0x010088F6312065A70A44B630A6848498EAD80093CFEAFE161DC94D83C7C5C9A5A748B8

As proposed in 2021, the two lectures on anthropogenic noise in air and underwater were turned into individual oral presentations based on a selection of papers prepared by the two lecturers. A heuristic map was drawn to summarize the work. This was a success. In addition, the instructions for the field work were updated. The difference of expectations between TTT20 and TTT4290 regarding the report was clarified. Otherwise the workload of the professor in charge did not permit to go beyond that.Therefore, some of the recommendations written in 2021 still hold. Since some students expressed the desire to record underwater sounds, it was tried to find a solution. Recorders we not available for purchase at that time. Some could be borrowed from the NINA, but it turned out that the main issue was the selection of suitable deployment spot. The underwater soundscape around Trondheim seems to be dominated by anthropogenic noise. Recording in lakes is an option, but a small boat is needed for deployment.

Several changes in the course schedule were needed because of other duties, but this had limited impact on the coherence of the lecture plan.The corridor-like room shape was not compatible with the combined use of the blackboard and of the large screen. The attendance was remarkably high throughout the semester. The students appeared to be highly motivated by the topic. The joint attendance of TTT4290 and TFE4595/TTT20 improved the group's dynamics. The 3 reference group meetings (13.09, 25.10, 4.12 - post exam) were repeated occasions for the students to express their strong interest for the material presented. The student members of the reference group were instructed to use the dedicated team in MS Teams, But they did not use it. 6 students enrolled to the course. The grades for the project were 4B and 2C. The exam grades were 2B, 2C and 2E. The lower grades at the exam were attributable to poor English skills and misunderstanding the duration of the exam. The field work that is part of the course went fine. All the students could collect useful data, although one recorder was stolen. More guidance would be beneficial when it comes to selecting a suitable spot. For future editions:<ul><li>Consider turning the course into an intensive one during the first week of the fall semester for the lectures and some of the workshops. The purpose is to reach a larger audience and to carry out field work earlier.</li><li>In the sessions about anthropogenic noise, ask the students to draft their own mindmap based on the presentations.</li><li>Complete the reading material</li><li>Purchase waterproof enclosures for the Audiomoths</li><li>Purchase a boat for deploying recorders in lakes.</li><li>Consider turning the written exam to an oral exam.</li></ul>

NTNU:TIA:REST

Department of Electronic Systems

Institutt for elektroniske systemer

Ingen hjelpemidler tillatt.

Engelsk

Mer om vurdering

50 % Skriftlig eksamen50 % RapportVed utsatt eksamen (kontinuasjonseksamen) i august, kan skriftlig eksamen bli endret til muntlig eksamen.Ved gjentak av emnet skal både eksamen og rapport tas igjen.

Anbefalte forkunnskaper

Akustikk, Biology, Etologi, Økologi, Programmering

Forkunnskapskrav

Faglig innhold

Funksjoner til akustisk kommunikasjon, lydgenerering, lydforplantning, hørsel, ekkolokalisering.Kroniske og akutte påvirkninger av menneskeskapt støy.Skadebegrensningstiltak.Bioakustisk monitorering for biomangfold.

Kursmateriell

Læringsutbytte

KandidatenHar kunnskap om<ul><li>Lydgenerering hos dyr</li><li>Lydforplantning i luft og vann</li><li>Hoersel hos dyr</li><li>Påvirkninger av menneskekapt stoey</li><li>Sensorer og utstyr til bioakustisk monitorering</li></ul>Kan<ul><li>Planlegge og virkeliggjoere bioakustisk datasamling</li><li>Post-prosessere bioakustiske feltopptak med dedikerte verktoey eller ved bruk av programmering</li></ul>Generell kompetanse: kandidaten får trening i rapportskriiving og feltarbeid.

Læringsformer og aktiviteter

Forelesninger, studentpresentasjoner, selvstudium og praktisk øving med rapport.

Bioakustikk for biodiversitet

Anvendt geofysikk

Zoologisk økologi

Fysikk

Økologi

Marin teknikk - masterstudium (5-årig)

Elektronisk systemdesign og innovasjon - masterstudium (5-årig)

Biologi - masterstudium

Energi og miljø - masterstudium (5-årig)

Fysikk og matematikk - masterstudium (5-årig)

Electronic Systems Design (Master's Programme)

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(27004)/FieldValuesAsText

<h1>Items that were delivered for this course from the previous year's recommendations included:</h1>       • Introduce more quantitative information about background noise       • Update the instructions for the fieldwork               • Provide online software resources for automated identification       • Check that the students take notes in Teams and that their input is saved. <h1>For future versions of this course, it would be good to:</h1>    • Have one or two lectures where the students are asked to read in advance a review paper and summarise it in class. (Recommendation carried over from last year)    • Establish a database to upload and keep data from the field experiments (Recommendation carried over from previous year)    • Update and improve the content into a set of coherent, editable pptx files for each lecture topic (New recommendation).

<h1>Assessment of the course</h1>The course was given by John Potter, standing in for Guillaume Dutilleux as he was on sabbatical. A schedule was published on Blackboard before beginning the course, and the number of lecture sessions was set to 13, with two time slots per week agreed with the students in which these could be delivered. This provided ample opportunity to allow for gaps where the lecturer or students could not attend for some reason. The group was very small (4 students, plus 1 for TTT20), which facilitated a flexible and personal approach. The acoustics group meeting room was used for these sessions, which provided an appropriately-sized room for a small group, with a good whiteboard and large display screen facilities. The course consisted of a series of interactive sessions, in which we explored the generation, transmission, reception and decoding of biological acoustic signals and the context of environmental (including anthropogenic) noise. The small class size facilitated more interaction and agile exploration, with extensive use of whiteboard and impromptu discussion, rather than following a fixed progression through pre-prepared material. A large part of the focus of the course was on planning and conducting a field experiment, and the latter sessions were therefore focused on experimental field planning, data acquisition, working with the provided hardware (audiomoths), deploying and maintaining equipment, and then analysing the data. The final sessions explored the data that the students had collected. This approach of learning by doing, with a hands-on practical task, proved to be a good motivating way to learn.  The students´ reference group consisted of four students. A dedicated Teams identity was generated for them. The report was submitted and forwarded for publication in KASPER. The reference report notes that the agile scheduling worked well for the students that attended the opening lectures but did not perhaps work so well for students that did not attend. I don´t see this as a big problem insofar as students who do not show up for the course are not in a strong position to complain when those who do have the course fit their needs. The students taking the TTT20 half course would prefer the report to be voluntary. Both the half and full (TTT4290) course students thought that a pass/failure on the report makes the half course too similar to the full course. In practice, the half-course students have little or no motivation to write and submit a report since it is not graded, but to grade it would make the half and full courses too similar. The audiomoths worked well, but some were water-damaged and perhaps in future some weather protection might better be provided, or at least more instruction on how to protect them. <h1>Students´ achievement of the desired learning outcomes</h1>One student was registered for the course but apparently this was in error.One student was taking the course while working, and unfortunately (although they were very good and highly engaged) they had to withdraw from the exam due to work obligations.One registered student did not show up for the lectures.Two students were very quiet and difficult to motivate but took the exam, submitted good field experiment reports and passed with a ´B´ grade.One student participated in the lecture sessions as part of TTT20 but did not submit a report on the field work (not graded for TTT20). They obtained a pass grade.

50 % Skriftlig eksamen50 % RapportVed utsatt eksamen (kontinuasjonseksamen) kan skriftlig eksamen bli endret til muntlig eksamen

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(21511)/FieldValuesAsText

This is the first year the course is given in this format. So there was no previous evaluation.

The course was given according to the schedule defined before the beginning of the semester It was just necessary to permute 2 lectures. This had no impact on the coherence of the lecture plan.The room had suitable multimedia equipment but no chalk was available to use the black board.The lectures went fine but the audience appeared quite passive on the whole, even though the 3 reference group meetings were repeated occasions for the students to express their strong interest for the material presented. The students were instructed to use the dedicated team in MS Teams, student notes from the reference group meetings have been lost from 2 out of 3 meetings.6 students enrolled to the course but 3 completed it and took the exam. The grades were 2B and 1C. The students attended almost all the classes.The field work part of the course went fine. All the students could collect useful data, although one recorder seems to have suffered for radio interferences. More guidance would have been beneficial when it comes to selecting a suitable spot and resources for identifying species from audio recordings. The reports delivered were quite valuable but the 6-page format is a bit too short considering that the report is worth 3.75 credits and does not permit to give enough details. To be done for the next time the course is given:<ul><li>Experimenting with one or two lectures where the students are asked to read in advance a review paper and summarize it in class.</li><li>Introduce more quantitative information about background noise</li><li>Update the instructions for the field work:</li><li>Database of observations</li><li>presentation of spectra,</li><li>analysis of background noise</li><li>online resources for identification.</li><li>maximum report length that should be larger than for TTT20</li><li>Check that the students take notes in Teams and that their input is saved.</li></ul>

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(15979)/FieldValuesAsText

Bioakustikk for biodiversitet - TTT4290