Visa resultat

IPR010 2014-15 LP1, IPR010

1. What is your general impression of the course?

Worst course ever»		1		1%
Fair»		1		1%
Adequate»		0		0%
Good»		21		36%
Excellent»		34		59%
Best course ever»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.5

- Sorry about that, I just hate project management but it"s a good thing that I noticed it so early in my life! I guess you guys did a good job, it"s just me :)» (Worst course ever)
- Just because the course is in English doesn"t necessarily make it a master course. Move it to the bachelor level where it belongs. It seems like master courses at Chalmers are like bachelor courses at other universities. I´,m really disappointed at the low academic level Chalmers. » (Fair)
- I feel like the lectures are a little bit straggled ("spretiga"), the connection between the parts (power theory, NPD etc) isn"t all that evident! However all parts are interesting!» (Good)
- quite good but I expected less focus on problems and more focus on solutions. More tools and less contradictive literature.» (Good)
- Pentagon Wars :) (y) Maylor = Generic. I argue that the scores on the basics test should be more distributed according to your level of analysis, and less according to whether you missed a single term in the book, or a single bullet point in one of Maylors arbitrary and non-structured lists. I can see the value of having the basics-part to get people from non-business backgrounds to catch up within project management basics. » (Good)
- The lecturers have all been very good in the way that they are all both eager to teach and they are quite good pedagogically. That is unfortunately not always the case at Chalmers. The pedagogy have potential in getting even better, but still. Well done! Don"t like the case work. Not that it"s not useful to know, but being an I-student at Chalmers, we"ve done this a million times already. Would prefer more seminars instead, or shorter and more cases. Or one with a different approach. I know the "intro, theoretical framework, method..." by heart at this point. Like the (after all) fairly simple test of all the basics in the beginning. It"s a way of curing the student syndrome. Love and hate the home exam. It"s more challenging to me, but I it gives room for analysis of which normal exams don"t usually test. Hard, but an learning experience. » (Good)
- Very good lectures. Project could have been more clear in its description.» (Good)
- Interesting topic but with too many hand-ins/exams/"moment(SWE)" to enjoy and focus on the content/learnings. It was never clearly understood that the course was about product development and not project development in general. The transition from the PM Basics into Product Development was never stated.» (Good)
- It was a good, useful course in general. Lars Hallin"s module was very good, although many things weren"t new to me, it was still interesting. The project gave much learning and the seminar/workshop was also good. In general, one issue was that the course was quite theoretical. Even when we did a project, it was also theoretical, analysing a project. Doing a real project like developing a theoretical product could have been more interesting.» (Good)
- I didn"t like the introductory part with the basic project management book, I believe that more depth could be reached if more focus was put on the deeper analysis. » (Good)
- I really like the way the course has been taught. It has not been just speaking about theory, it has been more speaking about daily basis situations that, by reasoning about them, take you to conlussions applicable to PM. As it has been my first course in Sweden I don"t know if it"s always like this, or it has only been this course.» (Excellent)
- -» (Excellent)
- I think the course is good, especially as an introduction to the MEI-masterprogram.» (Excellent)
- Challenging and I learned a lot.» (Excellent)
- I liked the parts with politics and shadow systems since it is not something that has been taught much in previous courses.» (Excellent)
- Good mixture between, lectures, project work, seminars and the home exam. » (Excellent)
- Very good and closely related to issues that we probably will face almost every day in our carreers. There are some synergies with the economics of innovation course (good/bad?) is it meant to be like that? the lectures were interesting and fun and we"ll for sure remember the fun and good examples, but sometimes they were a little fuzzy and unclear and I didn"t get the main message among all examples.» (Excellent)
- A good course, demanding hard work. » (Excellent)
- I"ve learned a lot, especially the structure with first the PM part and then its application was interesting.» (Excellent)
- Interesting touch to what could otherwise be a boring subject.» (Excellent)

About you

2. What is your total working experience of product (and service) development projects?

Working as a project member
57 svarande

None»		25		45%
1 - 3 months»		13		23%
4 - 6 months»		11		20%
7 - 12 months»		2		3%
More than a year»		4		7%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.03

Working as a project manager / project leader
56 svarande

None»		41		77%
1 - 3 months»		7		13%
4 - 6 months»		3		5%
7 - 12 months»		1		1%
More than a year»		1		1%
No answer»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.37

3. Where did you receive your Bachelor degree?

I (Industrial Engineering & Management) at Chalmers»		27		47%
M (Mechanical Engineering) at Chalmers»		3		5%
Elsewhere at Chalmers»		6		10%
A Swedish university other than Chalmers»		9		15%
A European university elsewhere than in Sweden»		7		12%
A non-European university»		2		3%
I have no Bachelor degree»		3		5%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.71

About the course

4. This helped me understand the Basics of Project Management

Matrisfråga

- Nothing bad about Lars Hallin, I enjoyed his lectures and teaching. However, I think I would have performed well on the PM Basics by only reading the Maylor book. I think Lars" lectures are important anyway since I know many students did not read the book.»
- The questions on the test are very specific and facts-based, therefore just reading and learning the definitions from the book is more valuable than the lectures in order to pass the test. Even though the lectures are more interesting.»
- The classes were very useful to understand PM basis, but many questions of the exam were not based of what was said in class.»
- -»
- Only used book. Got 14 on test for reference.»
- Bought the book and read it in print and used the e-book to search for specific question I had sometimes. »
- My opinion is that Pinto"s book about PM is more interesting to read. Maylor"s book did not feel that alive. Ofcourse very thorough, but quite boring.»
- Ver good lectures with very good teachers! I enjoyed them! »
- I did not use the lecture hand-outs that much so I am not sure how useful they were»
- Really liked the introduction. However, it could have been more challenging. »
- The classes were much more interesting than a 400 pages book of "what you have to do to be the best"»
- Already read Maylor at a course at KTH. Mostly read my own summary of it.»
- I usually learn by writing a summary myself, not reading someone else"s. »
- Slack - Operations Management also helped much. »
- I think it was good to have the textbook as a base.»
- Very good to have intensive course in the beginning, otherwise the project would have been really hard to structure and we wouldn"t have had any theory for the research study.»
- Maylor is an easy read, and with the help of Lars this module is excellent. With the new reading weeks system however, maybe try to spread the lectures a bit more. So more or less have last lecture early week 3 and then test end week 3. Did my own summary of the book I used for studying, so I don"t know if that helped me or not. I hope it did, otherwise it was quite the waste of time.»
- I think having the PM basics is a great idea. A quick introduction and learning of theory should be a part of more courses. Helps a lot in the later part of the course. »
- Reading the book (in ebook format) helped me a lot to understand the basics of PM, however I know that only the application will show what is really relevant.»
- The module is important and gives a good, tangible foundation that is a major takeaway from the course.»
- The PM lectures were pretty nice, and helped me understand stuff, however the slides are totally useless. »
- The Basics Lectures were very insightful. Lars"s lectures were interesting and engaging. »

Reading the text-book (Maylor) in print
57 svarande

I totally agree»		16		50%
I agree to some extent»		10		31%
I neither agree nor disagree»		3		9%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		3		9%
No answer/Did not use»		25

Genomsnitt: 1.87

Reading the text-book (Maylor) as an e-book
57 svarande

I totally agree»		19		42%
I agree to some extent»		17		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		15%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		1		2%
No answer/Did not use»		12

Genomsnitt: 1.84

Reading a summary of the book
57 svarande

I totally agree»		2		6%
I agree to some extent»		17		51%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		33%
I disagree to some extent»		3		9%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/Did not use»		24

Genomsnitt: 2.45

Reading the lecture hand-outs
57 svarande

I totally agree»		4		7%
I agree to some extent»		27		51%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		25%
I disagree to some extent»		4		7%
I totally disagree»		4		7%
No answer/Did not use»		5

Genomsnitt: 2.55

Attending the PM Basics lectures
57 svarande

I totally agree»		26		45%
I agree to some extent»		24		42%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		8%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/Did not use»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.7

5. The Lectures

Matrisfråga

- The literature seminar (with Jan), the lecture with all the "korvstoppning", the design thinking workshop, the NPD, and the customer involvement were the lectures I remember the most and thought were best. Also robert Stamlin but it was a bit unfortunate that it was so late in the afternoon!»
- The Shadow systems lecture was very interesting and I loved it!»
- I watched Pentagon Wars at home instead. Indeed a really good movie!»
- Jan is generally good, but that might not be solely because of Jan, but rather that the subjects themselves were really interesting.»
- The litterature seminar was very good, great strict in the groups and you really felt that you got something out of it. Most lectures were great, I especially liked "The From End of PM" and "Motivation, Leadership and Power". Perhaps "The Front End of PM" would be good to have earlier in the course.»
- I think that there could have been a bit more discussion in the literature seminar. I learned a lot, but I would"ve wanted to learn more!»
- Jan and Lars were my favourites. Very good pedagogic skills. Overall, I think it was too much focus om Volvo. I am tired of the talk about Volvo.»
- Jan is an excellent speaker, who speaks vividly with enthusiasm. Not being a big fan of lectures, I actually found these rather enjoyable. »
- Did not really appreciate the Stamlin one, was not very engaging»
- It seems like most of the lectures are 50% PM and 50% personal anecdotes. The "speed" of the lectures are so low compared to other universities. »
- Keep ut the good work, Jan! Intresting to listen to»
- I couldn"t assisst to the missing 4 due to personal problems. It would be great to have something better than slides to understand it (videos maybe?)»
- The closing lecture didn"t really add any new info nor revisited the old lectures properly. I felt it was more a reminder of "to dig deeper" when answering the exam questions and when facing difficulties in our future working life. »
- Overall good lectures, especially the ones with Jan and Lars.»
- I think that all the lectures were good. And I like how Lars focused on real life experience. I think that Jan does a good job lecturing also because I think he makes the subjects more fun and therefore easier to listen to. Overall cool lectures! The introduction to the project could have been earlier though. I know it might be hard to do that due to add and drop weeks, but could possible be solved in a way. For example at least that people are informed that a real life project will be needed so that you might be able to start look for one. »
- Special credits to Lars, Anne and Ingo as lecturers.»
- No-one will take a grading like this seriously, as it is observed as too large. Do not trust these results, maybe only what people thought of the course/ or certain individuals in general. I dont think the aim of the research project was clearly stated. Even though i know now it was about a different mindset to research not many people might have known or learnt this.»
- I thought the design thinking workshop would be more thorough , creative and challenging. It felt very shallow and more like something done because it was to rather than to actually teach something, or maybe it was due to the short time..»
- The design thinking workshop was a unique experience, this was one of the best lectures I"ve ever had.»
- Missing a clear brige from Lars basic PM part till Jans, Annes and Sarahs Cecilia Pedersén, She had some good points, but it feels like she was not relly prepered. »
- Overall, I get the feeling that it isn"t that much content after the PM Basics module. Maybe that is because there are so many different events with different lecturers afterwards, so it"s a bit difficult to get a red thread. I think it would help if the different lecturers learn more about what the others have done to avoid overlap. One issue was that there was much overlap between the literature seminar and Anne"s lecture. In general, the readings could be more integrated into the lectures. Of course, the lecture is not supposed to restate what says in the readings, but it could compare, discuss and touch upon it more. Something that I did on my exchange studies was to have student presentations in the classes. One student group would have to present and reflect on the articles for each of the classes, for 5-10 minutes. I think this enhanced learning, both for presenters and the others and provided presentation practice. Feedback for each lecturer: Lars is fun and knowledgeable, but seems a little bit unconfident, he should know that the things he talks about are interesting and signal that. Anne"s lecture was a bit overlapping with the seminar. It had some interesting discussion moments. In general, I thought it was a bit fast, if it was a little bit slower it would have been easier to learn. Sara"s lecture was also interesting, but a little bit fast. More pauses would be good. Jan"s lectures were interesting, he has a special rhetoric with a lot of rhetorical questions and examples which keeps up attention. However, some of them feels like they have no point and are a little bit long, remember that the classes are for us to learn and not to be entertained. Sometimes there"s a trade-off. »
- The subject of and readings about design thinking was very good, the workshop did not add much»
- Generally I think Jan should not go too deep into his metaphores and get to the point a little faster in order to actually take knowledge home !»
- All the lectures were on point and interesting. Jan"s anecdotes were great!»

Course Introduction (Jan)
55 svarande

I totally agree»		28		51%
I agree to some extent»		17		31%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		12%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.68

The PM Basics lectures (Lars)
56 svarande

I totally agree»		31		55%
I agree to some extent»		23		41%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.48

Introduction to the Research Project work (Jan)
56 svarande

I totally agree»		12		22%
I agree to some extent»		28		51%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		20%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.09

The Literature Seminar by Anne (answer only one)
53 svarande

I totally agree»		15		36%
I agree to some extent»		20		48%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		9%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		1		2%
No answer/I did not attend»		12

Genomsnitt: 1.85

The Literature Seminar by Jan (answer only one)
51 svarande

I totally agree»		18		62%
I agree to some extent»		8		27%
I neither agree nor disagree»		3		10%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		22

Genomsnitt: 1.48

Motivation, Leadership and Power (Jan)
56 svarande

I totally agree»		29		54%
I agree to some extent»		20		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		7%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.52

Guest Cecilia Pedersén
57 svarande

I totally agree»		5		9%
I agree to some extent»		15		29%
I neither agree nor disagree»		14		27%
I disagree to some extent»		8		15%
I totally disagree»		9		17%
No answer/I did not attend»		6

Genomsnitt: 3.01

Project Management and the Shadow System (Jan)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		26		50%
I agree to some extent»		20		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		9%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		5

Genomsnitt: 1.63

The Front End of PM (Anne)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		22		40%
I agree to some extent»		22		40%
I neither agree nor disagree»		9		16%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.79

Guest Robert Stamlin: Borderlands
57 svarande

I totally agree»		9		21%
I agree to some extent»		16		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		30%
I disagree to some extent»		3		7%
I totally disagree»		1		2%
No answer/I did not attend»		15

Genomsnitt: 2.3

Customer Involvement (Sara)
56 svarande

I totally agree»		19		37%
I agree to some extent»		19		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		21%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		5

Genomsnitt: 1.94

The Design Thinking Workshop (Ingo)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		37		66%
I agree to some extent»		14		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		3		5%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.46

Challenges to PM (Jan)
56 svarande

I totally agree»		23		45%
I agree to some extent»		23		45%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		9%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		5

Genomsnitt: 1.64

Movie: Pentagon Wars (Lars)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		16		44%
I agree to some extent»		15		41%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		13%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		21

Genomsnitt: 1.69

The Closing Lecture (Jan)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		18		33%
I agree to some extent»		23		43%
I neither agree nor disagree»		10		18%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		4

Genomsnitt: 1.94

6. Who was your Research Project supervisor?

Anne Elerud-Tryde (groups RPA1-RPA5)»		28		50%
Jan Wickenberg (groups RPB1-RPB6)»		27		49%

Genomsnitt: 1.49

7. The Research Project Work

- I was in a group of 6 and I believe that is to many. I also believe it would be good to make sure more than one student in a group is new to the school I really felt like an outsider in my group, the others all knew each other and were very comfortable with each other and I feel my opinions were not heart like they would have been if the group was more mixed»
- I really enjoyed the research project work and it"s really good to get the opportunity to really get deeper in to one topic, otherwise you only get to the surface of everything! However, was very stressful to try to find a project to research!»
- -»
- I think a project is a must in this course!»
- I had a fantastic project group, the best I had ever worked with. However, I am surprised that many other groups did not put much effort at all on this project. Especially exchange students. »
- Lisa was remarkably good at given positive feedback! »
- In my opinion create groups about 2-3 people could be easier for us to develop a better project where all the group is 100% involved and also to facilitate us to arrange meetings.»
- I had TWO people in my group that plagiarised material!!!! Also, I have heard that several other groups had the same problem. I can"t believe that Chalmers admit these students!!! After this research project, I will NEVER recommended Chalmers to any other students or companies. Both other students and companies that I have talked to so far can"t believe that Chalmers is like this. »
- I do think that the student assessment should be individual and that the scale should be greater, so that there is room to make a distinction between people. That is especially hard in a group where the difference between a green and a yellow mark would be huge.»
- Its good that you didnt tell us what to do. Made us think instead. But could been more clear in the begining. For example that it was supose to be written as academic article. Maybe this was your intention, to simulate the uncertainties of working in a project. Then I guess it was succesful!»
- It was Lisa who supervised us. We really liked her. Regarding the presentation, it would be nice to introduce a day at the MEI program where presentation skills are presented and where you get to practice these skills. However, this day doesn"t need to be a part of the project management course. If possible, send the request to Christian. »
- First I have to say that the cooperation was frustrating from the point of view that I was the unique spanish guy in a swedish group and they were usually changing to swedish even if I asked them to speak in english. The situation was better at the final, but in the group I was treated as the erasmus who is unuseful. I tried to talk some times with the group, but was impossible (until the final of the project) to make them change a little bit. I"ve discovered how frustrating can be to be in a group where everyone speaks swedish except you, and how unuseful you are if you don"t understand what is going on. Secondly, related with the student assessment (the common one in the project) it was a fake: My intention was to talk about these problems to put them in the assessment, but the general opinion (5 opinions against mine) was to put everything excellent and that"s all. I"m not saying that the work was no good, I thing that we have done a good work. I"m just saying that the assessment is a lie if there is no motivation to do it from the group.»
- - Was lucky to get a good group - Presentations will mostly be done generically as long as the grade is not affected a lot. We students just reach for "good enough" so we can put more emphasis on our remaining studies. It would be cool to have a a presentation heavily impact your grade so you would have the incentive to prepare more, and work on your rhethorical side. Maybe "selling" a project idea / business case to management.. :).»
- #1: I wouldn"t prefer a fully theoretical course, but I would prefer a new type of case work. I"ve done this before. Too many times. #4 and #5 First of all, we had Lisa not Anne. She was quite hard to get hold of, she didn"t answer any mails or answered them really late and it felt kind of nonchalant to every meeting hearing that she have so much other things to do. HOWEVER, at the last meeting after the preliminary hand-in she was brilliant. Really felt that she read it and offered concrete tips without telling us exactly what to do. The best supervisor I"ve had in that sense. #6 #7 It"s not really feedback just writing that everyone was brilliant :) #8 I wasn"t the one presenting. But I think it is good practice when doing it. »
- The presentations felt unstructured and unnecessary »
- It was Lisa, not Anne. It was good to have a real-world project but it was hard to get a good grip of what to do. But at the same time, it was a good experience.»
- See my comments from question 5 regarding the introduction of the research project.»
- The best part was the opposition comments. Maybe take away the presentations and keep the opposition between the groups. The presentaiton didn"t give us that much except for some practice in presentation skills.»
- The project is a good idea for the course. However, with all the readings, pre-test and home exam it is easily put in the shadows. This of course limits what can be learned from it. Furthermore I think the last supervision was a bit too late. Jan absolutely "chainsawed" our work, which that close to deadline could be fatal for a project group. Our group, luckily, instead of giving up buckled up and logged a (excuse the language) shitloads of hours the last few days. So in the end we were all really happy. Just to clarify, then chainsawing was not bad per se, We needed it. However, it would"ve been better to get it eearlier. And also Jan can be a bit more explicit when supervising. An abundance of metaphors can be quite difficult to understand. Now that sounded a bit evil, so as for clarification number two I want to explain that Im not saying Jan did bad. Supervision was harsh, but good, and really helped us create (in my opinion at least, let"s wait for the grade :) ) a much superior project work. But since nothing is perfect, if we would"ve had it earlier and it was a bit more explicit => near-perfection. »
- It was difficult to find a project to Jans specifications, as there were "none". It was later apparent that it should have concerned product development. I understood that "Our supervisor took great interest in helping us" was not the aim of the course, even though the frustration of not getting directional help helped some groups but totally ruined the project for some groups. The project presentations were not taken fully seriously, as it was one of an extraordinary large amount of phases, but the feedback was valuable. However, "how to get feedback from an audience" was not a new or valuable learning. (Maybe a poorly stated statement)»
- Jan is a good supervisor, however, in meetings it was very unclear most often what Jan really meant. I know it is often intentionally to make us "think". But we need constructive feedback as well, bot just "your not wrong, but your not right either". Because of this the project didn"t become a good learning source as a I believe it could have been. »
- It was Lisa that was our supervisor. I honestly don"t see the point of grading others in a group, if its in the purpose of pointing out the ones how don"t contribute to the project it should just be possible to notify and contact you if it occurs in my opinion... »
- I was a member of the group who didn´,t present»
- I was lucky to be in a very good team for the research project. I liked the way it was organized, that we were assigned to a group randomly with a good distribution of gender and internationality.»
- The research Project group was useful for me, I hadn"t done anything like that before so I was below the average within my group, but I learnt so much while doing it.»
- The project was really good in diving deeper into a theme and thinking critical about project management. Jan is a bit special as supervisor. On one hand, there are some valuable hints and food for thoughts after the session, but on the other hand I feel that he is not very good at listening to what the group have to say. I felt a couple of times that Jan hi-jacked the meeting when we were saying something, not letting us finishing our description and jumping on things before getting the full picture. As Jan is also has quite an authoritative style, interrupting and asking leading questions to prove his point rather than discussing with the group, it fosters a behavior from the group"s side not really expecting to get something useful from the meetings. When Jan is more concrete, discussing different sections or giving reading advice, the supervision is more beneficial.»
- This student assessment makes absolutely no sense if you"re discussing it within the group! Nobody will stand up and say : this guy"s work was terrible we should give him red ! However if its personal/anonym you can just release your rage like I"m doing right now ,)»
- Our supervisor Lisa gave excellent, constructive, feedback. »
- Overall, a great way of learning no matter what the subject is. I wished we"d had more of this in the bachelor"s progam, because you learn a lot from the other group members and hopefully they learn a lot or something from you.»

I would have preferred a fully theoretical course, and not have to investigate a real-world project
57 svarande

I totally agree»		2		3%
I agree to some extent»		5		8%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		9		15%
I totally disagree»		39		68%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.36

It was easy to find a project to study
57 svarande

I totally agree»		8		14%
I agree to some extent»		17		29%
I neither agree nor disagree»		9		15%
I disagree to some extent»		18		31%
I totally disagree»		5		8%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.91

Cooperating with the other students in my Research Project group was frustrating to me
56 svarande

I totally agree»		4		7%
I agree to some extent»		9		16%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		8%
I disagree to some extent»		17		30%
I totally disagree»		21		37%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.75

Our supervisor made herself/himself available for us
57 svarande

I totally agree»		31		55%
I agree to some extent»		18		32%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		5		8%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.66

Our supervisor took great interest in helping us
57 svarande

I totally agree»		30		53%
I agree to some extent»		16		28%
I neither agree nor disagree»		8		14%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.67

Regarding the Student Assessment, I found it difficult to give feedback to others (on their performance)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		3		5%
I agree to some extent»		13		23%
I neither agree nor disagree»		15		27%
I disagree to some extent»		9		16%
I totally disagree»		15		27%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.36

Regarding the Student Assessment, I found it difficult to receive feedback from others (on my performance)
57 svarande

I totally agree»		1		1%
I agree to some extent»		6		11%
I neither agree nor disagree»		15		28%
I disagree to some extent»		12		23%
I totally disagree»		18		34%
No answer»		5

Genomsnitt: 3.76

The Project presentations contributed to my learning of presentation skills
57 svarande

I totally agree»		11		22%
I agree to some extent»		15		30%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		26%
I disagree to some extent»		6		12%
I totally disagree»		4		8%
No answer»		8

Genomsnitt: 2.53

The Project presentations contributed to my learning of how to get feedback from an audience
57 svarande

I totally agree»		8		14%
I agree to some extent»		20		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		16		29%
I disagree to some extent»		6		11%
I totally disagree»		4		7%
No answer»		3

Genomsnitt: 2.59

8. The course administration

- Weekly emails are nice!»
- It would be easier if Time Edit was updated correctly.»
- Really good work with the course portal and I really appreciated the calendar subscription. Never ever take that away!»
- I actually help run a course at Chalmers, and there is no single reason I can come up with to have a separate schedule. Everything you did is possible with the TimeEdit system. Please change this (so I can just use the MEI class schedule).»
- Great with the weekly email!»
- A bit too much info through the pm"s»
- The weekly e-mail was great! »
- I would like the slides to be handed out all at once in before hand. I usually like to print slides so that I can take notes at them by hand. I believe that is how I learn best during class. »
- The e-mails were very useful for me (I usually forget things) Thanks!»
- Liked the e-mails. Made it easier to keep time schedule.»
- In the other course we have taken parallell to this one, it was possible to download all the lectures and literature as a .rar-file. That was useful.»
- The weekly emails are a very good idea. However, they could be somewhat clotted with text. Keep them as simple as possible. Calendar and schedule was bliss for students without the ability to plan, like me. I really liked it and it was very helpful. »
- It is unclear if you mean that "The on-line web schedule" is iCal or TimeEdit. »
- Best course administration I ever had at Chalmers. PingPong and email worked flawlessly. Really made the courses a lot more manageable. »
- The hand-in section was not updated until about one hour before deadline of the project, therefore it could not be uploaded before-hand. »
- I would prefer to have it in time edit, rather than separate online, which even was subject to changes (e.g. the misunderstanding with another class when a room was double booked)»
- The problem with the weekly e-mail, was that we did only achive pre-readings info. to Jans lectures and not Sarahs.»
- Very good.»
- Schedule and to-do list/important dates could be more easily presented»
- Well organized!»
- Greatful for the weekly e-mails, a very good way to show that you take this course seriously and tht motivates the students (at least me).»

Having the course schedule as an iCalendar subscription file was useful to me
56 svarande

I totally agree»		26		59%
I agree to some extent»		6		13%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		11%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		6		13%
No answer/I did not use it»		12

Genomsnitt: 1.97

The on-line web schedule was useful to me
55 svarande

I totally agree»		20		41%
I agree to some extent»		16		33%
I neither agree nor disagree»		8		16%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		3		6%
No answer/I did not use it»		7

Genomsnitt: 1.97

The weekly e-mail was useful to me
56 svarande

I totally agree»		36		66%
I agree to some extent»		11		20%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		9%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer/I did not use it»		2

Genomsnitt: 1.53

The News section was kept relevant at all times
56 svarande

I totally agree»		19		50%
I agree to some extent»		13		34%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		10%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		1		2%
No answer/I did not use it»		18

Genomsnitt: 1.73

The hand-out section was kept relevant
55 svarande

I totally agree»		28		50%
I agree to some extent»		23		41%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		7%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not use it»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.56

Chalmers standard questions

9. How was the course workload?

Too low»		1		1%
Low»		1		1%
Adequate»		18		31%
High»		36		63%
Too high»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- It was like an easy bachelor course. Definitely not a master course. Chalmers is so far behind other universities in Europe and the rest of the world. » (Too low)
- I"m not from Chalmers so I can"t really tell... but I guess Low!» (Low)
- Like I sad before. Good mixture, that help me to be motivating doing different things.» (Adequate)
- From the point that I come from a technical course where the goal of the teachers is to create a nightmare for the students (technical universities carried by old teachers in Spain) the work was low, and maybe make some more compulsory things could be interesting.» (Adequate)
- It was a good amount. Especially when having Economics of Innovation at the same time.» (Adequate)
- I think it was very reasonable.» (Adequate)
- Reasonable workload. The only problem is that securing a research project can make it difficult to get started on the research project as early as you would like to!» (High)
- I don"t find appropriate that a 400 pages book is only a 20% of the final grade. This subject has taken many more hours that other subjects.» (High)
- The first weeks were intense because of stressing through Maylor. The rest of the workload constituted of working with the research project work. The lectures and the literature seminar didn"t imply that much workload.» (High)
- High, but not too high. Almost what i expected from the master"s level.» (High)
- This is a really intense period, caused by two courses that require a lot of work and attention. However, I think that the work load has been possible to handle, but I wouldn"t wish for more! » (High)
- Project work took a lot of time, and therefore you barely had time to read the articles, especially in the other course running in parallell, Economics of Innovation.» (High)
- A very intense course. To some extent too much, but overall good.» (High)
- Too many hand-ins/exams/"moment(SWE)" to enjoy and focus on the content/learnings. Especially exam, presentation, guest lectures & lit.seminar. If the course truly is about product development, then skip the PM basics, and fight for a project management course. If it is only about project management, focus more on the book and related subjects (+ project work) and fight for a product development course.» (High)
- Project took a lot more effort than what you learnt from it. Could have learnt more by having other course parts as well and limiting the scope of the project in my opinion. » (High)
- Especially reading 400 pages in the first 3 weeks was tough.» (High)

10. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

11. What should definitely be changed to next year?

12. Additional comments