|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.
Course evaluation Service Contract Management, ISM030Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2008-06-04 - 2008-06-27 Antal svar: 15 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 60% Kontaktperson: Anna Kadefors»
Your background1. Which is your earlier educational background?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.26 2. Which masters programme do you follow now?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.13 Your own effort3. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?We mean total time, that is, both time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.26 - I took two other courses as well» (Around 20 hours/week) 4. How large a part of the teaching offered did you attend?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.93 - Missed several classes due to shoulder injury. There were also som clashas with other classes/projects.» (50%) Goals and goal fulfilmentThe course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.5. How understandable are the course goals?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.13 - There are too many topics (contracts, outsourcing, negotiations, legal part), all of them generally described, but none of them analysed in depth.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer) 6. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 7. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.53 8. Would you have preferred having one or two of the exam questions replaced by a case where you would be able to elaborate more freely?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.66 - One thing is memorising definitions, an other one is being able to apply the ideas behind those definitions.» (Yes, certainly) Teaching and course administration9. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.4 - The Domberger part was boring and not clear enough. The legal part was very clear, though sometimes it was hard not to fall asleep. Negotiation and incentives were interesting and good, all else was clear and interesting enough.» (Some extent) 10. What is your opinion of the lectures on outsourcing?- I think that a regular way of teaching with PPT"s would be better, since I am one year here and I haad difficulties to get used to the ppt"s and now it is changed to some thing else that not really cover the material. »- Sometimes a bit confusing. I really missed pp-slides as the papers the lecturer was given were not good at all. » - The first two handouts were not understandable since it was a summary and the profesor´,s reflections about the topic. It was difficult to understand the professor.» - Not well done.» - Would have been good with slides instead of a page with comments connected to the lectures.» - ok» - Need improvement» - they were fine, but i would prefer some more insight» - Interesting also with a background view. Interesting way of teaching» - good» - Trustworthy and overall well performed» 11. What is your opinion of the lectures on trust and relationship management?- It was good.I liked them.»- Ok. » - The topic was interesting. » - Clear and interesting, though not analysed as in depth as I expected.» - Good» - ok» - Good» - The lecture could cover more useful and interesting theories. » - ok» - great» - Liked two of the articles one was a bit blurry.» - also good » - Seemed uncomfortable and I lacked a clear thread during the lectures.» 12. What is your opinion of the lectures on public procurement?- -»- Boring and not too interesting.» - ok» - so so» - ok» - good» - Did not attend» - interesting, I liked the historical aspect of it.» 13. What is your opinion of the law lectures?- they were also ok.»- Very good. Very clear and structured lessons and notes. » - It was very interesting» - Very clear, quite boring.» - Very good part of the course but the references to the articles in the law document was confusion at some points.» - good» - Good » - It is very useful in some extent, I learned a lot from the exercises.» - Good» - great» - Interestiing» - good, good role play» - The law lectures held high class, and was both interesting and educating» 14. What is your opinion of the lectures on negotiations?- HE could spend some time on the book instead of more elaborating on his slides.»- Very good. Clear and interesting. » - Interesting and good. Sometimes too easy... advanced game theories would have been even more interesting.» - Very general. Could have been some deeper or with some more exercises.» - good» - Good» - The content is quite interesting and useful. » - Very good» - really great» - Maybe a bit slow the first time then interesting» - interesting and good, fun exercises» - Embarrasing. I see no purpose for a teachor to read straight out from his/her own slides and, when on occasion he would leave the dictation, he became much more uncertain on himself. Further, his english is long from well suited for this level of education.» 15. To what extent has the the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.23 - I learnt many different approaches, but none of them too specifically.» (Some extent) 16. What is your opinion of Domberger: The Contracting Organization?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.83 - The contracting organization is an interesting book and was very related with the topics of the course.» (Good) 17. What is your opinion of Fisher and Ury: Getting to yes?- nice book. i liked it.»- Ok. » - Important for structure a negotiation process.» - Good book, very interesting, though not too academic.» - Strange to use a textbook that the negotiation teacher refered to as not that good and never used in his lectures.» - Good» - Excellent» - very interesting reading» - Easy to read, obvious things but fit in with our other course» - Good book and to a reasonable price.» 18. What is your opinion of Badenfelt: The selection of sharing ratios in target cost contracts?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.69 - Don"t be nervous it was good!» (Good) 19. What is your opinion of Bröchner: Research on outsourcing?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.64 - The ideas are interesting, useful and good, but the paper is unreadable.» (Bad) 20. What is your opinion of Greenberg: Stress Fairness to Fare No Stress?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.64 - Interesting to see a slightly different point of view, however it is not a fundamental study, concerning the course. Plus, it gives just a few ideas, and one has to read the whole paper.» (Neutral) 21. What is your opinion of Harrington: IT procurement?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.71 - Interesting and useful, but the title does not reflect the paper.» (Good) 22. What is your opinion of Kadefors: Trust in project relationships?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.35 - Interesting theoretical discussion about trust, but I would put the experience of the construction projects in a different paper, and develop more the theory, here.» (Good) 23. What is your opinion of Mahama: Management control systems?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 - Quite interesting study, but written in a bad way.» (Neutral) 24. What is your opinion of Murray and Kotabe: Sourcing strategies of U.S. service companies?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.92 - Very interesting study, but as for Ulrika, with weak and quite obvious conclusions.» (Neutral) 25. What is your opinion of Åström and Bröchner: Imitating private business in public procurement: Swedish "affärsmässigt"?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.92 - Sure it is a nice paper, but I thought it was a bit "strained" into the course reading. That it didn"t really handle the subjects of the course.» (Neutral) 26. What is your opinion of the documents on a European Civil Code for Service contracts?- As a law code, sometimes is difficult to understand»- Not too bad. Clear, and not excessively long» - Hard to read legal texts as learning material but I can understand that it could be hard finding other litterature concerning the subject.» - -» - it was a usefull instrument » - helpfull in the exercises but not verry fun to read when studying for the exam» - Good stuff» 27. In general, would you have preferred more interaction during lectures based on the teachers assuming that you had really read the text-of-the-day?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.92 - Should be good to work with the articles with seminars.» (Yes, certainly) 28. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.33 - I had all the materials and information needed.» (Very well) Group assignment29. What is your opinion of the group assignment in general (usefulness, topics...)- very good.»- I think is enough to talk about only on one of the topics.» - Useful, and our topic was interesting.» - The assignment was very good and interesting. It was a great way of learning. But it was to few pages to fit the aim of choosing two or three subject questions. It would have been better to decrease it to one subject question or increase the number of pages. I would have prefered to increase the number of pages since I though that it was much to learn from the assignment.» - good» - Very usefull» - they were usefull and gave us the opportunity to study deeper the chosen topics» - Should have been specified that should be written as a scientific article. Would have made it easier. Also do not give the advice to cover too many issues.» - maybe if youcould choose the groups it vould be a better result. However this means that you need to help with contact for some groups even if one contact in our group arranged one interview.» - I liked it, especially due to the straight and clear instructions given for it. Little time was needed with the "administrative" parts of the report writing. Nicely done! On the other hand, it was a little bit dull, seeing that we have done dozens of similar reports earlier in our education on I. But again, I really liked how it was given to us with all the necessary details attached.» 30. What is your opinion of the supervision?- Quite good.»- My supervisor was not really helpfull since he did not help us to narrow the scope of our work. I think this would help us to have a better results.» - Not well organised. As we were a group, I would have preferred the supervisor to communicate in English, and with all the group members.» - Could have been on a more general level instead of only smaller comments. The feedback in the end was better but than it was too late to make some changes.» - need improvement» - Good. Liked the detailed feedback» - good» - Good maybe more direct critic on the text.» - There was some missunderstanding at one meeting that lead to a delay but our superviser helped us verry much, she were great » - She did a good job, even though it was obvious that she was rather new to it.» 31. How did the collaboration work in your group?- good.»- In general we work well in the group» - Initially very bad, then we improved a lot. Also different schedules and deadlines from other courses affected a lot our collaboration effectiveness.» - Very good collaboration. But it was not necessary to write down the group aims etc for a small assignment like this. But I really liked the way the groups were formed. Continue with that!» - good» - very well» - my group members did an excellente job» - I did almost all the work but it turned out good.» - not so good.» - Overall, it worked well. There were no equal share of work performed within the group - but life isn"t fair, right!?» 32. What is your opinion of the final presentation?- good.»- Interesting, though if I have to present, I am worried about my presentation and do not have the opportunity to fully concentrate also on the other groups" presentations.» - It was ok. » - good» - -» - they were very well prepared and it has been interesting to listen to the others» - Unnecessary to grade it but alright.» - good, however I personally had much to do in two other courses at that time but my mates did a nice presentation» - Totally pointless. At that time in the semester it was a completely waste of time. My suggestion is to either schedule it earlier or to just drop it. No skills learned by that presentation.» 33. What is your opinion on the grading and feedback?- Quite good.»- Feedback was good, grading also.» - Since it was clearly stated in the beginning how the grading should be performed it would have been interesting to know the grading for all parts instead of just the sum of them. Otherwise the comments was good.» - good» - Ok» - they have been fair » - Good!» - good but there might have been too high in some cases.» - Good. Seeing how we are not spoiled with feedback at all here at Chalmers and "I", I"m happy for everything I can get. » Study climate34. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.5 - Very good and friendly environment, help has always been given. The only thing I did not like were people asking qustions without raising their hand, and maybe getting an answer before other people, who were waiting.» (Very good) 35. How was the course workload?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.13 - Lot of readings about a lot of different topics. However, not excessive.» (High) 36. How was the total workload this study period?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.8 - Lot of free riding concerning the group works (4!) in my other course (Technological development in networks).» (High) Summarizing questions37. What is your general impression of the course?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.53 - Some personal lack of interest in this particular course/topic is surely influencing me. » (Adequate) 38. What should definitely be preserved next year?- the dinamic during the lectures»- Game theories, negotiations, group works, relatively low number of students in the class.» - The group assignment. The law lectures.» - law and negoiation part» - the organization of the lectures and the group works» - I like the mix.» 39. What should definitely be changed next year?- Some thing must be done about the literature for outsourcing. maybe the book from Jan Bröchner would be better.»- POWER POINT SLIDES for every lecture!» - better handouts and maybe add seminars for discussing the articles and the books.» - Domberger and/or the way Prof. Bröchner gives his lectures.» - The group assignment could be some larger. The negotiation part could be less general but it still is an interesting part of the course.» - the numbers ot teachers, it is to many» - -» - nothing» - Maybe have one teacher more constantly involved.» - refine the group work a bit.» - I respect that you are all very skilled in your fields and possess a lot useful knowledge for us. Meantime, it is my impression that all lectures could be lifted to a more "professional" level. It is hard to examplify this critique but I wasn"t all comfortable with the small cosy classes held. Also, drop Henrik from negotiating - really» 40. Additional comments- I loved the nice British accent of Prof. Kadefors.»- Better administration and planning before the lectures etc would not hurt.» - -»
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33%