Descobre o que os alunos realmente pensam sobre as tuas cadeiras

Eu curti bué este cálculo, acho que é o cálculo mais interessante, mas também é o mais complexo. O prof, Pedro Girão, era muito bom! Adorava as aulas teóricas dele. Não ia muito às práticas, mas acho que também eram boas. Tivemos três testes, não houve exame. As demonstrações eram 5 valores. Chumbou 1/3 das pessoas, o recurso foi difícil.

A cadeira é bem interessante. O professor é muito bom, super vale a pena ir às aulas de problemas. As teóricas também são boas, mesmo o professor tendo colocado vídeos online de aulas que ele deu há dois anos. Os exames são um pouco complicados. Este projeto é bem interessante, especialmente para quem curte aerodinâmica e simulações CFD. O professor não responde muito aos e-mails, mas se ligarem para o gabinete dele, ele é mais compreensível.

Olha, essa cadeira tem muita matéria por semana, então é super importante ir às aulas. Eu não fui e foi um erro. Tive imensa coisa para estudar em pouco tempo. A minha dica é mesmo ir às aulas e acompanhar tudo, porque aprender tanta coisa de uma vez é lixado.

O feedback geral para a cadeira de Liana é super positivo! A professora Luísa é sempre acessível e os PowerPoints são muito organizados. As aulas de laboratório são sempre divertidas, com dinâmicas engraçadas, não é só teoria pura. Tem sempre algum tipo de jogo, o que torna as aulas mais interativas.

Esta cadeira foi difícil, mas é mais fácil de aplicar o que aprendemos noutras disciplinas. Acho que foi difícil por causa do trabalho e das horas que tivemos de dedicar. Mas é mais fácil de aplicar porque foca-se mais em cálculos e não tanto na teoria como as outras cadeiras.

As aulas teóricas quase não valiam a pena. Eram muito focadas em seguir PowerPoints e não se aprendia nada de útil. O que realmente importava eram as aulas de problemas. Elas davam-nos as bases para fazer os exercícios que tínhamos de entregar. As teóricas só foram úteis mesmo no fim, antes do projeto. Aí sim, davam-nos dicas e ajudavam-nos com correções e tudo mais. Mas fora isso, o professor não fazia muita diferença, as teóricas não compensavam.

Os conteúdos da disciplina são muito interessantes, especialmente para a minha área. O problema é que o professor não era da área e não estava muito familiarizado com a matéria. Acho que isso afetou um pouco a nossa aprendizagem, mesmo que não tenha tido grande impacto nos resultados. O curso foi organizado à pressa. Fora o docente, a cadeira é de bastante interesse.

Esta cadeira é super fixe, o professor é top, super próximo dos alunos e quer mesmo que a malta aprenda. Ele dá bué de liberdade nos projetos para a gente ser criativo e expressar-nos. Não há muito apoio físico para a cadeira, eu usei IA para a programação. Foi muito bom para debater ideias com o grupo. O tempo para a cadeira é curto, só sete semanas, mas isso não é culpa do professor, é mais da estrutura do curso. Aliás, é um problema que acontece em quase todas as cadeiras. Fizemos um projeto fixe com um Arduino, medimos tensões e tal, e o segundo projeto foi mais sobre criatividade. Criamos um modelo 3D de um revólver de um jogo, com botões e joysticks, para usar como comando no PC. Funcionou super bem e ficámos orgulhosos, o professor também curtiu. É uma cadeira que nos dá espaço para a criatividade, o que é raro neste curso. O projeto final foi divertido de ver acabado e o professor incentiva a aprender por nós próprios. Recomendo a 100%!

Esta cadeira foi uma experiência interessante, mas tem alguns problemas. Primeiro, achei os critérios irrealistas. Pedem um relatório final para a minha feature mesmo antes de o professor aprovar ou de abrir um pull request. E a feature que é a aposta é de 400 linhas! Não faz sentido classificar uma feature pelo número de linhas, mas sim pela sua relevância para o projeto. Além disso, um dos professores demora imenso tempo a corrigir os trabalhos. Por causa disso, os bugs ou features acabam por ser 'snipadas' por alguém da manutenção, e a pessoa é penalizada por uma coisa que não tem culpa.

Achei o objetivo da cadeira bem interessante, tipo, entender o Web3 e blockchain e como pode ser útil no futuro. Mas a parte inicial é um pouco chata. Tipo, é importante saber o que é consenso bizantino e como usar, mas a abstração toda até chegar lá é cansativa demais para o resultado final. Podíamos focar menos na parte inicial. Tem matéria meio redundante, tipo a parte dos registos, que não faz muito sentido para o resto da cadeira. E seria bom explorar mais a fundo a parte final depois da blockchain, como smart cards. No projeto não exploramos nada disso, o que é chato porque é um período só. No geral, eu recomendo a cadeira para quem gosta de Cibersegurança e de Sistemas Distribuídos. Ela junta bem as duas coisas e culmina em blockchain, o que é um boa forma de cobrir os dois lados, especialmente para quem gosta das duas áreas. Mesmo com a parte mais maçuda no início, ainda recomendo esta cadeira para quem gosta de cibersegurança e sistemas distribuídos.

I really liked the course as it covered a lot of interesting topics for embedded programming. The project is 100% of the grade and it is time consuming, but you learn a lot. Prof Bernardino is very good and explains everything in the theoretical classes. This is a good, albeit heavy, class to take.

Terrible experience. The course is all AI bullshit and they expect you to interview 100 people during the course, as well as bi-weekly presentations, during a whole semester. The evaluation is completely arbitrary and depends if professor Luis Caldas (who is terrible btw) likes your idea or not. I would not recommend taking this course at all, and I only took it because it is mandatory for MEEC students. It is the most bullshit and nonsense course I have ever taken.

Honestly on of the best and most informative classes during my time at Nova. And definitely a must take for everyone interested in a career in VC. The workload is quite high with weekly cases, meaningful participation, two in class tests, a startup pitch, and then the exam in the end. But overall definitely worth it especially during the in-class discussions you learn a lot and the professor is very knowledgeable. If you split the cases in your group definitely still have a look so you can participate in the discussion which is, in most cases, a big part of the class.

You will be working the entire semester on this course. The homeworks require constant work. The evaluations is harsh, as a single decimal unit being work might make you lose 2 whole values in a Homework. The exam depends on the mood of the teacher, as he sometimes makes super hard questions. When it comes to classes, Professor Gil is awful, possible the worst one in the whole Bachelor's degree, he makes the theoretical classes intolerable. Professor João is a good teacher though, ans his pratical classes help understand the material, which isn't very hard to begin with

Not an hard course. While the classes aren't bad, they are taught super fast, ridiculously fast. The tests are easy, you just have to study. The project is easy too, requires a bit of work and the teachers are helpful

Overall a good course. The professor can seem harsh, but he teaches well. He is demanding though and expects us to work for our grades, which is fair. This course greatly improves upon knowledge gained in Aerodynamics I, I left it feeling like I knew 10 times more than when I finished Aero I. The exam is fair, you won't pass if you don't study, but if you apply yourself you can get a good grade. The computacional project can be hard, but if you work hard and go to the Lab classes you can understadn were to start. Ans while the professor is a no nonsense kind of guy, so don't go and ask him something like " What are the units of Cl" he will help you if you ask

Professor Lau is a good teacher in this course, better than he was in Applied Mechanics I. The course is interesting, not the most interesting but interesting nonetheless. Some concepts could be explored more in depth though, but it is understandable due to time constraints. The evaluations aren't complicated, fairly reasonable ans it is easy to have a good grade, although sometimes the teacher can go wild and make the Test really hard to understand

O professor não tem tempo para dar tudo. A visita à TAP foi bastante útil. Fica a saber que na coa de pás, o regime é eventualmente não estacionário. Boa cadeira, percebeu ou não

The best classes I ever had. Never laughed no much. Iconic!!! Best use of my time. The evaluations are easy. Just read the powerpoints, solve some exercises and go with God. Make something up on the theoretical questions and you are golden

Classes with the GOAT!! Heat transfer is a bit unfair when marking the "Homework". Also there are no Homeworks, as there are just Projects with a funny mask

This course has the best professor ever, Rui Baptista, his problems classes were especially useful and greatly contributed towards my success on this course. Besides that, he taught me very well the plasticity criteria called von-tresca in his also great theoretic classes. His maps were also very well made and also also very comprehensive in the reviews.

Labs are absurd. The main teacher rarely explains anything. Complicated concepts are barely explained, as the students are expected to already know concepts they have never heard before, such as calculations with complex numbers. Phasors, an essential concept is explained very poorly. Furthermore, any questions are answered with " Horário de dúvidas". The office hours are a joke, where the main teacher just tells us to think. The other professors are decent though, shame they are limited to some office hours and the labs. Also there are no problem classes, and in theoretical pratical classes barely any problems are solved

Best professor i have ever had! He is amazing teacher.

The teaching is heavily based on case studies (13 full pages + on notes average) to read at home and discuss in class, seldom on problem sets. Bi-weekly. Participating in class discussion is graded, reflecting 20% of the final grade. The written exams are not very difficult tho. Course content is very interesting, maybe a bit redundant towards the end, I would definitely recommend this course if you are into VC or entrepreneurship. I would say the weekly workload is high, but worth it.

The slides are not 100% complete with all of the things, they have the most important concepts and content but still you need to go to classes to be able to complete whatever information professors add in class. Going to Practical sessions helps you reinforce what was talked in theoretical as well as do exercises which is really important for the course. Overall you are not going to have trouble in this course.

I found this course quite dense. The practical classes are literally just like the theoretical ones, we do not do any exercises.

This is the easiest course in Nova. Content is relatively simple and the midterms and exams are literally a copy of the problem set. I highly reccommend this course as an elective to increase your GPA.

I did not enjoy this course. The content is quite hard to grasp and it is super abstract. The theoretical classes are not helpful, but the practical ones are (especially with Marlon). This is useful of you want to follow economics or want to be challenged, otherwise I would not reccommend it.

The course content is interesting but the midterm and exam can be quite hard especially the multiple choice and advanced group. The group works are easy to get a good grade.

An excellent course overall: light and enjoyable, yet still interesting and stimulating. The professor is very engaging, even if some parts of the content sometimes feel a bit repetitive. The group project is motivating and not overly difficult, while the three individual assignments throughout the course are manageable and do not require a significant time commitment. I would definitely recommend this course to anyone looking for something relatively relaxed but still engaging.

The professor is very engaging, although some of the content can be difficult to fully understand at times. The hybrid structure of the course, with online and in-person sessions, makes it quite challenging, especially for students without a solid background in statistics. The final exam is open book, but it is not particularly easy.

The course is fairly interesting overall. The group project is relatively easy and students generally receive good grades. The final exam is long and somewhat complex, but with good preparation it can be managed.

This was probably the least useful course I attended this year. The professor was very monotonous, and there was little actual teaching, as the course mainly consisted of student group presentations. The group projects did not receive particularly good grades, and almost no feedback was provided. The exam preparation was also quite frustrating, as it required studying nearly 200 pages of unstructured and poorly coordinated material collected from various academic papers.

The professor is excellent: very clear, engaging, and effective at explaining concepts. Although he does not provide slides or additional supporting materials, full recordings of the lectures are made available, which is very helpful. The overall purpose and structure of the course are not always entirely clear, but a variety of interesting topics are discussed throughout the semester. A basic understanding of microeconomics is useful in order to follow the lectures more comfortably. The group assignments are simple and quick to complete. The midterm was somewhat challenging, while the final exam was comparatively easier.

The professor is very engaging and knowledgeable. Although the course was presented as advanced, the content itself did not cover many particularly new or innovative concepts. The group project was extremely demanding and, in the end, did not fully reward the effort invested, as grades were determined based on the relative ranking of each group’s performance. The final exam does not truly assess the knowledge acquired during the course as it mainly focuses on applying a few frameworks and concepts to a case study that is released only 48 hours before the exam.

The course is relatively easy and fairly interesting overall. Attending lectures is not essential, but it is important to stay organized and keep up with the group work throughout the semester. The final exam is slightly more difficult than expected, although still manageable. Final grades are generally between 16 and 17.

The topics are interesting, and the professor is clear and engaging. The individual assignments were relatively easy, and most students received high grades, while the group project was slightly more challenging. The slides often do not include the solutions to the problems discussed in class, so attending lectures is important in order to fully understand the material.

Nice overview of Operations management, easy to get a good grade in the assignments

Exam is open questions, try to keep up with the weekly deadlines of the project otherwise you will strugger in the end

The teacher Rui Henriques is really good. He records the classes and posts them online and explains really well. I almost never looked at the slides, the classes are enough for both the project and the exam. The contents of the course are super interesting. It focuses on how documents for a Retrieval System like Google are stored, indexed and retrieved. It also talks about concepts like LLMs, Web Crawlers and RAG. The project is really open-ended and, even tho is a bit extensive for the time we had to do it, it's good to learn how to apply the concepts we talk about in the theoretical classes. We covered a lot of concepts and algorithms but the exam was quite easy. It's basically just applying the formulas and have an understanding on how the algorithms work. We were allowed to take 2 pages with formulas to the exam. Overall, really good course!

The teacher is ok, you can get by watching the mooc of the course and reading the slides, it’s important to go to the exercise class to understand how the exam questions work because they are subjective, do a lot of previous exams to understand the thought process. The exam is true or false and wrong questions discount 0.2 so it’s nit the best. The project is easy, everything you need is in the teachers website and she encourages people to use the code from there, there is a report template that you just need to fill with your results and analysis

The teacher is good, he explains things in an easy way to understand, the evaluation is 50% two tests, that are easier than the class handouts and 50% a project. The theoretical class slides aren’t helpful and they are confusing but this part is important for the tests, don't focus just on the exercises solved in class. The project can be confusing at first but when you understand the work to do it can be fun, grades are usually good. You don’t need a background in industrial engineering to do the class anyone can do it.

2 Homeworks, 2 Test and 2 Practical Tests (Programming on paper). Very competent teacher but very strict with the academic writing and professionalism.

As aulas práticas costumam ajudar bastante para compreender os exercícios e o que é preciso fazer nos Map's. Os testes costumam ser acessíveis mas os materiais com a matéria ficam um pouco aquém, apesar dos testes resolvidos ajudarem bastante. Estudem pelo Resumos Leic para rever a teórica e façam os testes dos anos anteriores.

Projeto relativamente longo, o exame é relativamente difícil, para prepararem-se para ambos recomendo o CS50.

This course is evaluated with 2 projects, each evaluated by presentations. The first one is very easy, it is about the JEQ. The second one has 4 parts, the first 2 parts are easier then the last ones but overall, they are ok to do.

The teacher is very good! He helps a lot, and he's always available for doubts.\ There are 2 parts for evaluation: A monography about a chosen theme and an exam. The difficult part for the monography is to choose the theme and have a good literature search, the rest is easy. The teacher gives all the slides he presents in the classes, and they are really useful. I advise you to use the slides at the same time as the teacher, so that you can take notes and to know which ones are better for you to bring to the exam

Interesting course with a great professor and engaging classes. Two easy case studies and the exam is open book. The average in the last years was 16, but very easy to get 18.

Awesome teacher. Passionate, friendly, and explains well. Probably the only reason I liked the course, given as the subjects covered are probably obsolete (could be wrong and ignorant). The course focuses on Lisp and Java, and in my year the project was in Julia. We had to implement an extension to the Julia language. If you're looking to really do it yourself, it's not too challenging and if you apply yourself you'll learn along the way (although I must be honest and say that with 0% AI help, it would've probably been more challenging/hard). The course teaches you about extremely specific architectural design decisions in the aforementioned languages and unless you are a complete nerd like me you won't like it at all. Theoreticals = important, labs = irrelevant. Overall I'm just not giving it a 5 due to the limited applicability of what we've learned.

Labs are optional and I didn't go to a single one. Honestly I think it's kind of bad that the teachers just give you a lab guide and basically save themselves more class time but the course was good so I'm not complaining. To me this is the perfect type of course because the exam forces you to actually learn and understand what is going on and what you did in the project (in case you did it, but didn't really do it), and it doesn't ask stupid, way-too-specific questions designed for you to fail. No, it asks fair, important questions that let you freely write and showcase your understanding of the subjects. To me, that's perfect. The teachers were good and the theoretical classes were digestible. Those are important.