University College London
Computer Science Department
University College London
Computer Science Department
The meeting took place on 22nd May in 229. About 15 second year students and 6 lecturers attended (including SRW, JW, MAS, GR, GK, MS, PAS, JAC).
There was a very heavy coursework load at the end of term 2.
B20b contributed a lot to the coursework load but was generally very warmly appreciated. Students probably put in more work than was strictly required. CS/Cog students had problems due to the overlap with B14. The separate CS/Cog group was a good idea.
B23 had gone well. The course text was excellent though there were not enough copies in the library. More concentration on design patterns was suggested.
B21a was felt to be "good but mathematical". Possible there was too much depth on FFTs etc. however the material on efficiency of algorithms was recognised as being important. There was some lack of coordination in that techniques needed for B21a were covered in B46 but this was not taken by CS/EE or CS/Cog students.
The maths part of B46 was felt by many to be A-level revision (though the stats was new to most). It was pointed out that A-level syllabuses differed substantially so it was difficult to assume common knowledge. There was felt to be too much in the course. Some students seemed "afraid" of notation and formalisms. There were requests for consistent use of notation, however, it was pointed out that varied notations were a feature of the real world. The material in B45 was felt by some to be more advanced than that in B46 and perhaps the two should be swapped. However, the B45 material was needed to support some 1st year courses.
B228 - there was too much material much of which was hard to remember. Practical work was suggested. There was support for the idea of putting some data communications material in the core.
B224 was felt to be an excellent course with the practical element being "just right". There was a good and consistent sense of direction to the course. Very warm words were spoken.
B402 was appreciated and the material provided plenty of motivation. However the base level was felt to be quite low and that this would have been an ideal first year course. The timetable clash with B14 was noted and should be dealt with.
E722 was not felt to expand much on B116.
There was generally acceptance that students should expect to pay for one text-book per course - though not more than one and only then if the text was well-suited. Students would object to paying for notes if a text was also essential.
There was discussion of the merits of printed notes. It was pointed out that many institutions did not provide these and that their provision could be a discouragement to lecture attendance and concentration. Perhaps notes should be less detailed so that students had to add to them.
Tutorial support was very uneven. Some did well by setting students specific exercises, presentations etc. Other groups rarely met and frequently broke up early.
Students on joint programs were concerned as to whether their different backgrounds were properly taken into account in designing and delivering courses.
Some CS/Cog students indicated that they would be happy to have a common first two years in a 4 year course.