Feedback from TFTB34
Anthony P.F. Turner
Biosensors and Bioelectronics Centre
General
• Would recommend course to others
• Course was very relevant for their education
• No complaints about the study environment
• The students felt that they all had the same
opportunity in all aspects of the course
• Course evaluation completed by 7 students – 4.0
• 86% staisfied with their achievement on course and
considered workload ”just right”
• 72% said assessment was good test of understanding
• Too much biology and not enough design
• ”Overall, I liked the course, but wanted more”
2
Study guide
• Patent litigation were set to U/G and not scaled grades
• "the focus would be on design, construction and
manufacturing of biosensors, with an overview of the
common and new materials and components used".
The focus was rather the other way around.
3
Lectures
• Good coordination and little overlap (except lateral flow)
• Biochemistry content too basic, while nanomaterials and
electrochemistry too complex; Edwin got it right with his
microfluidics!
• Too much focus on glucose, would like wider selection of
examples (e.g. QCM, SAW etc)
• Patent and commercialisation aspects very interesting and
enjoyable.
• More engineering less analytical chemistry: if one would design a
new sensor, what would you need to think about, what problems
would you face?
• Karin was very, very good and deserves praise; Anthony was
good but took too long to get to the point!
4
Labs
• SPR lab appreciated, but value of computer tutorial
questioned; perhaps replace tutorial with QCM demo
• Lab assistants complimented, but would liked to have
done much more for themselves
• Questions for lab report appreciated, but would like
work graded and clearer instructions on how to write
the laboratory report
• Could make their own solutions for enzyme electrode
and could have been challenged with an unknown
sample to try to estimate the glucose concentration
5
Group Project – Patent Litigation
• Original and fun
• Some found task daunting and briefing as to what is
expected could be improved
• More preparation time requested
• More background material should be made available,
suggest both sides make full disclosure in advance
• Everybody should be required to present
6
Online material
• Online material supplied was generally fine
• Use of slides instead of books worked well in this
course
• Good to provide more in-depth articles for those
interested
• Liked ”all electronic” provision
7
Tutorials
• Mostly an opportunity for the students to ask the
examiner questions and get answers.
• When the students did not have any questions, the
roles were flipped and the examiner asked the
students questions. Some found this slightly
unnerving, but since there was no pressure to give the
right answers, no one felt that it was a problem.
• All the students thought that this approach was good
and felt that they learned much by participating.
8
Examination
• Need to explain better how grade calculated for group
project (50% group; 50% individual)
• Points for sub-sections of questions should be
indicated on exam paper. Some questions should
have carried more marks than others
• A lot of things taught not in exam e.g biosensors in
general & lateral flow.
• Too many questions on chemical reactions and SPR
9
Thanks Everyone
10
www.ifm.liu.se/biosensors