Because this is a newly developed course, I ask you to provide some solid feedback so that I can better structure the course the next time that it's offered.

For taking the time to seriously and completely fill out this evaluation, you will get 9 points credited toward your homework total grade. This depends solely on your thinking about and addressing all the questions, and not on the content of your responses.

General Logistics

Problem Sets:

1. How much time did you typically spend reading and digesting the assigned weekly readings in this course?

   
   

2. How much time did you typically spend preparing the weekly review problems for presentation?

   
   

3. How much time did you typically spend completing the weekly assigned problems?

   
   

4. How does the overall weekly workload compare to the other physics courses you have taken? Math courses?

   
   

5. How even or uneven was the weekly workload? Comment on any assignments that were particularly heavy or light.

   
   

6. Were the review and assigned problems enough to insure that your understanding kept up with the course? Comment on any areas that were particularly fuzzy or particularly slow.

   
   

7. What was the hardest aspect of doing the review and assigned problems? Could this be improved in some structural way?

   
   

8. Did you find presenting review problems yourself instructive? How might this be made more helpful, for the presenter?

   
   

9. Did you find seeing review problems worked at the blackboard instructive? How might this be made more helpful, for the listeners?

   
   

10. Did you find the written solutions useful?

    
    

Exams:

1. Did the exams provide a fair test of the material covered in the course? Why or why not?

   
   

2. Were you able to accurately predict the range of questions and problems that would appear on an exam?

   
   

3. How long did the takehome exams take you?

   
   

Overall Structure:

1. How was the pace of the course as a whole? Any overall impressionistic comments on pacing?

   
   

2. How was the focus or intellectual coherence of the course as a whole?

   
   

Texts:

1. How useful did you find Barger & Olsson, in the excerpts we covered? Any points of particular clarity or murkiness?

   
   

2. How useful did you find Griffiths, in the excerpts we covered? Any points of particular clarity or murkiness?

   
   

3. How useful did you find the short supplements from Symon (1-d mechanics methods) and Boas (Laplace equation methods)?

   
   

4. Were there any issues where further supplemental reading materials be helpful?

   
   

Specific Content:

The outline below describes the content of the course, as we actually completed it. I ask you to comment on each topic in the course focusing on the following issues:

Level and Pace:

This course is a more sophisticated mathematical treatment of the classical physics learned in freshman physics, applying math formalism developed in differential, integral and multivariable calculus. There is thus a hope to build on materials learned in previous math and physics courses, assuming a certain level of background and hoping to go beyond it.

For each course section, comment specifically on the starting point of that section, and whether the level could have been higher, or should have been lower. To what extent was introductory material review, and could that have been shortened or omitted without disorienting you?

Also comment on the pacing of material in each section, after introductions. Was the development of ideas and formalisms too fast or slow? too repetitive and incremental? too superficial and formal? Had the elements necessary to understand the material been sufficiently put in place beforehand?

Finally comment on the extent to which our coverage of each topic went beyond your previous understanding of that topic.

Focus:

For each topic, comment on how clearly connected it was to the overarching themes of the course. To what extent was the material it covered necessary to understand subsequent lectures? Was this material central or peripheral to the course? Was it covered in too little, too much, or the right amount of detail, for subsequent needs of the course? Could it have been omitted?

Fun:

Please comment on any topics in the course that you particularly liked -- that were particularly beautiful, interesting, thought-provoking, elegant, etcetera -- and that you would not like to see omitted from the course.

For each topic listed, rate it as follows:

Focus:

How central to the course was this material? From 0 (least) to 10 (most).

Fun:

How intrinsically interesting/enjoyable did you find this material? From 0 (least) to 10 (most).

Pace:

How did you find the level and pace of our coverage? From 0 (needlessly slow and elementary) to 10 (challenging but understandable) to 20 (way too fast, unintelligible).

Novelty:

How novel was our coverage of the topic to you? From 0 (nothing new) to 10 (entirely new material).

Mastery:

How successfully do you think you mastered the topic, at the level presented? From 0 (confused even about the most basic concepts) to 10 (mastered even the subtle issues, capable of solving detailed problems completely).

Add any comments as to placement in the course, desired omission/inclusion/lengthening/shortening, better presentations, etc.

Classical Mechanics, Oscillators and Circuits

1. Newtonian Mechanics: One-dimensional Approaches 4 + 1 weeks, Homework 1 -- 4
   1. Closed Integration Methods ( B & O 1 - 1.6 )

   2. Potential Methods, Motion in a Potential ( B & O 2 - 2.3 )

   3. Homogeneous Differential Equation Methods, Damped oscillators ( B & O 1.7 - 1.8)

   4. Inhomogeneous Differential Equation Methods, Driven oscillators and LRC circuits ( B & O 1.9)

   5. Takehome Exam 1

2. More Dimensions and Formalisms 3.5 + 1 weeks, Homeworks 5 -- 7
   1. Newton's Laws in More Dimensions ( B & O 2.4 - 2.6, G 1 - 1.4 )
      1. Acceleration and polar coordinates ( B & O 2.6 )

      2. Work, Potential, Force ( B & O 2.5 )

      3. Multidimensional functions: Gradient, Curl, and Line integrals (G 1 - 1.4 )

   2. Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Methods ( B & O 3 )
      1. Using Euler-Lagrange equations ( B & O 3 - 3.3, 3.5 )

      2. Formalisms: Least Action Principle, Hamilton's equations ( B & O 3.6 - 3.7 )

   3. Angular Momentum and Central Force Motion ( B & O 5 - 5.1 )
      1. Equations of Motion and effective potential ( B & O 5.1 )

      2. OMITTED, read only: Planetary Orbits and Kepler's Laws ( B & O 5.2 - 5.3 )

   4. Takehome Exam 2

Electromagnetism

1. Understanding electrostatics 3 weeks, Homeworks 8 - 10
   1. Electric field and potential; Divergence, Flux and Gauss' Law ( G 1.2.4, 1.3.4, 2 - 2.3.2)

   2. Conductors and Capacitors; Electrostatics and Laplace's equation ( G 2.3.3 - 2.3.5, 2.5, 3.1, 3.3.1 -2, Boas 13.1-2, 13.5)
      1. Conductors and Capacitors phenomenology ( G 2.3.3 - 2.3.5, 2.5)

      2. Solving Laplace's equation by Separating Variables
         1. Cartesian coordinates and Fourier series (G 3.1, 3.3.1, Boas 13.1-2)

         2. Spherical coordinates and Legendre polynomials (G 3.3.2)

         3. Cylindrical coordinates (Boas 13.5)

         4. OMITTED Multipole Expansions (G 3.4)

2. Magnetism, Dynamics, Maxwell's Equations and em waves 1.5 weeks, Homework 11
   1. Magnetostatics( G 5 - 5.4.2, selective)
      1. Qualitative Review, Lorentz Force and Biot-Savart (G 5-5.2)

      2. FOCUS: Ampere's Law (G 5.3)

      3. Vector Potential and Poisson equations (G 5.4 - 5.4.2)

   2. Electrodynamics , Maxwell's Equations, EM waves ( G 7 - 7.3, 9 - 9.2.2, selective)
      1. Motional emf and Faraday's law ( G 7.1.2 - 7.2.2)

      2. Maxwell displacement current and Maxwell's equations ( G 7.3 - 7.3.5)

      3. Electromagnetic Waves ( G 9 - 9.2.2 )

3. Takehome Exam 3

Final Comments:

Add any final comments you may have. What changes might make this a more effective course?

About this document ...

This document was generated using the LaTeX2HTML translator Version 96.1 (Feb 5, 1996) Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, Nikos Drakos, Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.

The command line arguments were:
latex2html -split 0 eval.

The translation was initiated by Katherine Benson on Wed May 1 01:37:34 EDT 2002