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.

Research by Design 2009, ADM142

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-09-17 - 2009-10-27
Antal svar: 0
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 0%
Kontaktperson: Saddek Rehal»

Goals and fullfilment of goals

The learning outcomes are given in the course programme, that is the knowledge, understanding, skills and perspectives you are expectd to reach. Notify for each outcome how well they have been fulfilled.

1. Where the aims and objectives of the course clearly formulated?

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather Bad» 0 0%

Neither bad nor well» 0 0%

Rather Well» 0 0%

Very well» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

2. Are the aims and goals reasonable in relation to your pre-knowledge ?

0 svarande

No, the goals are to elementar» 0 0%

Yes, the goals are reasonable» 0 0%

No, the goals are too ambitious» 0 0%

No opinion» 0

Genomsnitt: 0

Initial Workshops

3. How well did the initial workshop "FRICTION + MOVEMENT" work within the overall course?

0 svarande

Very well» 0 0%

Rather well» 0 0%

Neither well nor bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Very bad» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

4. How well did the initial workshop "FRICTION + MATERIAL" work within the overall course?

0 svarande

Very well» 0 0%

Rather well» 0 0%

Neither well nor bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Very bad» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

5. How well did the initial workshop "FRICTION + SOCIAL SPACE" work within the overall course?

0 svarande

Very well» 0 0%

Rather well» 0 0%

Neither well nor bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Very bad» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Workshops 1 To 4

6. How relevant is workshop 1 (exploring a situation + staging experiments) ?

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

7. How relevant is workshop 2 (Critical modeling, staging problem situations)?

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

8. How relevant is workshop 3 (Structuring the research problem, Focusing goals) ?

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

9. How relevant is workshop 4 (Creating value, developing innovations)

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Literatur seminar

10. Was the literature seminar 1 relevant?

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

11. Was the literature seminar 2 relevant?

0 svarande

Very much Irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelvant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

12. Was the literature seminar 3 relevant?

0 svarande

Very much Irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelvant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Lectures

13. Are the lectures in general relevant?

0 svarande

Very much irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather irrelevant» 0 0%

Neither relevant nor irrelevant» 0 0%

Rather relevant» 0 0%

Very much relevant» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

14. Lecture: Sept. 01. Staging Research Problems (Catharina Dyrssen)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

15. Lecture: Sept. 02. Friction and Movement (Gun Lund)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

16. Lecture: Sept. 02. Design Dialog (Saddek Rehal)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 –, 5 (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average)

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

17. Lecture: Sept. 02. (Morten Lund)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

18. Lecture: Sept. 02. Social Network (Otto von Busch)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

19. Lecture: Sept. 08. Concept Knowledge Theory (Saddek Rehal)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

20. Lecture: Sept 08. (Ana Betancour)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

21. Lecture: Sept. 08. On choice of methodology: overview research methods (Monica Billger)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5,(1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

22. Lecture: Sept. 10. Text-Image-Model: Inquiry and representation (Fredrik Nilsson)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

23. Lecture: Sept. 15. Visual Communication (Christel Copp)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

24. Lecture: Sept. 16. Geting lost, as a Method (Monica Sand)

Grade the lecture on a scale 1 - 5, (1=lowest/very bad, 5=highest/very good, 3=average).

0 svarande

1» 0 0%

2» 0 0%

3» 0 0%

4» 0 0%

5» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Conference

25. How do you rate the conference?

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Neither bad nor well» 0 0%

Rather well» 0 0%

Very well» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Education and course administration

26. What support have you got from learning staff?

0 svarande

Very little» 0 0%

Rather little» 0 0%

Neither big nor little» 0 0%

Rather big» 0 0%

Very big» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

27. How did the organisation, memoranda, direct information etc. function?

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Neither well nor bad» 0 0%

Rather well» 0 0%

Very well» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Work environment

28. How do you rate the possibilities to get assistance and ask questions? (Workshop consultation).

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Neither well nor bad» 0 0%

Rather good» 0 0%

Very good» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

29. How has the cooperation between you and students in your group been?

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather bad» 0 0%

Neither good nor bad» 0 0%

Rather good» 0 0%

Very good» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

Concluding questions

30. What is your overall opinion of the course?

0 svarande

Very bad» 0 0%

Rather Bad» 0 0%

Neither bad nor good» 0 0%

Rather good» 0 0%

Very good» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 0

31. What was best and should be preserved next year?

32. What was not so good and should be changed next year?

33. What can be improved?

Kursutvärderingssystem från