[Syllabus logo] Second minute paper

October 29, 1996
Anonymous minute paper critiquing the recent
midterm exam:
  1. What appeared on the exam that you least expected?
  2. What was missing from the the exam that you most expected?
  3. What would have better prepared you for the exam?
  4. General comments and criticisms ...

In no particular order...

Nothing you put on the exam really surprised me. The only thing I thought was that you should have thrown in a couple of problems where you use Ohm's law to find the current, volts, resistance, etc. It seemed like we spent a lot of time on this and only the ideas of that was on the test. I think that looking at last year's midterm was helpful. We just covered some different topics. Maybe for the final we can outline what will be on the test a little more. It wasn't an unfair test though.
  1. Procedures of Play-Doh experiment
  2. A question consisting of 3 resistors; 2 parallel in series with the third.
  3. Answers to the previous exams.
  4. I believe that the exam was fair. The previous exams were extremely helpful.

  1. I least expected the question #3 about power. We never reviewed kV?
  2. Questions on hooking up several appliances to one circuit (120V ac); how big of a fuse... stuff like that.
  3. A REVIEW SESSION... Better review on web...
  4. You were not constant on your grading scale. Some people got undeserved points where others got ripped of deserved points.

I wasn't expecting the Play-Doh question at all so I was not prepared for it. I was expecting a parallel circuit question or a question with both a series and a parallel circuit. I would have greatly appreciated a review session before the exam where you would have been available to answer questions and give practice problems. I think before the next exam we whould be given more practice problems because although there were some, I feel as though we work through something once in class and are expected to retain it.
  1. I think the Play-Doh experiment question appeared on the exam, and I was surprised about that.
  2. I thought the questions would have been the same as the ones you had given us on the quiz. Not the same, but the same idea.
  3. Probably a more intense review and answers to previous exams.
  4. It really wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, although I should have done better.

  1. #5 was a surprise about the copper-top tester. We did go over many things about it, but I don't feel we covered the question very well.
  2. I thought more of Ohm's law would be on the exam -- series/parallel. Maybe more questions of power would have been expected as well.
  3. A class of review, questions/comments for you would've helped. I had many questions that went unanswered when I took the exam. Some specific problems from old test were on ours, and I didn't understand them.
  4. Overall, the test was pretty fair. It was more difficult than I expected, but I'm not unhappy with my grade.

  1. Questions about our labs.
  2. Some of the formulas.
  3. A review session on exactly what to study.
  4. I would not change anything for the next test. I just need to study differently.

  1. Question on Play-Doh and internal resistance of battery.
  2. More problems on Ohm's law.
  3. Having a review class before.
  4. Not really

I least expected the last question. I was expecting to see a question involving the structure of the atom; i.e., myths about its picture. I would have been better prepared if you provided a practice sheet in addition to the previous test from 167.
I was not surprised by anything that was on the exam. You hit all of the major parts of our classes and discussions. If you had been around for the class before the exam for a review of some kind, it would have helped. The exams from last semester really helped put me in the right direction study-wise.
Back to SCEN103 Home Page.
Comments, suggestions, or requests to ghw@udel.edu.

Last updated Oct. 30, 1996.
Copyright George Watson, Univ. of Delaware, 1996.