Please answer in the form indicated. You can leave out answers if you wish. You can always provide additional feedback if you wish, either on this form or by contacting the lecturer.

Questions taken and adapted from course evaluation forms at the Computer Science department of Saarland University/Germany.

• Overall impression
  • Considering both the limitations and possibilities of the subject matter and course, how would you rate the overall teaching effectiveness of the instructor?
    (1 - very bad, 5 - very effective): 4.8
  • Focusing now on the course content, how worthwhile was this course?
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very worthwhile): 4.5
  • Are you interested in doing a thesis (master, PhD) or find a job related to the topics covered in the course?
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 3
  • How was the pace of the course?
    (1 - too slow, 3 - about right, 5 - too fast): 3
  • Did you have any language problems in the English lectures?
    (1 - I couldn't understand a word, 5 - understanding was good): 4.8
    "a bit fast"
  • Did you have any language problems in the French lectures?
    (1 - I couldn't understand a word, 5 - understanding was good): 5
  • Were there any difficulties/problems?
    none
  • If the course is ever given again, the following should be done again
    "many examples"
    "little homework"
    "examples on the Web"
    "NLP, IE, SW - very interesting topics"
    "presenting the different sides of the Semantic Web"
  • If the course is ever given again, I would change the following
    "too slow about theory"
    "too slow about logic"
    "no developing course (TD for example using YAGO)"
    "more practical work"
    "more programming (e.g. 2/3 theoretical class, 1/3 practice)"
    "long technical discussions about particular implementation"
    "it would be nice if there were some lab class, where we could try and use the Semantic Web, just to feel how it really works"
• About the presentation
  • Were the slides clear?
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very clear): 5
  • Were the slides useful for reviewing the course content after class?
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very useful; simply don't answer if you did not use them after class): 4.6
  • The lecturer gives lectures that are well organized.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very well organized): 5
  • The lecturer is well prepared.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very well): 5
  • The lecturer is enthusiastic about the subject matter.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very enthusiastic): 5
    "10"
  • The lecturer notices if students have difficulties.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - notices immediately): 4.5
  • The lecturer clearly communicates what he/she considers important.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very clear): 4.8
  • The lecturer has an interesting style of presentation.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very interesting): 5
  • The lecturer uses visual aids, blackboard and the Web effectively.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - very well): 4.8
  • Any suggestions about this?
    "very dynamic style"
    "do not change anything"
• About the student interaction
  • The lecturer encourages questions from students.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 5
  • The lecturer is careful and precise in answering questions.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 5
  • The lecturer is accessible to students outside of class
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 5
    "I didn't try much myself, but based on how quickly you answer e-mails..."
  • The lecturer is friendly and helpful to students during breaks, office hours, etc.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 5
  • In case that you do not understand something while working at home or with other students, whom would you ask?
    (lecturer, other students, do research on your own)
    first research on my own (including Wikipedia), then lecturer
  • Any suggestions about this?
    none
• About the course
  • What was the difficulty of the course?
    (1 - too easy, 3 - about right, 5 - too difficult): 3
  • What was workload relative to comparable courses?
    (1 - much less, 3 - about the same, 5 - much more): 4.5
    "no [home-]work in other classes, but good point"
    "much more, but no homework was given in the other courses"
    "5, but OK"
  • The level of previous knowledge required for the course is ...
    (1 - too few (I know more than was assumed), 3 - about right, 5 - too much (I felt left out)): 2.3
    i.e. I knew a bit more than was assumed (3=optimum)
  • What topics should have been dealt with in greater detail?
    "implementation of the ideas"
    "perspective of Web semantics in the future"
    "definitively information extraction"
    "I would have liked to program something"
    "future social and commercial uses of the Semantic Web"
  • What topics should have been dealt with in less detail?
    "language processing"
    "logics"
    "technical precision about implementation (e.g. syntactical details of languages)"
  • Any further comments or suggestions about the course?
    "more programming!"
    "organize a small presentation witrh a person from the software industry talking about the topics presented in the course"
    "It would have been a plus to have a synthetic view of (1) major issues and motivations to tackle the questions (2) what is going on now (3) what your personal insight is regarding these trends."
• About the assignments (homework)
  • Assignments were useful for rehearsing the content of the lecture.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 4.8
  • What was the difficulty of the assignments?
    (1 - too easy, 3 - about right, 5 - too difficult): 3
  • Assignments were interesting and stimulating.
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 4.3
  • Assignments match course matter
    (1 - not at all, 5 - definitively): 5
  • Any suggestions about this?
    "continue this way!"
    "I need to mail some remaining homeworks! And I would be happy to do so!"