Student Surveys

This page says what students at various schools think of the book. We enlisted the cooperation of instructors to pass out a questionnaire asking the students for feedback on six questions:
  1. Effectiveness in teaching AI (0=ineffective, 10=very effective):
  2. Usefulness as a reference book (0=useless, 10=very useful):
  3. Overall readability (0=unreadable, 10=very readable):
  4. Overall level of interest (0=boring, 10=fascinating):
  5. Overall level of technical difficulty (0=easy, 10=impenetrable):
  6. Your overall impression of the book:

The schools responding were American University, Berkeley, Buffalo, Columbia, Harvard, Temple.

American University

 The course-end questionnaire did not ask our six questions, but some students did volunteer impressions of the book.

"Overall, a very good book which I will use again. BTW, my class is an introduction to AI, with upper level undergrads (few) and beginning grads (lots, MS level) ... majors are CS and IS ... only a couple are interested in AI research." -- Prof. Michael Gray

Berkeley (University of California)

 Survey Results Spring 95, Prof. John Canny (18 students responding)
  1. Effectiveness in teaching AI (0=ineffective, 10=very effective):
    Median = 8; Mean = 6.8; Min = 1; Max = 10
  2. Usefulness as a reference book (0=useless, 10=very useful):
    Median = 8; Mean = 7.2; Min = 2; Max = 9
  3. Overall readability (0=unreadable, 10=very readable):
    Median = 8; Mean = 7.4; Min = 3; Max = 10
  4. Overall level of interest (0=boring, 10=fascinating):
    Median = 8; Mean = 7.3; Min = 4; Max = 9
  5. Overall level of technical difficulty (0=easy, 10=impenetrable):
    Median = 5; Mean = 4.6; Min = 2; Max = 8
  6. Your overall impression of the book:

    Buffalo (SUNY)

     The mid-course questionnaire did not ask our six questions, but some students did volunteer impressions of the book.

    Columbia University

     Survey Results Spring 95, Prof. Stolfo (18 students responding)
    1. Effectiveness in teaching AI (0=ineffective, 10=very effective):
      Median = 8; Mean = 8.2; Min = 6.5; Max = 10;
    2. Usefulness as a reference book (0=useless, 10=very useful):
      Median = 8; Mean = 7.6; Min = 5; Max = 10;
    3. Overall readability (0=unreadable, 10=very readable):
      Median = 9; Mean = 8.7; Min = 6.5; Max = 10;
    4. Overall level of interest (0=boring, 10=fascinating):
      Median = 8; Mean = 8.1; Min = 6; Max = 10;
    5. Overall level of technical difficulty (0=easy, 10=impenetrable):
      Median = 5; Mean = 4.9; Min = 2; Max = 7;
    6. Your overall impression of the book:
      (Collected elsewhere.)
    "I used your textbook this semester in my Intro AI course and you should be happy to know the students loved it. There are a few minor bugs here and there (on second thought I should have gathered them up but I didn't) but in any event its a real "rave". I've been looking for a better text from the prior ones and your book did the trick. Nice job." -- Prof. Sal Stolfo

    Harvard University

    Harvard did not use our questions, but did rate the book on a 1 [low] to 5 [high] scale as part of the normal student evaluation process. Prof. Grosz writes: "Your book got a 4; previous texts have been in the 2's or very low 3's. The distinction is significant. As you know I am a fan and think the book rates highly on all of [your questions] 1-4, and is at the right level of technical difficulty."

    Temple University

     Temple used AIMA as a supplementary text in Spring 1995 (and will use it as the main text in Spring 1996). The instructor (Prof. Giorgio Ingargiola) gave these estimates:
    1. Effectiveness in teaching AI (0=ineffective, 10=very effective):
      8
    2. Usefulness as a reference book (0=useless, 10=very useful):
      10
    3. Overall readability (0=unreadable, 10=very readable):
      7
    4. Overall level of interest (0=boring, 10=fascinating):
      9
    5. Overall level of technical difficulty (0=easy, 10=impenetrable):
      8
    6. Your overall impression of the book:
      I like this book very much. When in doubt I look there, and usually find what I am looking for, or I find references on where to go to study the problem more in depth. I like that it tries to show how various topics are interrelated, and to give general architectures for general problems (say planning, learning, ...).

    AIMA Home Contact Russell & Norvig