ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

Visa resultat

Här 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.

TEK365 2014-15 LP1, TEK365/DIT844

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2014-10-23 - 2014-10-31
Antal svar: 61
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 74%
Kontaktperson: Jan Wickenberg»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs

About you

This is part B of the Course Evaluation Questionnaire

You find part A in Ping-Pong under Hand-ins. Part A is short, and consists of five questions.

1. What is your general impression of the course?

61 svarande

Worst course ever»0 0%
Fair»3 4%
Adequate»3 4%
Good»26 42%
Excellent»21 34%
Best course ever»8 13%
No answer»0

Genomsnitt: 4.45

- I mean, the course could be improved a lot. Overall, OK course. I didn"t have that high expectations for this course.» (Adequate)
- The cases are good, but if there is more basic knowledge guide, it is better.» (Good)
- in my view, on of the best part was case seminars» (Good)
- Not my course of interest. I"m more of a technical guy, but I do want to start my own business, so it is useful.» (Good)
- I would say it is more than "good" but not excellent» (Good)
- Good balance between cases and lectures. » (Excellent)
- Good lecture. Learned a lot. » (Excellent)
- Jan teaches well, with the vast examples there is no way you can fail to understand.. military stories just funny i loved it» (Excellent)
- The course gave a broad view of how to manage projects that will be very useful. The teaching level was very high.» (Excellent)
- The course was well structured and the schedule was well built. There was only one negative aspect, You can tell that Per has a great knowledge but due to poor English, it seems like he simplifies what is said and it"s not conveyed in a good way. It"s a shame since I would like to hear so much more!» (Excellent)
- I wouldn"t say Best course ever (I enjoy Programming), but It"s an excellent course. I enjoyed every lecture I attended. I have learnt many new things and everyday I sat in class to listen, I was thrilled and felt like, "yeah, this is what I came here (Chalmers) to learn". It has really changed my thinking process. I have come to appreciate the many reading materials we were flooded with because I have learned by experience that a reading person is a thinker as I have become one. The practical application of every lesson through the various stories and analogies was a blessing to me. Above all I have treasured the lessons on The Shadow System and Organisational Politics.» (Excellent)
- Lots of work, but covered a lot and gave the impression that I learned much.» (Best course ever)

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

Matrisfråga

Working as a project member
61 svarande

None»17 28%
1 - 3 months»7 11%
4 - 6 months»6 10%
7 - 12 months»10 16%
More than a year»20 33%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 3.15

Working as a project manager / project leader
59 svarande

None»37 63%
1 - 3 months»12 20%
4 - 6 months»5 8%
7 - 12 months»1 1%
More than a year»3 5%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.63

3. Where did you receive your Bachelor degree?

61 svarande

D&IT at Chalmers»23 37%
Elsewhere at Chalmers»3 4%
A Swedish university other than Chalmers»8 13%
A European university elsewhere than in Sweden»7 11%
A non-European university»20 32%
No answer»0

Genomsnitt: 2.96

About the course

4. This helped me understand the Basics of Project Management

In the best of worlds, a project management textbook would have been taught before this course started. During the first years our project management courses at the master level were run without a PM textbook. By student demand we later introduced the PM Basics module and allotting four (now five) lectures to the module.

Matrisfråga

- Really good book and lectures. »
- i used a number of methods to understand this course, in the earlier weeks i read the e text book from which i made a summary from the whole book with accordance to the slides, and for the PM lectures they were too fast and yet by then i hadnt yet covered most of the book. The teacher could cover five chapters in one lecture»
- I decided to read the book (Maylor) instead of going to the PM Basics lectures once I found out that the lectures would not cover everything in the book.»
- Although the textbook was well written and included all aspects of a project, I found that it sometimes lacked useful examples of the written theory. The book had some examples from actual companies but they just confirmed the statements from the book and didn"t explain or gave concrete examples on why some things were as described. (Fuzzy formulation, sorry)»
- The book is extremely big and boring. And like most textbooks, it tries to be comprehensive and oversized to justify its cost (am I being a little cynical?). This makes for a boring, unengaging read. The lectures were far more interesting and took the most important bits of information (the 20% that"s useful 80% of the time). I understand that you want every student to have the knowledge necessary to do the rest of the course well and being tested on the textbook is one way of doing this. I think a better approach is to make a list of every concept and skill a student would need to be successful in this course and then have a test where students must demonstrate an ability to do these skills (instead of asking questions like "what does Flygberg say about topic X?", which only demonstrates that a student read the book, not that he understands the concepts). I"m not saying that students shouldn"t have to do any work outside of the lectuers. Three weeks is a short time, so not all of this material might be covered in lectures, so some reading is required.»
- I think only syllabus should have been defined and in lectures all of the main points covered. A book could be recommended, but here it was almost imposed. It was always , Maylor says this, that etc.»
- The PM test is a great way to promote reading the book. However, an idea can be to split up the PM test in two parts for the first time, to not force the student to read the whole book for a single moment, that encourages "temporal knowledge". It will be easier for the student to remember the parts read as well.»
- It was a few weeks ago now... But as I recall it, Lars Hallin went off-topic a lot and as the test regarded so much information, not much (was anything?) of what he said was actually present on the test.»
- Felt like an enormous challenge coming from not having had to read a single course book in the bachelor to suddenly having to memorize a whole book, but it worked. I learned lots.»
- I don"t think it"s realistic to read and *understand* the textbook in such a short period of time. Thus, I don"t see the benefits of having PM Basics test. Yes, it is possible to remember and reproduce some definitions from the book. But this knowledge seems superficial to me.»
- Having read the book, the PM Basics lectures seemed like a slow rehash of the book"s content with little added value. I would either want more direction on what to focus or perhaps focus on relating the different theories to actual situations.»
- Attending the PM Basics Lecturers wasn"t very beneficial as the book was easy to understand. Nevertheless I attended all lectures as a way of knowing what to read next and not wanting to miss out on anything in case there was a difference of opinion between Lars and Maylor. Perhaps the only PM Basics lecture I couldnt do without was the one on the Critical Path because I learnt something from Lars about not leaving any nodes hanging, Maylor doesnt mention that, unless I missed it. »
- Particularly good lectures! The lectures in this course felt much more meaningful than usual due to that the lecturers had experience from industry.»

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

I totally agree»21 51%
I agree to some extent»10 24%
I neither agree nor disagree»6 14%
I disagree to some extent»2 4%
I totally disagree»2 4%
No answer/Did not use»18

Genomsnitt: 1.87

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

I totally agree»19 38%
I agree to some extent»16 32%
I neither agree nor disagree»7 14%
I disagree to some extent»4 8%
I totally disagree»3 6%
No answer/Did not use»11

Genomsnitt: 2.1

Reading a summary of the book
60 svarande

I totally agree»12 25%
I agree to some extent»24 50%
I neither agree nor disagree»7 14%
I disagree to some extent»4 8%
I totally disagree»1 2%
No answer/Did not use»12

Genomsnitt: 2.12

Reading the lecture hand-outs
60 svarande

I totally agree»9 17%
I agree to some extent»21 40%
I neither agree nor disagree»17 32%
I disagree to some extent»4 7%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer/Did not use»8

Genomsnitt: 2.36

Attending the PM Basics lectures
61 svarande

I totally agree»24 40%
I agree to some extent»22 36%
I neither agree nor disagree»9 15%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»3 5%
No answer/Did not use»1

Genomsnitt: 1.96

5. The Lectures

This was a good lecture

Matrisfråga

- Generally Jan is the best on this course but honestly, i never understood anything Bing ever said , he is just hard to understand PM basic lectures were really brief to the point but its better than nothing. All that Eva talked about we already knew, wish she had something new to say to us»
- I decided to read the book (Maylor) instead of going to the PM Basics lectures once I found out that the lectures would not cover everything in the book. Bing gave a very inspiring lecture, and one of my favorite lectures in the course. It was by far the most inpsiring lecture I have ever been to in any course ever, because there was such a positive vibe in the classroom and energy I never seen before and after. I would like to have had more lectures like this. The Literature Seminar wasn"t interesting except for free snacks and Jan inviting us to a fine location. Actually, we should have had more lecture in this fine location. Managing the Shadows of the Organization didn"t bring up anything of interest. The avoidance to connect this theories to contemporary events really lost my interest in this lecture. Because we all know that it is possible to make qualified guesses based on a bunch of hypothetical reasoning, but what"s the real use of it remains unclear to me. What"s the benefit for me in attending this lecture?»
- Jan"s lectures were usually very good, especially the shadows of the organization. They usually have very good examples and cover topics often skipped in academia.»
- The literature seminar felt like waste of time. It could perhaps have been held at a higher complexity level, and I would have found it more interesting to discuss the articles. Overall I would have preferred a deeper discussion of the psychology behind the relationships that a PM maintains.»
- Some literature seminars were held by Per Svensson. These were also good. He clearly divided the case material on the board. How ever, it was hard to hear his voice during his lectures.»
- It"s a shame that I missed the Shadow lecture, will there be a possibility to attend next years version of it? »
- The movie was great (watched it at home). I would have watched it in school if I knew it would be on the home exam.»
- Eva"s lecture was very basic. Would have wanted something more there. It was good that Jan paused the movie at several times to discuss things when we still had it clear in our minds.»
- Only point I disagree with Eva"s lecture was that she spent most of the time lecturing about things I had already studied. Felt unnecessary to be there. Other than that I have no comments. It felt a bit light, but that may be since I already was familiar and had worked using the concepts she discussed.»
- Socratic method is good for giving some thought to relevant managerial problems. But after discussing the question it would be extremely demanding to outline possible answers. This remark is more about the contracting and learning cases rather than the lectures.»
- I ended up skipping many of the PM Basic lectures, because I didn"t feel they gave me any more knowledge than what I already got from the book. The Management by Models lecture was a bit easy for me since it seemed to focus alot on agile processes (specifically scrum) and since I"m already well versed in that subject I would have wanted something less basic. Either more advanced topics or a unusual angle or stories from the "real" world.»
- Initially I had difficulties understanding the Maylor textbook. I had to read Chapter One three times. I could not relate the concepts well but when I read the EM Company case, everything I read came together as I could immediately identify what wasn"t right according to Project Manaement. This earned me a Toreborone choclate from Jan. What an honor. The Shadows of Organisation lecture in combination with the Pentagon Wars movie have become some of my most treasured lessons in this course. The movie has joined all pieces of the Shadow system lessons in my mind. Management by models was an very good lecture as I learnt something new from it though some of the things were repetitions of what I had already learnt in the course "Requirements Engineering" Overall, I enjoyed Jan"s way of teaching, many times he made me laugh (I say me because these are my personal experiences) at the same time teaching me to be a thinker. I really appreciate that very much. To have a critical thinking mind is my greatest desire and I believe it is this ability to reason and apply Knowledge that makes up wisdom.»

Course Introduction (Jan)
61 svarande

I totally agree»35 60%
I agree to some extent»18 31%
I neither agree nor disagree»4 6%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not attend»3

Genomsnitt: 1.5

The PM Basics lectures (Lars)
61 svarande

I totally agree»21 35%
I agree to some extent»26 44%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 13%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»2 3%
No answer/I did not attend»2

Genomsnitt: 1.94

The Case of the EM Company (Bing)
61 svarande

I totally agree»10 18%
I agree to some extent»23 43%
I neither agree nor disagree»13 24%
I disagree to some extent»5 9%
I totally disagree»2 3%
No answer/I did not attend»8

Genomsnitt: 2.35

The Literature Seminar (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»18 34%
I agree to some extent»23 44%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 15%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer/I did not attend»8

Genomsnitt: 1.94

Managing the Shadows of the Organization (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»35 67%
I agree to some extent»14 26%
I neither agree nor disagree»2 3%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not attend»8

Genomsnitt: 1.4

Challenges to Project Management (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»31 53%
I agree to some extent»22 37%
I neither agree nor disagree»4 6%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not attend»2

Genomsnitt: 1.56

Management by Models (Eva Hådding)
61 svarande

I totally agree»3 7%
I agree to some extent»9 22%
I neither agree nor disagree»9 22%
I disagree to some extent»12 30%
I totally disagree»7 17%
No answer/I did not attend»21

Genomsnitt: 3.27

Movie: Pentagon Wars (Jan)
61 svarande

I totally agree»27 60%
I agree to some extent»14 31%
I neither agree nor disagree»4 8%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not attend»16

Genomsnitt: 1.48

The Closing Lecture (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»31 59%
I agree to some extent»17 32%
I neither agree nor disagree»2 3%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not attend»8

Genomsnitt: 1.51

6. The Organizing Case A (Per Svensson)

Matrisfråga

- Per gives really good feeback on the cases despite not being able to grade it on time. Otherwise case A was good. Per analyzed each point involved which was also good.»
- At least I don"t see why this assignment was needed. I already knew about everything in the lecture. In the group, we just worked four hours writing this hand in the day before deadline. The feedback was very good and with deep analysis on the essay. I don"t really want to go into why the lecture wasn"t interesting, but I"ll leave it to you as an exercise to figure out.»
- Per had some problems with the strenght of his voice, which made it hard to comprehend what he said at times. A microphone would be a good tool for him.»
- During both the lecture and the seminar by Per, it seemed as though he only asked questions when he knew the answer - other answers were not even considered. For me, this is not very interesting.»
- The lectures and seminars with Per was not that great. It was really hard to hear what he was saying and the general feeling during the seminars was that there was only one right answer and no room for discussion, which made me very unmotivated to answer any question because of the high risk of looking stupid.»
- Occasionally hard to hear Per. I didn"t really enjoy the way he ran the seminars. Seemed like it was more geared towards us all throwing out ideas, but no thoughts of his own. It made me think that I should have a 10 on all of the case studies, because he never argued for or against an idea.»
- During the seminar, Per has a tendency of instead of opting for discussion, instead pointing to individuals/groups to answer. He also tends to write anything you say without a discussion, this gives the impression that it"s correct and others don"t really counter-argument.»
- XP and open source were retarded and weren"t very applicable to project management. How open source was constructed in the case competition didn"t make any sense when they had Linux as a role model of such a success, since Linux is very traditional with their contributor hierarchy. XP just felt lazy by putting two people in a room for a few weeks with a fraction of the time that the other teams used. The only model that was relevant was the traditional one, which was easy to argue for since the other two were so retarded. »
- Per spoke very quietly during the first lecture, but he was probably ill or something.»
- I didn"t really think the case seminars were needed. They could have been useful if we had them before the case deadline. Now it was more like "go there to pass the course"-attitude Of course you would have to change the content to not give away the answers.. You probably want us to think by ourselves so it is possible that the best solution would be to remove them»
- Basically only two of us wrote the whole essay.»
- I seriously don"t understand how we can give a concrete recommendation basing on the assignment. The input data is too fuzzy. For example, it says that "They are willing to spend a certain amount of money". Is this amount enough for building a large team or just for an XP team of 2 programmers? »
- It seemed to me that Per was constantly looking for the answer he had come up with himself and showing disregard or even disapointment when you had the "wrong" answer - even if it was a valid/interesting idea.»
- Being the first case. Wasn"t very sure how to answer. Perhaps more guidance must be given on how to go about the analysis of problems at the beginning than at the end in a seminar»

The assignment was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»26 43%
I agree to some extent»29 48%
I neither agree nor disagree»3 5%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»2 3%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.71

The case lecture content was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»20 33%
I agree to some extent»22 37%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 13%
I disagree to some extent»6 10%
I totally disagree»3 5%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 2.15

The case lecture was well presented
61 svarande

I totally agree»7 11%
I agree to some extent»16 27%
I neither agree nor disagree»14 23%
I disagree to some extent»18 30%
I totally disagree»4 6%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 2.93

The case seminar was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»19 31%
I agree to some extent»23 38%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 13%
I disagree to some extent»7 11%
I totally disagree»3 5%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 2.2

The case seminar was chaired in a good way (by Per, answer only one)
55 svarande

I totally agree»16 34%
I agree to some extent»8 17%
I neither agree nor disagree»11 23%
I disagree to some extent»8 17%
I totally disagree»3 6%
No answer»9

Genomsnitt: 2.43

The case seminar was chaired in a good way (by Jan, answer only one)
41 svarande

I totally agree»19 73%
I agree to some extent»7 26%
I neither agree nor disagree»0 0%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer»15

Genomsnitt: 1.26

The essay was marked in time and feedback was provided (when asked for)
60 svarande

I totally agree»26 44%
I agree to some extent»15 25%
I neither agree nor disagree»5 8%
I disagree to some extent»9 15%
I totally disagree»3 5%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 2.1

Our case group worked well together with this case
60 svarande

I totally agree»19 31%
I agree to some extent»17 28%
I neither agree nor disagree»11 18%
I disagree to some extent»4 6%
I totally disagree»9 15%
No answer»0

Genomsnitt: 2.45

7. The Planning Case B (Per Svensson & Lars Hallin)

Matrisfråga

- Case B was hard because of the microsoft project and we scored a low mark. It was well presented but when it came to doing it in our groups it just got hard.It took the longest to be marked.»
- This case was very fun to do. First of all, I love Lars Hallin"s MS Project lecture. It was fun sitting back and getting a crash course of the tool. The group work was good.»
- Per had some problems with the strenght of his voice, which made it hard to comprehend what he said at times. A microphone would be a good tool for him. Attending the seminare with Per made the discussion very directed and not as dynamic as it could have been. However, the class was unsure of what to discuss which also made the discussion worse.»
- Are groups set up in 4 because it makes it easier for the teachers? By making groups larger, a lot of people can hide behind the work of others and teachers probably won"t hear much about it. For example, in my alpha and bravo groups, I had two people who were essentially useless. If groups were smaller, there"s a good chance I might have been the only one doing the work and then I would have complained to the teachers. But since I had one person to share the workload with and the other students technically showed up, I wasn"t sure if I had grounds for complaint. I know you"re aware of the problem, as you mentioned how some people only want a 3 and others want a 5 and that groups should address this issue early on.»
- I had the impression that we were not given the information we would have needed to solve this case well. On the seminar, it seemed as though we had done everything wrong, but on the essay, we got a rather good mark. So I have difficulty knowing how well I actually understood the case.»
- Working in groups were there seems that no one cares is... interesting or awful, I"m not sure yet.»
- I feel that Per was looking for precise changes based on general rules and rules of thumb in the case which we did not had any knowledge about. "It is common to do like this..., you all added to small buffers or whatever". When changes are made to the case they should be e-mailed and not added to ping pong, I saw it long after the case was finished.»
- our case seminar was by Per and was really good.»
- The MS Project lecture was to late presented, there was only a few days to complete the assignment.»
- Same as case A.»
- The Per one seems to not be in the questionaire. However, I think he did better on this one and it was really interesting as a case study!»
- This case was really difficult. It felt like we were fumbling around in the dark, with no clear guidelines on how to work nor a good knowledge ground. We did not really have any idea of what we were doing, most of our work was based on guesses. One thing specifically was how to account for the problems that we have identified (i.e. suiting change the project to account for the problems). I"m not sure if we had a lecture on that topic or not. Per said several good things (how to approach such a problem, methods, tricks etc.) during the case seminar which would have been needed at the start of the case.»
- Too little time to work with the group. We got the MS Project file on Thursday, and we needed to hand it in on Tuesday. However, the lecture on MS Project by Per was Thursday. So we didn"t want to meet on the weekend so basically we were only able to work on Thursday, Friday and Monday. Furthermore, it was very unclear what we were supposed to do. We applied several changes to the MS Project file and we only got shit for it in our feedback, so it would have been appreciated if we got to learn how to actually work with a Gantt chart. Maylor doesn"t really make it clear what you are supposed to do to the planning to minimize risks.»
- It was really hard to use the software. Probably it would have been easier to use pen and paper or something like that to focus on the task instead of the software»
- Maybe give more information about the project will be better to work with the case.»
- This was by far the hardest case and felt a lot heavier than the others. The huge list of tasks to plan combined with a lack of information made it very hard to envision how to modify the plan and it just seemed really daunting right of the bat to even find a good place where to begin.»
- Microsoft Project made it hard. It felt like what Maylor said may happen, technology made it more inflexible. Two of us who discussed and planned.»
- I think it would be extremely beneficial if Lars could show us how to correct the plan in MS Project in order to mitigate the uncovered risks.»
- Per talks english with a heavy accent, and talks rather softly. It"s really hard to hear what he"s saying if you sit behind the first row. I think the technical aspects of navigating ms project ate away on our time to really discuss the case. This case came a bit as a shock, because I had absolutely no idea how to tackle the problem. It didn"t feel like what I read in Maylor was applicable and I couldn"t remember anything really useful from the lectures either. I would have liked to discuss the case with a teachers assistant or similar.»
- I tend to think that working with MS Project in modifying the given plan was a challenge and we didn"t do much of that. What we covered much was Risk Analysis. If the goal of this assignment is to teach Students how carry out Risk analysis and make approriate plans probably with a tool like MS Project, I would like to suggest Students be given an opportunity to come up with their own fictitious projects, which they can plan and analysee risks for and then implement their plans in MS Project from Scratch. In the seminar each group can then be given an opportunity to present its project and Ghantt Chart to the entire class in about 8 minutes. This I feel would build more confidence and competence in risk analysis for one"s projects and actual planning. The mpp file with an existing plan can be handed out as just a way of practicing to modify other people"s plans.»
- The essays weren"t marked in time, but we didn"t ask for them as Jan had brought that up on one of the lectures. This Case could also be more clearer, we didn"t actually know what was expected from us.»

The assignment was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»20 34%
I agree to some extent»25 43%
I neither agree nor disagree»9 15%
I disagree to some extent»3 5%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 1.96

The case lecture content was relevant
59 svarande

I totally agree»14 25%
I agree to some extent»18 32%
I neither agree nor disagree»16 28%
I disagree to some extent»6 10%
I totally disagree»2 3%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 2.35

The case lecture was well presented
60 svarande

I totally agree»8 14%
I agree to some extent»18 31%
I neither agree nor disagree»14 24%
I disagree to some extent»13 22%
I totally disagree»4 7%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 2.77

The MS Project lecture was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»26 50%
I agree to some extent»14 26%
I neither agree nor disagree»10 19%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»8

Genomsnitt: 1.78

The case seminar was relevant
59 svarande

I totally agree»15 26%
I agree to some extent»21 37%
I neither agree nor disagree»14 25%
I disagree to some extent»4 7%
I totally disagree»2 3%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 2.23

The case seminar was chaired in a good way (by Jan, answer only one)
53 svarande

I totally agree»11 30%
I agree to some extent»12 33%
I neither agree nor disagree»9 25%
I disagree to some extent»3 8%
I totally disagree»1 2%
No answer»17

Genomsnitt: 2.19

The essay was marked in time and feedback was provided (when asked for)
60 svarande

I totally agree»4 7%
I agree to some extent»4 7%
I neither agree nor disagree»10 17%
I disagree to some extent»20 35%
I totally disagree»19 33%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 3.8

Our case group worked well together with this case
60 svarande

I totally agree»11 18%
I agree to some extent»16 27%
I neither agree nor disagree»11 18%
I disagree to some extent»10 17%
I totally disagree»10 17%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 2.86

8. The Contracting Case C (Jan)

Matrisfråga

- Also for 9 please leave constructed kritic»
- This was my best case because the baggage handling was a thriller and we performed well on it. It was an excellent case.»
- I have to "agree to some extent" that the group worked well, because we had some guys who didn"t contribute as well as the others. It was frustrating that there was no motivation from the others to read the text and make a significant contribution (I say significant because we had to write and explain every single idea that these guys contributed in the hand in).»
- I would have preferred to get at least a sentence of feedback in PingPong, without having to ask for it. Although I know there is no scientific evidence that this matters, I prefer it.»
- our case seminar was by Per and was really good.»
- This was a bit step back towards the comment on case A for the seminar. However the case itself was a bit much on the readings, I was ill at the time so I guess that might have been a factor for having a bit more rough time to work.»
- 2 of the group members (foreigners) couldn"t really contribute a whole lot. Partly because of lacking English skills.»
- One student didn"t really participate and another only a little. A written feedback would be appreciated.»
- Almost no feedback»
- No feedback was given opposed to the previous cases.»
- For me, getting to choose my own group was a huge benefit. While cultural exploration and unexpected thinking seem great on paper, my experience was closer to people not being reachable, on time, taking responsibility or english proficient. It was increadibly demoralizing to work in that group and I learned much less than in the later cases.»
- The case lecture was relevant but presented too quickly. I didnt quite grasp the principal agency theory but made efforts to catch up in the reading materials.»
- No group-wise feedback in Ping-pong, which was a minus. Also, the marking was quite late. »

The assignment was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»30 50%
I agree to some extent»23 38%
I neither agree nor disagree»6 10%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.59

The case lecture content was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»23 42%
I agree to some extent»23 42%
I neither agree nor disagree»7 12%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»6

Genomsnitt: 1.75

The case lecture was well presented
60 svarande

I totally agree»23 42%
I agree to some extent»23 42%
I neither agree nor disagree»5 9%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»6

Genomsnitt: 1.79

The case seminar was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»27 45%
I agree to some extent»20 33%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 13%
I disagree to some extent»3 5%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.83

The case seminar was chaired in a good way
60 svarande

I totally agree»28 47%
I agree to some extent»19 32%
I neither agree nor disagree»9 15%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.79

The essay was marked in time and feedback was provided (when asked for)
60 svarande

I totally agree»6 10%
I agree to some extent»10 16%
I neither agree nor disagree»17 28%
I disagree to some extent»12 20%
I totally disagree»14 23%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 3.3

Our case group worked well together with this case
60 svarande

I totally agree»20 34%
I agree to some extent»20 34%
I neither agree nor disagree»6 10%
I disagree to some extent»9 15%
I totally disagree»3 5%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 2.22

9. The Learning Case D (Jan Wickenberg)

Matrisfråga

- This case was marked in time and we got back our results early despite that it was very easy to get lost in the lots of text.»
- Skip.»
- Our group had a dropout in this case which made it a bit harder since we expected him/her to contribute. Very good that Jan didn"t let late students enter the seminare. Gave the impression that he cared about the content of the seminare.»
- Jan does a very good job with the case seminars as he forces us to think about nonobvious issues.»
- Same as before, I would have preferred to get some words of feedback, without having to ask for it.»
- The seminar was really interesting with dialogues and thoguhts. I was thrilled with the extra input at the end. Shame the seminar was so short.»
- 2 of the group members (foreigners) couldn"t really contribute a whole lot. Partly because of lacking English skills. Interesting case, but I wish the issue was better resolved, if possible. How the learning SHOULD be done.»
- One student didn"t really participate and another only a little. A written feedback would be appreciated.»
- Lots to read, but learned a proportionate amount. One of the more interesting cases.»
- So many texts to read. Really challenging case. Although it seemed kinda easy at first, it required a lot of discussion among our group and it was really difficult to reach a consensus of what to write for this specific case as there were some conflicting points of view. »

The assignment was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»35 58%
I agree to some extent»21 35%
I neither agree nor disagree»3 5%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 1.51

The case lecture content was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»27 46%
I agree to some extent»17 29%
I neither agree nor disagree»12 20%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 1.82

The case lecture was well presented
61 svarande

I totally agree»22 37%
I agree to some extent»26 44%
I neither agree nor disagree»8 13%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»3

Genomsnitt: 1.84

The case seminar was relevant
61 svarande

I totally agree»27 45%
I agree to some extent»23 38%
I neither agree nor disagree»6 10%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 1.76

The case seminar was chaired in a good way
60 svarande

I totally agree»30 51%
I agree to some extent»20 34%
I neither agree nor disagree»7 12%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer»2

Genomsnitt: 1.63

The essay was marked in time and feedback was provided (when asked for)
61 svarande

I totally agree»14 23%
I agree to some extent»18 30%
I neither agree nor disagree»15 25%
I disagree to some extent»9 15%
I totally disagree»4 6%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 2.51

Our case group worked well together with this case
60 svarande

I totally agree»22 37%
I agree to some extent»18 30%
I neither agree nor disagree»7 11%
I disagree to some extent»8 13%
I totally disagree»4 6%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 2.22

10. The course administration

Matrisfråga

- Generally, i never wondered where i had to be because there was proper communication at all times and the icalendar was perfect as it gives the rooms too.»
- No idea about what you mean by "The News section". In general, the Pingpong as a portal was very difficult to navigate. Didn"t even know there was a News section before reading this course evaluation. Can"t even find "The News section" when I know it exists. The on-line web schedule was actually useful, so Thank you, Jan, because that you did manage very well. I don"t like to use university email, calendar, and what other services. Hats off to you for allowing me to use my personal calendar. My comment is, skip the weekly emails, empower the calendar.»
- As someone who did not go to Chalmers for undergraduate and takes courses in Interaction Design (which does not use Ping Pong), I had never checked the news and had idea useful information was there until week 8. This is more an issue with me, but there are a lot of foreign Master"s students who have no idea about how to use Ping Pong.»
- weekly e-mail was perfect»
- I have to admit I didn"t check the website that frequently but the mail and calendar were awesome! You got this nice feeling when reading the mail, was a bit like the sections mail that gets sent out every week during the first 3 years, it"s really appreciated from everyone I"ve talked to in the course!»
- All courses should use an iCalender, it"s awesome. The weekly e-mail is fantastic, all information that I need in one place, sent to me when I need it. It definitely minimizes confusion!»
- Every course should use iCalendar instead of the damn time-edit that is never descriptive nor updated regularly.»
- I love the weekly emails. I feel very well taken care of, and it makes me excited to come to the lectures.»
- Really good to have a Google Calendar. Much easier to get information from than getting a CSV-file from TimeEdit.»

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

I totally agree»43 82%
I agree to some extent»5 9%
I neither agree nor disagree»2 3%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not use it»9

Genomsnitt: 1.28

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

I totally agree»39 70%
I agree to some extent»8 14%
I neither agree nor disagree»5 9%
I disagree to some extent»2 3%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer/I did not use it»6

Genomsnitt: 1.5

The weekly e-mail was useful to me
61 svarande

I totally agree»44 72%
I agree to some extent»11 18%
I neither agree nor disagree»4 6%
I disagree to some extent»1 1%
I totally disagree»1 1%
No answer/I did not use it»0

Genomsnitt: 1.42

The News section was kept relevant at all times
61 svarande

I totally agree»23 52%
I agree to some extent»11 25%
I neither agree nor disagree»10 22%
I disagree to some extent»0 0%
I totally disagree»0 0%
No answer/I did not use it»17

Genomsnitt: 1.7

Chalmers standard questions

11. How was the course workload?

61 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 1%
Adequate»13 21%
High»42 70%
Too high»4 6%
No answer»1

Genomsnitt: 3.81

- The PM Basic test maybe a week later» (Adequate)
- Workload was manageable» (Adequate)
- Totally dependent on the group in the cases» (High)
- High but good. With the pressure of producing the cases, learning was supported. The first exam of the basics was a bit early though.» (High)
- It was a lot of work, but I expect that for a Master"s course.» (High)
- The amount of papers needed to be read increased significantly over the later cases.» (High)
- Having constant deadlines and meetings take time, but it"s a good preparation of what will be needed. I chose High because I think that High workload is good, it"s the way it should be.» (High)
- High workload but in a good way - I enjoyed it» (High)
- It is on the verge of being too high. I spent a lot of time on the course, and together with Requirements Engineering which was by all means not a course with low workload it felt like more.» (High)
- The work load was high in the early weeks but pressure subseeded later on after the PM Basics test.» (High)
- In the weeks when we had the Cases was stressful, but at the end the workload was low.» (High)
- I personally had to spend too much time studying for Project Management that I was a little behind to the other course I am taking. Although the course context is not that hard, it requires a lot of effort to improve. Therefore my only complain is that I had to focus, like 70% on project management and 30% on the other course I take especially during the 4 weeks of the Case studies» (High)
- Every week there was something, a hand in, a group work, a test or a test and hand in.» (Too high)
- The workload was way higher than what was planned because of group members unwillingness of working.» (Too high)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- maylor. Basic lectures. Ms project. cases»
- I definitely enjoyed the Managing the Shadows of the Organization (Jan) lecture and also the Pentagon War. Definitely informative.»
- Weekly email, icalendar, thrilling courses .. ooh and movie time»
- Cases as well as guest lectures»
- The calendar and the frequent updates (I think you updated that every day, GOOD WORK!). So we don"t have to use the user-unfriendly Time Edit service.»
- The cases. The entusiasm from Jan in the lectures was inspiring which helps out learning.»
- Jan"s lectures!!!»
- The PM Basics part of the course, the case assignments»
- The lectures by Jan. The out-of-the-box thinking that is never going to be written in a textbook.»
- Lars Hallin»
- The pentagon movie lecture. made it easy to connect course learnings with real life situations and made it easier to remember»
- Working with cases was useful.»
- The Case studies »
- The layup of the couse: The basic test, the cases and the home exam.»
- The Microsoft project lecture, the basic test, case seminars.»
- Jan and Lars are excellent teachers!»
- Jan Wickenberg is a good lecturere. Please keep his lectures. Lars Hallin is also a good lecturer keep his PM Basic lectures.»
- The whole course content should be preserved to next year.»
- The case study!»
- The case studies»
- Overall the structure of the course was good.»
- The PM basic, the guest lecture and some of the cases»
- Jan should keep lecturing. Organizing case and The BAE case»
- The right text book has been chosen. The four business cases are interesting to study.»
- Group projects»
- The cases were good. The PM basics seemed very fast and made for a rough start of the course, even though the material isn"t completely new to me. But otherwise I think the PM basics is good to have.»
- Cases every week, weekly mail and the atmosphere during lectures, you feel like you can say whatever without beeing "the dumb one"»
- PM basic»
- The course administration worked well and should be kept.»
- Case A,C and D»
- The basics PM part»
- Mashing through the book in the beginning was pretty helpful, and having two chances to do the test.»
- Jan Wickenberg"s lectures about challenges and shadow system. Things that are not taught outside university»
- Everything was good, really good course»
- The whole organization of the course is good.I think it is OK if it stays like that.»
- Jan"s lectures.»
- The learning case was really interesting. The double opportunities to make the basic test was also really good. Keep the Feynman texts.»
- Seminar. It is the most useful way to help me nderstant the case and the knowlege of it.»
- Jan"s lectures. They were the bomb. Especially the Shadow System one.»
- The Pentagon Wars.»
- The Maylor book. I needed that firm basis for the later parts of the course.»
- Everything.»
- Cases and "special lectures"»
- Two occasions to write the Basic Test.»
- The seminars were really good! Keep them.»
- Lecturers»
- The literature studies in the beginning was very useful and should be graded and more emphasized.»
- case seminars»

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Maybe mandotory pm basic lectures or workshops and no basic test, I don"t really get why Maylors reports on Bent Flyvbjerg"s work on optimism is relevent....»
- give feedback in time. I"d rather get 4 on c and 8 on d and learn something than make the same misstakes again and get 6 on both for compensation. »
- Honestly, I felt that the case studies could be done better. I learned from them, but the seminars and the intro lecture to them weren"t that great. It may also be due to the fact that I couldn"t hear Per. He was always too soft..»
- Jan should give proper feedback on his cases.»
- Ms project lecture, basics lectures should be more than this year.»
- The group hand ins didn"t contribute to my learning. It usually does, but in this course, the group work didn"t suit as well as usual. Because I am comfortable in working in groups, I can point out the issue. We can have only one meeting per week, because time constraints. It is not possible to meet more because of schedule conflicts. In addition, the meeting had to be exactly the day before the hand in, it was the only time everyone could come to the meeting. That means we had no time to look over the document and do any changes to the document before hand in. Q: Why don"t we meet earlier? Because the groups are assigned twice in this course, the time to find each other is limited and because this is a first year class, most people don"t know each other from before. There is a parallel project, which runs a project with different groups and in my case, I didn"t know a single student in my case essay groups from before. This makes the collision in the schedule high. Overall, the group hand ins obliterated any chances of getting a decent grade in this course, so yeah.»
- More information about how to find and mitigate risks in the second case. I got the feeling of getting thrown in with the head first in this case.»
- I would like a more streamlined PM Basics section. Fortunately, I have a business undergraduate degree and relied on that knowledge rather than Maylor"s text.»
- The feedback from each case on how the groups performed should be given before the next deadline occurs so that the students may learn what to focus on. Think about adding a new way of having lectures. Could there be recorded lectures with questions to answer about them? That would enable students to go back to parts that they didn"t get the first time. »
- Hard to find time where everyone could meet. One way of fixing this is to have fixed time where people have to meet»
- Per»
- The EM case lecture did not give much»
- I want lectures and seminars to be about discussions, not about the teacher"s preset notions of right and wrong. I do not feel that it is creative or developing to answer questions with only one right answer. But then, I"m not an engineer.»
- Again I will say, sticking to a book is not good, the firm theories should be presented in the lectures, and then students should be left open for reading articles or other material. In the basic PM lectures there was nothing to learn.»
- Maybe two text would be enough in the litterature seminar, so there is more time to study for the basic test.»
- A lower amount of required reading material for case D.»
- I"m sure Per have excellent knowledge in the subject, however the knowledge did not transfer.»
- If possible it might be interesting to have Lars Hallin take one of Per Svenssons cases. They seem both to be experienced project managers however they got different views and both views would be interesting in the cases. Lars Hallin is in some sense a better lecturer than Per Svensson.»
- Management by Models (Eva Hådding) should definitely change since it was to basic and was redundant information for some extent. »
- Basic lecture»
- Contents of the courses Should provide more contents»
- Try to introduce MS project lecture earlier in order to give students some extra time to learn the application. Elaborate more on the objectives on case A and B.»
- The second case was not as good as the rest. The MS project lecture should have been given before, and maybe some other cross-platform application should be considered instead. »
- Please change the planning case. The learning case was quite ok but if there is a case that points out learning organization even clearer then this case should be changed as well.»
- The 2nd week was killing - too much work to do.»
- Not sure. Not my course of interest, but it was a good course none the less. Maybe not required case seminars, only the second two really did anything for me. The first two I don"t think we"re structured very well and I don"t think helped in any way and I had no learning outcome.»
- Seminars with Per. I"m not saying he should not do them but he should re-think what it is he wants to say and what he wants us to say and try to encourage more discussion without finger pointing in an order from left to right.»
- The lectures from Per Svensson needs to be greatly improved to provide any usefulness at all. The amount of information tested on in the basics test (the whole book) was a lot to learn in only three weeks. Even though the test is given in reading week 8, you should consider moving the first basic test one week later into the course. Because it would be quite much in the end of the course with both a test and a home exam, while the other course takes up half the time as well.»
- I felt a bit lost in case B. It was not perfectly clear what we were allowed to change in the plan and what not. The literature seminar should not be one day before the dugga.»
- the period for Basic PM should be longer and the content of the book explain more deeply»
- The Planning case should be changed, see my comment in that section.»
- Do something about the case groups. It is true that in industry you have to work with people you don"t like. But I assume that all people on a company have the skills (language) and motivation to perform the work. It"s silly when two of the group members aren"t able bring anything of use to the table, and basically gets a free ride by the other two who have higher ambitions. It seems like many of the foreigners don"t know how to use sources and references in a text, and that you can"t make a statement without a source, which was kinda annoying. Furthermore, the schedule for the cases was also a pain. We got the case on Monday, usually we met on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, often had nobody else read through nothing more than the case, so the only thing we could do was to braintstorm a little bit, then I would write a bit on it on the weekend, finally would meet again on Monday and write the handin. Overall it would be nice to more clearly know what is expected of the case handins. Another thing that was a little peculiar was how many of the examples of projects were run by the state in some way. For example NASA (case 4), Denver Airport (case 3), many examples in Maylor, and examples during the lectures (Hallandsåsen by Lars, and some subway in Göteborg). It would be interesting to learn more from the private sector.»
- Discuss the literature seminar texts in groups»
- Consider making the case seminars optional I didnt think I needed help in understanding the cases further so that time could have been spent in a better way »
- For the basic test, one week after the last lecture (chapter 17) of basic test could be favorable. »
- Smaller seminars. The only seminar which sort of felt like a seminar was the first one that had was in a smaller room with a smaller group. It was right on the edge when it comes to room and group size. The rest felt like more interactive lectures. My suggestion is to make much smaller groups but only make them an hour long. Smaller groups will go through the content faster and there will be much more interaction and group participation. If this is done, more preparation should be expected from the students.»
- The basic lecture is too fast. Every lecture have too many things.»
- Feedback on the case essays would have to come a lot sooner.»
- Penalties for setting up groups. In hindsight, just losing one point is not nearly worth the bonus of setting up a real power-group. For getting a good grade, and to maximize learning, a designed group would be best. On the other hand, some of the groups would probably be real shit, but that should be reflected in their grades, in my opinion.»
- Balance between PM Basics and the lectures.»
- I"d like more feedback, both when working on the cases as well as after it has been graded. One didn"t have time to learn and adjust as the course progressed - which is ironic when keeping in mind the subject (learning case etc.).»
- The marking and presentation of the Cases and Case seminars. It would be wonderful if Students also talk and present their own work especially in the Planning case. And also given sufficient guidance on who to analyse and write the cases.»
- The grading of the cases should not be revealed before the end of all four, cause people tend to slack at the end if they have secured enough marks.»
- If the Planning Case is still around, it should be clearified.»
- Provide feedback in time for the next case so that we can change what we did wrong in the previous ones.»
- Maybe smaller groups in the case assignments. It felt like the groups was large compared to the size of the assignments.»
- Teachers not speaking in their phones during the lectures.»
- Too early PM Basic test»

14. Additional comments

- Very good course, but the feedback from the cases and the ability to improve was close to not existing. Kind of ironic when one of the cases adresses learning as an important part of the course. »
- I learnt alot from this course and am thrilled to say that am going to be scoring a 5 in it, Jan please keep it up.. you never ever gave me reason to dose off with my eyes open»
- It"s a nuisance for me as a student to not be able to get the case essay in electronic format because I have to go to the lecture. "Guys, do you remember where in the article author A talks about what B does, can you find me that page number again?" was a common question during case group meetings. It was difficult to discuss things under these conditions. I leave this to you as an exercise to improve for next year. I am not going to fill in this course evaluation again. This was longer than expected and took me a couple of hours to read through the questions, understand it, formulate an opinion, make it comprehensible and review what I had written, it"s too long.»
- Good course, but the high workload might shock some students. If this workload/type of work would be represented in more courses, then learning for me would increase, mostly because of the "Student syndrome". :)»
- Great course in general. I have learned a lot!»
- A very good course but a lot is dependent on the teachers. Case feedback should be given before the next one starts.»
- Nice to have the basics test early in the course to ease the workload in the end of the period and to have basic PM knowledge when doing the cases.»
- One of the best course I"ve attended to.»
- http://youtu.be/BKorP55Aqvg There might be wisdom in this clip. Or just entertainment. Anyway, it would be fun to hear what Jan would say about it. Maybe next years home-exam? ,)»
- In total, the only bad experience during the course was working on the first two cases, however it was not related to the course itself but to the members in the group.»
- I like the case study. At the same time, I think basic lecture should be with some cases to help understand how to use this theory.»
- Would have liked to have the case reports marked before the the next deadline. Missed several opportunities to learn what you were looking for in our texts. Really good course overall!»
- Great course, just not my topic of interest.»
- Overall this has been one of the best courses I have studied during my 3.25 years at Chalmers, keep up the good work!»
- The new 40-hour work weeks compared to the old 50-hour is nothing that I have yet noticed. Perhaps it is because of the unwillingness of working in both the courses which I am enrolled in.»
- I would thanks you for your effort ...»
- And took this course because of Jan. And Jan, you"re amazing! The best teacher I"ve had (without a doubt) at Chalmers during my 4.5 years. You tell fun and interesting stories and anecdote and connects that to the content of the course, brilliant! Much easier to listen to and to remember. I get the feeling that I"m not really "learning" any course content, which I usually feel at lecture (but I do learn of course, a lot!). Thank you very much Jan! Hope you get a new bike soon ,)»
- Great course, thank you! I really liked Jan"s ability to teach pedagogically. »
- One of the best chalmers courses ive taken I absolutely think this will help me in my career There should be a series of courses in this area»
- I would prefer to know when i do something and you do not like it rather than say it in public and having a question mark, did he say that to me ? So probably next time you can just mail the particular person instead.»
- Maybe I was unlucky (though I"ve heard similar things from quite a few other groups) but the work ethic from the majority of my team mates has been really bad. While I"m happy with the course and have liked the cases and thought they"ve been interesting, I don"t feel the group work has enhanced my learning at all. The level on the writing and reading comprehension has been too low, the discussions have been too one-sided and I"ve needed to do way too large share of the writing. It is pretty bad when you can not even understand what some of your group members have written. The fact that one team member plagiarized did not help my feelings regarding this. If I were to do it again I would accept the penalty and create a custom group. It"s my one, major regret. What you should do about it? I do not really know. Preferably there ought to be tougher English requirements in order to be accepted to the program. In lieu of that, smaller groups would also work. That way, if you get a good partner then great. If not, well then you at least almost have an individual challenge. It is when you have two or more individuals who want to participate but lack the necessary English skills to understand the text well enough and write something which can be understood that it becomes really frustrating.»
- Sometimes it"s hard to follow what Per said.»
- Although incredibly interesting and probably useful, the Shadow System-, behind-the-scenes-, Kevin-Spacey-in-House-of-Cards-theories that are the main focus of this course seem a bit weird for an Engineering course. I sort of felt that if I were aspiring to become a manager I would have been more interested in more in-depth training/knowledge of more regular day-to-day project management activities/problems. But I"m not the expert, just thought I"d throw it out there. I really enjoyed the House of Cards style theories :)»
- Microsoft Project is useful to learn, but you didn"t really have time to learn it, and any changes you made was cumbersome since the project was quite big and complex.»
- The biggest problem with this course is group work. Why you as an experienced project manager don"t give us a clue about how to organize efficient group working? We"ve wasted so much time figuring out how to write essays. We couldn"t write separately because then it"s not a team work anymore. And we couldn"t write together because different members have different abilities (speed of thinking, level of understanding, language skills). As a result, the group is dependent on the leader(s) who does the majority of the work. What is interesting, I asked about team working one of my team mates who has a Bachelor"s degree from Chalmers and he said that he was never told how to work in teams efficiently. I"m not sure if you think that this issue is super easy, or you don"t know the answer yourself. I would love to hear it.»
- It was very hard to study in a good way for the PM Basics exam since the book is quite extensive and the questions are very detailed.»
- This was a very interesting course that raised my curiosity of Project Management! »
- Even though it was a small basic exam, it did take time to study for. And when you have the cases each week, I think it would be enough to either have one ordinary exam or one home exam, not both.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från