Aktuella utvärderingar

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.

Product Lifecycle Management Evaluation, PPU110

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-11-12 - 2008-11-26
Antal svar: 7
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 23%
Kontaktperson: Andreas Dagman»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

7 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 14%
Around 20 hours/week»1 14%
Around 25 hours/week»2 28%
Around 30 hours/week»3 42%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- The project was quite heavy and took a lot of time.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- Most of the efforts had to be done on the last two weeks since there were problems with the systems to work on early in the course.» (Around 30 hours/week)

2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

7 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 14%
75%»1 14%
100%»5 71%

Genomsnitt: 4.57

- due to colliding courses» (50%)
- Collision with another course, even though after a while this course´,s lectures was prioritized.» (75%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

7 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»2 28%
The goals are difficult to understand»3 42%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»2 28%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- It is difficult to understand how to apply them» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- a lot of changes during course» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.

6 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»5 83%
No, the goals are set too high»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.16

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

6 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»5 83%
Yes, definitely»0 0%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- The project: yes The lectures: no» (To some extent)
- Since there are different interesting trends toward the PLM concept it would have been better to ask the students to find and discuss a recent paper in the class as a seminar.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

7 svarande

Small extent»3 42%
Some extent»3 42%
Large extent»1 14%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.71

- -Hard to get the conneciton between the theory and the practical work. -The instructions for SmarTeam was very poor» (Small extent)
- Though the concepts that were taught are disperse in origin, their integration is what makes PLM systems effective. Hence such integration is needed in teaching the concepts too (BPR, software engineering, KBS etc)» (Some extent)

7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?

7 svarande

Small extent»3 42%
Some extent»1 14%
Large extent»3 42%
Great extent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- They helped a lot for the theoritical part of the course, but not for the practical part.» (Some extent)

8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?

7 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 14%
Rather well»5 71%
Very well»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 3

Study climate

9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

7 svarande

Very poor»1 14%
Rather poor»3 42%
Rather good»2 28%
Very good»1 14%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Too few possibilities to ask questions, and too few assistants to help you» (Very poor)
- to much unclear facts about the project.» (Rather poor)
- Dag"s job is very understaffed.» (Rather poor)
- Malmqvist and Amer answers questions bur not Dag» (Rather poor)

10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

7 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»3 42%
Very well»4 57%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

- It was because of my fellow students that I at all had the chance to pass the course» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

7 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»2 28%
High»3 42%
Too high»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 4

- but some frustrations due to bad planning and info from course responsible.» (Adequate)
- Mostly because I did not know what the tasks were. And when asking Dag/Amer the goal was not clear aswell» (High)
- As there was such amounts of re-work necessary for my part, crashing/non software» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

7 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»2 28%
High»4 57%
Too high»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.85

- recommended courses were colliding» (Adequate)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

7 svarande

Poor»1 14%
Fair»2 28%
Adequate»3 42%
Good»1 14%
Excellent»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

- I had large difficutlies with SmarTeam due to poor instructions and too little assistance» (Poor)
- It was not particulary clear what should be done in the project. The PM explained what should be done in one way while the supervisors said something else (lower demands). SmarTeam gave us a lot of problems (not working, error messages etc).» (Adequate)
- others who didn"t have own experience didn"t learn so much i think. Some may need more learning about the basic stuff in PLM software.» (Adequate)
- Personally I had a more tool-centric with a complete solution as an outcome in mind.» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The short exams Guest lecturers»
- duggor and project»
- The abstract, theoretical part of the course was OK, and this could be kept, and preferrably improved with a stronger connection to the practical part.»
- Amer Dag»
- The course lectures»
- The articles in the binder.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- SmarTeam only available in MMT1 that was booked about 80% of the time. Hard to find time to work with the project. Better introduction of the project work from the beginning, explaining what should be done and what is expected for grade 3. This was not done until very late this period.»
- setup of project, and content of project»
- Re-make the whole layout for the practical part. Make sure that there is a couple of people that have more exoerience with the system then the students themselves, and have more tutorials, and more possibilites for assistnace. I would have needed a personal assistan from time to time during this course, so possibilty to book supervision times (for example 20 min alone with the teacher) would be great! »
- Give Dag the tools to be able to give proper guidance during the project! He knows a lot but has no help. Connect the lectures better with the project Connect the guestlectures to the course!»
- More training in smarteam, how the software works etc.»
- The project was good in theory but it was extremely much problems with SmarTeam. Better stability in using SmarTeam is needed to do the project as it should be done, as it was now it could be very problematic if you didn"t choose the "correct" computer. A project should depend on knowledge obtained and effort put on the project, not on the software itself!»
- CAD modeling in the project work.»

16. Additional comments

- make startup of smarteam work better. to much problems with connect database for some.»
- A good idea for the course, but not practically implememtend.»
- Dag and Amer is the only reason why I rated the course fair and not poor.»
- SmarTeam has to be more stabile in order to have equal prerequisites to succeed, it should not depend on luck!»
- Add a seminar at which students present a recent article in the field.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från