problem with SULIS is that if your data is out of range from the lab experiments, you can't get the correct answer on SULIS and therefore lose marks.

I'm not going to call the data 'bad' because I subscribe to the view that there's no such thing in science as bad data. But if an assessment expects data to be within a certain range and it isn't, then there's a problem.

There can be a number of reasons for a set of data to be out of range: bad lab practice, lack of familiarity with the equipment or procedure, malfunctioning equipment, materials (test samples) being out of specification. If you're working with a group, you can add in disinterested group-mates to the list. This is where the traditional lab report can allow the good student to succeed despite the data being off-spec. A standardised, computerised assessment has limited ability to deal with these situations.

I would suggest, if it's possible, that the SULIS assessment be modified to allow the student enter their set of lab results at the start of the assessment so that the computer can then compute the answers to be expected from that data set and mark the student against that benchmark. Now we're back to assessing the student's application of the theory and lab work rather than the student trying to game the system to gain marks.

BTW, I've no investment in this module either as a student or TA, but discussions like this interest me

daniels.ducks

Completed the exam today. Some parts were grand, some were very hard. Someone just said that there was a 20% mid semester exam. Mosy of us found out about this today when we looked at the front of the exam paper. Where was this in the module outline? Where is the module outline?

garv123

daniels.ducks wrote: »

Completed the exam today. Some parts were grand, some were very hard. Someone just said that there was a 20% mid semester exam. Mosy of us found out about this today when we looked at the front of the exam paper. Where was this in the module outline? Where is the module outline?

He doesnt tell you when they are because if he does people will only attend that lecture.

Not sure if its written in the outline but its mentioned in the lectures (if you attended :P)

When i done the exam if i didnt know i picked c.
about 75 of my answers were c and i got a c1. That done me.

jeremyr62

It's a typo. I'll send a message round on SULIS tomorrow. We tried it last year to encourage attendance and it failed to work so we didn't repeat it this year. The exam header was supposed to be changed but it somehow slipped through unedited.

SarahBeep!

jeremyr62 wrote: »

It's a typo. I'll send a message round on SULIS tomorrow. We tried it last year to encourage attendance and it failed to work so we didn't repeat it this year. The exam header was supposed to be changed but it somehow slipped through unedited.

:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

I think this is more embarrassing than K O'B recycling Finn's email about the Smedias...

crazyred

This thread is getting off target. It was started about a woodwork/Metalwork teaching student saying it is a joke and not relevant.

I am a first year woodwork teacher. I sat the exam today. 100 questions multiple choice. I studied, I sat the 50 practice questions Jeremy had in his final tutorial. I scored 31 out of 50 was happy enough. I attended all but 4 lectures and missed one tutorial and one lab over the semester. I can honestly say sitting in the exam today I didn't know more than 20 answers. I sat there and was forced to guess the rest. I have sat a lot of exams but I have never sat one that I have know as little content on the exam in all my life!

I have 3.65 QCA from last semester and only missed one hour of class time before Christmas, so I am not some pissed student venting who turned up once every few weeks and falls asleep in lectures.

Jeremy you have given out about the bad lecture attendance, well I have been there, day in and day out and I have seen even in the small attendance half of those students there are from the Woodwork and metalwork class. These are guys and girls who come out every lecture wondering what you or Gerry Higgins have been talking about. The language used by both of ye is quiet complex to anyone who hasn't studied physics of chemistry before and I dont think you realise this. I believe you also fail to see that this is our college introduction to science and we are put in with second year engineers and product designers far ahead of us in their understanding of science completing many modules like this already.

I today was better equipped than the majority of my classmates for your test and yet I was still left to guess over 80 questions!!!! Unlike some people arguing their point I do see how this material could be relevant to us teaching students, however I believe you and Gerry Higgins have not educated these students at all. They will not have even a basic understanding of your module after today. The fundamentals will have been lost on them. We were given a mock test that was far far simpler than today and no past exampapers were online so that we could even gauge the exam. The questions included question never mentioned in class or in the notes.

Your module could be good and relevant but it isnt being explained to 1st year students it is being described to 2nd year engineers. If you and Gerry Higgins are not able educate this module to a mixed ability class like you have in plain English then the woodwork and metalwork teachers should not be in your module.

I would love to see how our two classes results fair out against the 2nd year classes and I bet it would back up my point. Fact of the matter is you are not educating us satisfactorily therefore it is a waste of our time!

jeremyr62

When MT4002 was initiated, the content had to be approved by ALL the course directors whose programmes were involved.
They all had sight of Engineering Materials 1 by M.F.Ashby and D.R.H.Jones.
All the course directors approved of the syllabus, methodology and module content.

If you think the content is set at an inappropriate level then you should contact your course director, giving your reasons.

crazyred

I have mentioned it to him already earlier in the year. You say it have been approved by the coarse directors. When was the last time that it has been reviewed by the course directors or our two classes result compared to the 2nd years? I know the course is not set up for people to fail and I doubt I have because of coursework but I honestly forced to guess over 80 questions yesterday, and I was prepared compared to many on my class. Do you think this is good enough for educating members of a class, guessing 80 percent of an exam?

jeremyr62

It's no good asking me if I think it's good enough. You are the one who guessed 80 out of 100. You should be asking yourself that question and addressing the reasons why.

crazyred

Well Jeremy I did attend 20 hours lectures, 14 hours of labs and and 8 hours of tutorials and tried my best to engage while I was there. I did my study and did my calculations, had no past exam paper to gauge this paper off, it appears from your typo from last year it is just the same exam redistributed every year. I revised all the past question we got in your tutorials felt like it wouldn't be too bad got 31 out of 50 in your last tutorial and then had to guess 80 questions. I don't believe I need to ask myself any questions!

I think your grasping at straws at present most of your replies give no real information here. I asked has the course been reviewed since it started by course directors or results ever compared and you decided not to answer, instead I telling me I should ask myself why I had to guess? I have tried my best I don't believe you have tried yours.

Frankly if your module was not a problem for these students it would not be on boards with 81 comments under it.

daniels.ducks

jeremyr62 wrote: »

It's no good asking me if I think it's good enough. You are the one who guessed 80 out of 100. You should be asking yourself that question and addressing the reasons why.

Sorry Jeremy, you should be asking questions of the module if you felt you had to give a mid-term test (and not specify exactly when it was) to try and get attendances up. I have to agree with crazyred here that you seem to be clutching at straws.

jeremyr62

If it makes you feel better having someone else to blame for having to guess most the answers then OK. There isn't much I can do about that.

A lot of students won't have guessed most of the answers.

MT4002 hasn't been reviewed because no course directors have requested it be reviewed.

daniels.ducks

jeremyr62 wrote: »

If it makes you feel better having someone else to blame for having to guess most the answers then OK. There isn't much I can do about that.

A lot of students won't have guessed most of the answers.

MT4002 hasn't been reviewed because no course directors have requested it be reviewed.

Yeah there is a lot of the students of the engineering courses doing this module.
I think this is just something that we we need to talk to the course directors about. This module isn't taught in a way that incorporates everybody. I heard a lad doing engineering that said he found it way to easy and it should be done in first year for them.

Ginge Young

jeremyr62 wrote: »

If it makes you feel better having someone else to blame for having to guess most the answers then OK.

Because nothing can ever be wrong with the module.......

Can I suggest that someone actually does get something sorted that this entire thing be reviewed by the course directors. There is obviously nothing going to be done by those running the module.

I did it quite a few years ago, from what I can gather nothing has changed. Perhaps there are limited ways that it can be improved, but really, if crazyred is genuine about his efforts, it is not fair to say it is his fault, or that he is looking for someone to blame.

The way a module is taught/constructed can have a direct reflection on how well people do. If people do bad, it can be a reflection on themselves, the module itself or the lecturer. Adopting the idea that it's solely the students fault is not right.

garv123

Ginge Young wrote: »

Because nothing can ever be wrong with the module.......

Can I suggest that someone actually does get something sorted that this entire thing be reviewed by the course directors. There is obviously nothing going to be done by those running the module.

.

Sarcastic half ar$ed answers fix everything though

daniels.ducks

garv123 wrote: »

Sarcastic half ar$ed answers fix everything though

Garv, you only took a small part of his post into the quote you made. Ginge makes a very valid point in his post.
I'm sorry garv but even your last post in this thread tells me you are out of touch with the workings of this module at the moment.

garv123 wrote: »

When i done the exam if i didnt know i picked c.
about 75 of my answers were c and i got a c1. That done me.

This also says something about the exam??

garv123

daniels.ducks wrote: »

Garv, you only took a small part of his post into the quote you made. Ginge makes a very valid point in his post.
I'm sorry garv but even your last post in this thread tells me you are out of touch with the workings of this module at the moment.



This also says something about the exam??

It wasn't aimed towards him, I only included the bit about lectures doing nothing about it.

80% of the people doing the module are out of touch with the workings with it.
Last year at least 3/4's of the class hung around outside the door waiting to see if he was having the mid-term because they would rather fall asleep at home rather than inside in the lecturer because the majority of people were lost as soon as the first slide went up.

All of our course and the woodwork lads guessed a high majority of the course.

daniels.ducks

garv123 wrote: »

It wasn't aimed towards him, I only included the bit about lectures doing nothing about it.

80% of the people doing the module are out of touch with the workings with it.
Last year at least 3/4's of the class hung around outside the door waiting to see if he was having the mid-term because they would rather fall asleep at home rather than inside in the lecturer because the majority of people were lost as soon as the first slide went up.

All of our course and the woodwork lads guessed a high majority of the course.

Ya I heard about that, then when the test was on there was texts going around and people were running in. I think this says says something about the students and also the module. I mean does Jeremy ever wonder why this is that numbers are so low in the lectures? I mean we'll get i'm guessing a 80-90% of students go to there metal/woodwork lectures because they can understand the material and it is relevant to them. Last semester I went to most of my lectures in Tech Maths 1 because I understood what was happening. I find when I go to a materials lecture can't understand what is being said by the lecturers because the content is a good few levels above junior certificate science that i used to do.

How about incorporating smaller tutorial groups maybe a class of about 30 whereby students can reinforce what is said in the lecture?

jeremyr62

Going around in circles here. I addressed midterms/poor lecture attendance above.

However I make this as a suggestion.

No more reliance on powerpoint. No book of lectures notes. No handouts. Essentially turn back the clock and go back to chalk and talk with the odd ppt picture to augment the traditional approach. Students then have responsibility for compiling their own notes.

We might try this for MT4023 Materials 2 and see how that works.

daniels.ducks

jeremyr62 wrote: »

Going around in circles here. I addressed midterms/poor lecture attendance above.

However I make this as a suggestion.

No more reliance on powerpoint. No book of lectures notes. No handouts. Essentially turn back the clock and go back to chalk and talk with the odd ppt picture to augment the traditional approach. Students then have responsibility for compiling their own notes.

We might try this for MT4023 Materials 2 and see how that works.

By addressing do you mean solving the problem? Holding a mid term and not specifying when exactly it is on is a way of 'guilting' the students into coming. Did the extra students that came attend for the lecture or for the test?