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.

TEK 145 Quality and Operations Management

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-11-19 - 2008-11-26
Antal svar: 24
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 46%
Kontaktperson: Hendry Raharjo»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

Your own effort

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

24 svarande

0%-25%»0 0%
25%-50%»0 0%
50%-75%»2 8%
75%-100%»22 91%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- The guest lectures were not good» (75%-100%)
- I found myself in an situation where I myself had to do the majority of the work...» (75%-100%)
- Some were good som were not very interresting» (75%-100%)
- I went to all lectures» (75%-100%)

General questions on the course

2. What is your general opinion of the course?

24 svarande

Very negative»1 4%
Negative»5 20%
Positive»15 62%
Very positive»3 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- Not coordinated at all, a course description was presented after 3-4 weeks, it wasn"t clear how the exam should look like until the last week (and this was from that there wasn"t supposed to be an exam at all from the beginning). I wouldn"t recommend this course to others, chaos is the word.» (Very negative)
- Very poor planning and also changing crucial parts during the course as examination form. Probably the worst course I"ve had at Chalmers.» (Negative)
- No communication between teachers of the different weeks. Group works were not optimal.» (Negative)
- Too large groups, too small projects, too large differences between participants when it comes to prior knowledge, too much overlap and repetitions between weeks!» (Negative)
- Bad coordination and information» (Negative)
- The group work with grades for the first quarter was not realy a good idea » (Positive)
- Allthou a bit unstructured, it was overall good.» (Positive)
- The course in itself was good...but the constellations of the project groups where extremely bad» (Positive)

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

24 svarande

Small extent»1 4%
Some extent»8 33%
Large extent»10 41%
Great extent»5 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.79

- It seams as I didn"t get the SPC part at all... » (Some extent)
- 4 hours of lecture is too long. Concentration only hold for the first 2.» (Some extent)
- Some weeks where very good and others less good. In general I found that the course lacked theory, I think that we should have had more theory before we went in to the case exercises. » (Some extent)
- The most has been villing to help, but not Henry!» (Large extent)
- good examples and teachers specialized on their topics» (Large extent)
- The teaching have been good!» (Great extent)

4. How was the course workload?

24 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Adequate/Low»1 4%
Adequate/High»15 62%
Too high»8 33%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- too many "small projects"» (Adequate/High)
- maybe a bit less group assignments would have been better» (Adequate/High)
- As said. No communication between teachers, so the teachers of each week handed out too much material for each week.» (Too high)
- Since I found that my group was working so bad, I had to do the majority of the work by my self with the help from just one more teammate!» (Too high)

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

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 4%
Rather good»9 37%
Very good»12 50%
I did not seek help»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- The Swedish students were more confident as they had contact to teachers on phone or via mail.» (Very good)
- good communication and fast answers from the teachers» (Very good)

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

24 svarande

Very badly»4 16%
Rather badly»6 25%
Rather well»9 37%
Very well»5 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- Once more, the course description, obscuritys about the exam and the assignments which for me were fatal in the end. » (Very badly)
- Course PM first in week six, and when reviced again. Are you kiding me? No information about exams and no other until the last minute.» (Very badly)
- Not enough information about the structure and changes about the course. » (Very badly)
- More exact information about what to study in the course litteratur should be gathered at one place, to make it easy to find!» (Rather badly)
- late course description, many changes in web page. handouts okej» (Rather badly)
- Think that hendry was not given the right information of how it works at Chalmers. Cannot be vary difficult to explain that for him» (Rather badly)
- very late informing of course schedule.Also there have been many changes in the schedule» (Rather badly)
- real-time information was good. But no course syllabus for the first 3 weeks is not appropriate.» (Rather well)

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

24 svarande

Small extent»1 4%
Some extent»1 4%
Large extent»18 75%
Great extent»4 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- Would have been good to know what literature which we were supposed to have in advance.» (Large extent)
- The Service Operations Management book is worthless. Otherwise, the material was excellent.» (Large extent)
- Good handouts and course literature» (Large extent)
- it provided different views, more details sometimes and they were well structured» (Large extent)

8. What is your overall impression of the weekly course?


- Most teachers should keep their time, lack of respect for others. A lot of the lectures and exercises draw over time.»
- Week 1: Overall inconsequent learning objectives, oral feedback at presentation was somehow irrelevant and not representative to the final grade of the week. Week 5: 4 hours of SPC kills the head (especially when Henry skips breaks!!!)»
- Overall, good teachers. Guest lecturers were not good at all. Very unenthusiastic people not enjoying to give lectures.»
- for the first i have missed because i came late for the course»
- SPC: good real examples.»
- There where a low quantity of excersices for SPC, one of the main causes for poor performance on this part of the examination.»
- I think that the lecturing on SPC was good and interesting, but there were given contradictory information about what was included in the exam. The lectures went far beyond the course litterature and it was therefore very hard to know what to focus on!»
- If any course week must be changed, I would definitely vote for the statistical process control, to much information delivered with poor quality and pedagogic. »
- Didn"t learn much about the statistics, it took a very big part of the week and wasn"t of that much use later on.»
- About the Sixth week: there had been lots of information and material,very hard to handle!»

Week 1: Operations Strategy
23 svarande

Very Poor»0 0%
Poor»1 4%
Neutral»4 17%
Good»11 47%
Very Good»7 30%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4.04

Week 2: Integrated Product Development
23 svarande

Very Poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Neutral»4 17%
Good»13 56%
Very Good»6 26%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4.08

Week 3: Managing Operations Processes
22 svarande

Very Poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Neutral»5 22%
Good»14 63%
Very Good»3 13%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.9

Week 4: Customer Focused Product Development
23 svarande

Very Poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Neutral»3 13%
Good»13 56%
Very Good»7 30%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4.17

Week 5: Statistical Process Control
24 svarande

Very Poor»5 20%
Poor»5 20%
Neutral»4 16%
Good»7 29%
Very Good»3 12%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.91

Week 6: Improvement Process
24 svarande

Very Poor»0 0%
Poor»1 4%
Neutral»4 16%
Good»13 54%
Very Good»6 25%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4

Evaluation process and grading

9. Did the exam reflect the course in a fair way?

24 svarande

Not at all»3 12%
No»3 12%
Yes»18 75%
Yes, completely»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- I studied too much and response to all questions. But the scale for checking our papers was not fair. Sverker and hendry tend to write exactly what they think about the matters. Their questions have a wide area to answer. I think every answer to their questions may be correct due to different point of view. » (Not at all)
- The questions on the two last parts where very strange. » (No)
- some questions wre outside the learning objectives, even though we asked hendry about this issue before the exam. Also, some questions were quite abstract..» (No)
- Not the SPC where the examquestions were too hard, for only been studying it for one week. » (No)
- But not the SPC part, that week included quality tools, and SPC may be a large one of those, but it hade to much room, specially on the exam. » (Yes)
- Not the SPC week. I am sorry, but I think all 6 teachers should have the same standard. Getting 0 out of 5 points just for picking the wrong option without any consideration to the argumentation is not acceptable. And 16 questions for 4 hours??????? is that really reasonable??? NO COORDINATION BETWEEN TEACHERS!» (Yes)
- too long» (Yes)
- Except for SPC part» (Yes)
- The part and grading on SPC I really don"t understand, or maybe the questions were very ambiguous or focused in a way that I not am used to from my previous studies on Industrial engineering and management at Chalmers. Something was very strange there.» (Yes)
- Many questions and undrestood thath it is difficult for teachers to understand that we answer more than only theis own questions» (Yes)
- Quite big though, many questions. Would prefer a exam with less and bigger questions. » (Yes)

10. How would you change the grading system of the course?

Current system: 40% of final grade is obtained from weekly group-score and 60% is obtained from the written final exam.

23 svarande

I suggest my system, see below»6 26%
No change is needed»17 73%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

- I prefer 60% on group work and 40% on final examination.» (?)
- I think that the exam could have been the same, but the groupworks could have been just passed or fail for the 40%» (I suggest my system, see below)
- The group works should be graded as fail or pass so the students can get toghether better.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- The grade system is okey, but there is no control over the groups. Some people did not deserve 1 single point on the group works. But, as always, no one can create a perfect system.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- I think that 40% is too much on the group score. At least in my group, to or three out of seven did all the work for the group score, and the rest just tagged along, without understanding much at all. I really think that it was hard too cooperate with people from other cultures, specifically those who come from a culture where cooperation with other students in the academy is rare! To motivate 40% from the group grade, support on group work, maybe performance reviews, or just project-work education should be given. I realize that it is important to learn how to cooperate with people from different cultures, but the workload becomes to heavy on those that are used to a high workload and project work!» (I suggest my system, see below)
- I would change the course grading to be only pass or fail on the weekly case exercises, and to a "normal" 3,4,5 grading on the individual exam. » (I suggest my system, see below)
- The groupwork should be of more importance than 40 %, after all it is six weeks of hard teamwork.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- good because the group work is also a part of what we learn and do at school» (No change is needed)

Summarizing questions

11. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The SPC week and Operations Strategy week was perfect. And the course was very good in overall.»
- The different topics for each week were interesting.»
- I think the overall structure with the group assignments and different lecturers works well.»
- Weekly groups work and presentation the same week.»
- group assignments, but there MUST be a check to see that groups function properly. Some do NOOTHING!»
- first week»
- Visits to industries, KJ method day, the trip, presentations from visitors, interactive examination, feedback on weekly asignments»
- Assignments and course material were good»
- The cases and the weekly courses. »
- The veriaty of topics!»
- Diversity. Guest lectures. Level of quality. Intensity.»
- schedule with free friday afternoons, boda borg, and interactive exam»

12. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Organization! It"s ridiculous that the institution for QOM has so poor planning!»
- SPC, SPC and SPC... more information in an earlier stage generally. »
- More time could be given for case studies.»
- The grading system»
- 1. Better information about readings in the course literature. 2. Even before the course starts the date and place of the exam should be decided. This should not be decided after 2 or 3 weeks into the course.»
- Either smaller groups or only pass/fail grading on group work to reduce the risk of getting a low final grade due to bad group members.»
- A course PM and another administrator who knows how things work.»
- Exam: Too many questions (root cause: no coordination among teachers) Weekly lectures: Too much overlapping (root cause: no coordination among teachers) Literatue: Too much (root cause: no coordination among teachers) So, I guess you see the point. And finally: The course syllabus should be provided the FIRST lecture.»
- you should mention clear and firm course structure ( Grading system etc) at the begining of the course, so that there will not be any confusion to the student.»
- A new student group for late arrivals, not adding to an old one.»
- I beleived that you should remove statistical calculation part and just review the spc as a whole and described more on six sigma.»
- Provide example of exercises of SPC to students, to long examination (no time to think the questions properly), »
- The part on SPC should be clearer! The groups should be smaller and the cooperation in groups should be supported»
- The system for grading the different assignments and the dynamic of the groups. »
- Better information»
- 1- Informing student about plan and contents of course beforehand. 2- More cooridination and communication between lecturers.»
- Coordination and improvement of the information in the course.»
- Some questions from the exam must be changed»
- more exercises on the SPC part, reduce work assignments»

13. Additional comments

- I will not recommend anyone to apply to QOM.»
- Almost all of us got low score on the SPC part of the exam alltough most students thought they gave good answers. Either the questions were badly forulated or we didnt get enough information in the lectures.»
- it is difficult to manage a big group with different backgrounds and interest»
- I understand that one of the main focuses in this course has been to work in an international environment that reflects many real life working environments around the world today. But I must comment the way of the recruitment process of the international students and how this has been conducted. The majority of the international students (specially from Iran) that I have worked with do NOT have the necessary prerequisites to study on a level like this, the result is that just a few people in each group have to take upon themselves to do not just some more work, but a lot of more work to get the job done. And on top of that, each individual in each group will get the same benefits from the "teams" results with them to the written exam. I must say that I am very disappointed in the setup and the recruitment process that Chalmers have, it clearly doesn"t work. »
- to many people that didn´,t understand SPC question on exam. not relevant that so many get 0 points! must be something othter than the students fault!»
- Too bad about Hendry"s question on the test (Hendry"s part was very interesting, though). Other than that, great course! A flying start of the Master"s. »
- interesting course during the whole quarter with different teachers and topic, it was really good to open our mind to the many parts of quality and operations management»

Kursutvärderingssystem från