Při výběru garanta předmětu se zobrazují připomínky jak k němu, tak ke všem vyučujícím daného předmětu. Při výběru vyučujícího, který garantem není, se zobrazují připomínky vztažené pouze k němu.
Christoph Allolio, Ph.D. [32-MUUK], Aplikovaná matematika I [NCHF071, cvičení]
Doctor Allolio was always willing to answer questions, he requested consultations and we could always write him an email. He was fair at the examination. I liked the not too serious and sometimes jokey atmosphere.
I think doctor Allolio could improve a bit on explaning problems in front of the black board. The introduction to the topic was fine for me in general, but i got often lost when he was solving a problem in front of the class. It was often too quick or too chaotic for me and sometimes he got a bit lost himself (But in that case I quite liked the discussions afterwards about the solution, as it sometimes showed his thinking process behind solving the problem, which was then helpful when solving some problems on my own.) In some topics I would appreciate less chaotic summary.:)
I liked clear explanations of professor Málek and his great sense of humour. He was always well prepared, we could ask him questions and meet him for consultations. During the lectures he asked us questions and he was often making sure that everyone understands.
Dr. Průša was always excellently prepared and ready to answer each possible question. The exercises had a clear structure, corresponded to the lecture, and moreover broadened it. So, we (practically) went through the main concepts and also through selected associated topics.
I really appreciate the approach and passion in the subject. Also the tolerance and I can’t forget to mention the beautiful notes and the nicely cleaned blackboard
Připomínka k předmětu, Aplikovaná matematika I [NCHF071, cvičení]
The most valuable part of the course was for me extensive homework each week with interesting bonus tasks. That provided me with regular exercising of the current topics and sometimes made me dive deeper in some of the bonus topics. Lot of the times we discussed the homeworks during the exercises and we always got feedback on Moodle.
What could be improved would be the announcement of tests, for me. We didn't know how many there would be at the start. We also didn't know about the final midterm until 5 days before, which was quite a problem as we had already planned 2 other midterms and there was no time to prepare. On the other hand, that wasn't that big of a problem, as there was no minimum score to obtain the credit and the score (2 midterms together with homeworks and participation in class) was just to help us during the oral exam. The evaluation was also quite benevolent.
There was great cohesion with the lectures.
As for the available literature, we had a lot of materials for limits and there were a great abount of integrals in the homeworks. The limits in the materials in Moodle were unsolved, though. It is of course possible to put the problems to Wolfram or to Chat GPT, but Wolfram gives just the result lot of the times and uses l'Hopital's rule all the time and Chat GPT doesn't have to ba always reliable.
I would prefere recomendation of some book of solved problems which we got before Christmas from profesor Málek at the lectures. (Kopáček: Problems 1)
The exercises had a clear structure, corresponded to the lecture, and moreover broadened it. So, we (practically) went through the main concepts and also through selected associated topics.
One thing I see as a bit unfortunate is the lack of counting. I don't think there should be more time during the exercise for this, and quite certainly, homework shouldn't be "inflated" by other calculations. However, it might be worth considering the creation of a voluntary seminar on calculations (and perhaps use of Mathematica as well?).
The cource was very organized, I liked that we had the notes to the course online (in hand written form). The lectures were interesting and professor Málek made the lectures engaging and inspiring, he included examples from physics and often gave us suggestions on what to look at at home. The lectures were sometimes difficult for me, but professor Málek was often making sure that everybody understands.
I really enjoyed this course, and it has also moved me forward a lot. From my point of view, the lectures were relatively comprehensive and well-arranged. Also, the likenings were great (what a pity I do not have a bulldozer to push Jupiter).
Another thing to appreciate is the unrelenting enthusiasm of the lecturer and the approach to the students – the possibility to go for the tutorials and the willingness to elucidate misunderstood concepts.
What I find fabulous are the study materials – comprehensive hand-written notes (sometimes even highlighted).
One thing I would consider is the ratio theoretical x computational part during the evaluation of the exam (perhaps 3:4 would be more convenient than 1:2).
