Visa resultat

10/11 KUL - utvärdering

1. What is your overall impression of the day?

very bad»		0		0%
bad»		0		0%
OK»		2		3%
good»		25		39%
very good»		37		57%

Genomsnitt: 4.54

- I was only there for the morning sessions» (good)
- Presentations I went to were very good. The venue is not good if you are disabled in any way. Dark, small korridors with too many people. Although "mysfaktorn" is high, I would like to see a better venue with respect to this.» (good)
- Sessions were put together a strange way» (good)
- I learnt more than I had anticipated.» (very good)
- en av de nyttigaste konferenser jag deltagit i pga av att det är ett ämne som ingår iallas vardagliga arbete, oavsett vilka kurser man undervisar i. Inspirerande att höra andras erfarenheter kring undervisning. » (very good)
- It was nice to see what all participants wanted to say without the influence of a theme etc. The trend was quite clear.» (very good)
- It was great to (finally) have this kind of conference at Chalmers. It provided a valuable and necessary venue for promoting and discussing pedagogy and learning among us practitioners.» (very good)
- Important with a joint pedagogical conference at Chalmers!» (very good)
- Good presentations and lots of time in between the regular speeches.» (very good)
- well organized» (very good)
- Livliga diskussioner och många nya engagerade ansikten. Många positiva tankar.» (very good)
- a bit hectic, with short brakes.» (very good)
- Very interesting! Also inspiring (for me as a phd student) to see that there are so many teachers at Chalmers who recognizes the importance of teaching.» (very good)
- Nice to meet all people that are interested in educational problems. Interesting subjects. Too many actually. It was impossible to listen to everything that you would like.» (very good)
- Great to have a day to focus on these issues.» (very good)

2. What is your opinion about the information before the conference?

very bad»		0		0%
bad»		2		3%
OK»		22		34%
good»		27		42%
very good»		12		19%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

- The conference call should have been sent out to all that teach, with a reminder.» (bad)
- The info came late.» (OK)
- I totally missed the possibility to register for workshop. Also I missed the last day of registraation.» (OK)
- Information could be better distributed, not only to program and department head but directly to all teachers » (OK)
- I thought it would be concentrated on Constructive alignemet.» (OK)
- Could be better! More information not only to the teatchers but also to the studentadministration.» (OK)
- Unclear about speaker"s what, how, and when. » (OK)
- A little disorganised at the beginning for obvious reasons-difficult to find information about when and where» (OK)
- there was an odd message about parking... (not very sustainable)» (good)
- Some abstracts and titles were missing. » (good)
- Något i sista sekund kom det slutgiltiga programmet. MEn det gick ju bra det med. » (good)
- I think it was my fault but the e-mails were long and I didn"t see the link to where you could read the abstract of the others» (good)
- I had some insight early on, so for me it was clear. However, more advertising would probably be needed (then again, the house was full!)» (good)
- jag vara orolig att det skulle bli få deltagare och att folk inte skulle ha tid att engagera sig hela dagen» (good)
- could have been better. Please use BCC when emailing- gives less spam mails to people and higher integrity.» (good)
- The info could have been given a bit sooner, more especifically the program.» (good)
- The information of when, where and why was clear.» (very good)
- but a little late» (very good)
- I only participated, without giving a presentation. I did not need much more information than place and time.» (very good)

3. What is your opinion about the organisation during the conference day?

very bad»		0		0%
bad»		0		0%
OK»		3		4%
good»		19		30%
very good»		41		65%

Genomsnitt: 4.6

- Don"t see another solution, but it annoyed me that I wanted to clone into sometimes 4 persons to not miss any sessions...» (good)
- Too many parallel sessions, we were a number parallel sessions with only 5 participants each.» (good)
- It was a very good idea have surveyed ahead who was planning to attend where to allow the rooms to fit the audience very well. It was also good to add buffer time between presentations that made it easy to walk between rooms and freely choose what seminar to attend. » (very good)
- Very pleasant and relaxed. Gave a good opportunity to discuss pedagogical questions with colleagues. » (very good)
- Trevligt och välkomnande» (very good)
- It work very well. people keept times etc.» (very good)
- It was easy to find where to be, there was always someone to ask if having questions!» (very good)
- I think everything went really smoothly and I liked the fact that each session was given 40 minutes (instead of the regular 20 minutes).» (very good)
- The different sessions, transport between them, short coffee breaks, lunch and dinner really fascilitated networking» (very good)
- Very nice with parallell presentations in small groups - that stimulated discussions. It was also nice to meet new people at every session!» (very good)
- Conference committee = very good :) About Chalmerska huset, at least 15 persons (if not more) didn"t get desert with their lunch = very bad :( Otherwise good food and friendly staff.» (very good)
- Lunch could be better!» (very good)
- All practicalites worked well.» (very good)
- Klockan som ringde:) Den varma atmosfären. » (very good)
- Det var dock lite ont om plats att sitta och äta vid lunchen. » (very good)
- happy and helpful people.» (very good)
- Everything ran smoothly (in m eyes). :-) » (very good)
- Went v. smoothly!» (very good)

4. What is your general opinion about the content?

very bad»		0		0%
bad»		0		0%
OK»		8		12%
good»		30		47%
very good»		25		39%

Genomsnitt: 4.26

- Jag var på flera föredrag där deltagarna fick minimal information, för att sedan delas upp i grupper och gå igenom material och ge feedback på förslag från föredragshållarna. Bra för föredragshållarna, men varken kul eller givande för deltagarna. Ska detta förfarande vara tillåtet nästa gång?» (OK)
- We have some work to do at Chalmers... Still, this was the first conference and these things take time. There were also some really good contributions. But perhaps the most important thing was to actually start a discussion (and starting a culture of discussing these things).» (OK)
- Some talks were very good, some were quite poor» (good)
- I lacked the parts about constructive alignment that had been underlined in preparations for the conference.» (good)
- It was not easy to choose among many parallel presentations, and my choice was not always the best» (good)
- Everything was good except of some presentations which was more of a discussion rather than a information session. The problem was that the time was a bit too short for meaningful discussions.» (good)
- Relevant» (good)
- Good that it is work in progress, with team exercises for input to the different projects.» (very good)
- There is a lot to learn from the different kinds of pedagogical activities at Chalmers and was nice that all kinds of presentations were welcomed.» (very good)
- It"s very good to have a mix of talks where teachers can suggest ideas and pick up ideas. It doesn"t have to be research-level. » (very good)
- It"s "real" content, each contribution represented something that is an actual work field. We should work with pedagogy all year long and KUL should be a forum where we can share and get feedback.» (very good)
- Positive with the mix of topics.» (very good)
- It was particularly good to get ideas on how to in a simple way improve my teaching, by learning from practical experience from other teachers.» (very good)
- Högt och lågt - blandat » (very good)
- Relevans men också spridning i detaljering är färdighetsgrad är bra. Synd att man missade mycket som var intressant, men kul att se mångfalden!» (very good)
- Could always be better, but it was inspiring and fills it purpose.» (very good)
- Include qualified guest speakers» (very good)
- All presenters added something interesting to the conference and the overall quality was very good.» (very good)
- There were many interesting subjects. I would have liked to listen to more than six of them.» (very good)

5. Mention a presentation which you particularily enjoyed (if any).

6. Rank the following items according to how important you perceive them to be?

- This type of meeting is a great forum to learn from each other.» (?)
- Delar gärna med mig av mina tankar när jag fått mer erfarenhet av undervisning. » (?)
- This is a very difficult ranking to make. I think they all correlate.» (?)
- As a PhD student I aanted to learn and build on my CV» (?)
- Difficult to rank, all alternatives are important, but my first alternative is definitely the most important.» (?)
- Possiblity to discuss, influence and contribute to ongoing projects/ativities at Chalmers, respond to proposed projects/activites, or to initiate and plan new projects/activites at Chalmers would come very high on the ranking list (instead of information about - use the audience to test ideas). Education is not only teaching, but also planning, designing courses and programmes (comment to "get new ideas for my teaching").» (?)
- Twenty years ago #7 would have been at the top» (?)
- För mig som är UOL är det viktigt att få se lite vad som gjorts inom mitt UO som inte har initierats av ledningen och att skapa kontakt med de lärare som gjort jobbet.» (?)
- I"m not sure if I interpreted the alternative : "My own ped. qual." correctly» (?)
- The last 3 ranked here weren"t relevant for me» (?)
- Since I"m not a teacher, the rest of the options don"t really apply on me.» (?)

7. How often should Chalmers arrange a conference like this?

never»		0		0%
every 5 to 10 years»		0		0%
every other year»		12		19%
annually»		50		80%
every semester»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.8

- Or annually. » (every other year)
- In principle every year, but there is a need also for gettogethers at the programme level. That does not really happen today. These two activities can alter resulting in a yearly pedagogical activity.» (every other year)
- Timing was good - early january» (annually)
- or biannually if individual programs have workshops in between.» (annually)
- There may be fewer speakers next year now that many have expressed themselves, but we don"t have to have many parallel sessions, and one could have a discussion on a specific topic.» (annually)
- Let"s start with annually, and see what happens to the interest in attending. Every semester is too often.» (annually)
- or perhaps every 18 months (June and January)» (annually)
- Before the start of the autumn semester is a very good time to give these encouraging talks and discussions.» (annually)
- There should aslo be a complmentary workshop every year for programme directors, vice heads and other leaders of education for discussion about future directions and strategies. (Similar to the IMPACT worjshops in the past).» (annually)
- Med årlig konferens kan man ha som mål för vissa ped-projekt som drivs över kalenderår att presentera på konferensen!» (annually)

8. What time of the year would be best for the next conference?

This time of the year»		58		92%
I have another preference»		5		7%

Genomsnitt: 1.07

- It is a nice "kick-off" and one has the opportunity to implement ideas for the new semester.» (This time of the year)
- January before courses start is definately a good choice.» (This time of the year)
- Perfect timing!» (This time of the year)
- or June» (This time of the year)
- Or at the start up around August» (This time of the year)
- Late spring or early autumn» (I have another preference)
- At the end of lp.4 (before summer).» (I have another preference)
- Autumn - in preparation for the school year.» (I have another preference)
- Week after Easter or examination week in March» (I have another preference)
- june» (I have another preference)

9. What can be improved till next time?

10. What should be preserved till next time?