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.

Total Quality Mgmt - Autumn 2009, IEK311

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-16 - 2009-11-05
Antal svar: 79
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 80%
Kontaktperson: Marco Santos»

Your own effort

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

79 svarande

0% - 25%»3 3%
25% - 50%»7 8%
50% - 75%»16 20%
75% - 100%»53 67%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- I could not attend more since I had compulsary lectures for an other course at the same time.» (25% - 50%)
- eseier and more time efficient to read in the book.» (25% - 50%)
- I am also doing 100% a thesis. Otherwise, I would attend the lectures much much more.» (25% - 50%)
- Closer to 50%. Unfortunately I had lectures in another course at the same time both on tuesdays and wednesdays.» (50% - 75%)
- Could unfortunately not attend due to other compulsary courses at some days» (50% - 75%)
- I attended all of those possible for me» (50% - 75%)
- cuz i have another course which overlaps with this course» (50% - 75%)
- suggest for more guest lectures from industry.» (75% - 100%)
- interesting course» (75% - 100%)
- I think the lectures in this courese are all very useful.one lecture with a grop is a good form, can make us applied practice in time which is helpful for understand the principles and method» (75% - 100%)

2. Have you fullfilled the following tasks:

If you have not fullfilled the compulsory tasks, please explain why.


- three points is too little for all this work!»
- Question and motivation for some chapters were not usefull. for ex ch 3,9,21»
- i think the work load s a bit much»
- As said, I am also doing a thesis at a company. So, it"s quite hard to find time to do Q&M. I"m just 2 weeks behind though and I will finish it before the exam.»
- I thought questions and motivation was unnecessary. Instead of reading I had to write these stupid motivations.»
- because i was in some other lectures.»
- The oral examination, because I was sick, and the Q&M because of lack of time, should however be finished tomorrow»
- will complete Q&M before the exam»
- it is all very useful!»
- There were somewhat little time awarded to the tasks»
- Did not have time to do it, had another class with the same scheduled lectures.»
- The questions and motivation were a particularly good idea, since it forced the students to read the book and I think, that was helpful. The other tasks were also very helpful to understand the theoretical parts of the course. In general the questions in the exam could be a bit more related to the tasks (for instance DoE and Helicopter lab). Moreover, feedback for the different tasks should be given. Unfortunately we got usually just a bit or no feedback at all. So we sometimes could not know if we made a good job I did not know (if we did not ask for particular points), if we understood a topic right.»
- I have selected three courses so i didnot have time to review the lectures before the mid exam»

Compulsory - Helicopter lab assignment
79 svarande

Yes»79 100%
No»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1

Compulsory - Interactive assess. / oral examination
78 svarande

Yes»76 97%
No»2 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.02

Compulsory - Question & Motivation for each chapter
79 svarande

Yes»72 91%
No»7 8%

Genomsnitt: 1.08

Necessary for bonus points - Process Mgmt. assignment
78 svarande

Yes»70 89%
No»8 10%

Genomsnitt: 1.1

Necessary for bonus points - KJ-Shiba session
77 svarande

Yes»69 89%
No»8 10%

Genomsnitt: 1.1


3. What is your overall opinion of the course?

79 svarande

Very negative»0 0%
Negative»5 6%
Positive»54 68%
Very positive»20 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- All in all ok,but a bit boring. Too many calculation things, not enough practical relation.» (Negative)
- Too many teachers were coming into the class.» (Positive)
- Marco did an awesome job!» (Positive)
- Some weeks were better than others. SPC is still very confusing when Henry draw´,s all over the screen!» (Positive)
- A bit too much focus on SPC and DoE, the other parts that are just as important are not emphasized as much and what I will use mostly in my professional life is not SPC and DoE, but instead the "soft parts".» (Positive)
- It was a good course, well balanced between theory/practise and qualitative/quantitative. I liked the global approach towards TQM.» (Positive)
- Very interesting area, somewhat too short course» (Positive)
- I like the variation and that it were some more practical parts» (Positive)
- Missing feedback for the tasks is the only point which can be pointed out as negative. Further it depends also on the exam results(which we probably will not have before the deadline of the evaluation, as far as I got it). The results will show among others, if we got the right understanding of different topics (but this depends of course on the students first of all but probably also on the course).» (Positive)
- Through this course, we can get a general idea of what TQM is and would be very useful for the future career.» (Very positive)
- The only bad thing was the absense of answers for old exams and the nature of the exam. Understanding the meaning of words is not what the course is about...» (Very positive)
- Good content of the course!» (Very positive)

4. Concerning the proportion of theory and practice:

By theory it is meant mainly lectures whereas practice means mainly exercises.

79 svarande

The course was too theoretical»5 6%
The course had a good balance between theory and practice»73 92%
The course was too practical»1 1%

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- I can"t really say much, can I, since I don"t attend the lectures. But I would say, if I was to compare the workload of theory and practice, they are not balanced. The theory part is way too much. Together with the compulsory and extra practice sessions, it makes the course really big.» (The course was too theoretical)
- As often at Chalmers, the course is rather theoretical and could be more practise-oriented. But still it was well illustrated and there were several group activities, which is good and has to be developed.» (The course was too theoretical)
- the most important areas included practical work which was good» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- Most practical than most courses which I think is good. But, "divide into groups" isn"t always as easy as it sounds. Also, more time is needed to conclude the exercises!» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- could be more practical, and less hand in motivation questions.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- We should have more time to do the practice part» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- Balance was actually really good.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- Nicely organized with the combination of small projects like Helicopter Lab and theoretical knowledge.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- but I think theory should be stronger before practice» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- To much compulsory parts, if the students do not learn -> its their own fault» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- Maybe a bit to much interaction in the classes.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- I like the variation and that it were some more practical parts» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- The course for SPC was a little bit too much focus on the theory and numerical calculation.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- Cookies experiment is my favorite!» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)

5. How was the structure of the course?

A good structure means that the time spent on each subject is adequate and that the sequence of the subjects is clear and logical.

79 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»6 7%
Good»52 65%
Very good»21 26%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- It was difficult to set an order for all these different topics» (Poor)
- It was hard to follow a red line of the course, a lot of jumping between different subjects.» (Poor)
- Too many different professors. » (Good)
- But no enough time for the assessment -> better less assessments and doing them in more days» (Good)
- The introduction slide with Marco Santos with the obligatory sessions were to complicated. The excel sheet could be presented at first.» (Good)
- more about six sigma» (Good)
- Some information came in the last minute but overall I think it was good.» (Good)
- Some kind of overview could be shown in lectures sometimes to show where we are with the actual topic in the big context.» (Good)
- very well structured» (Very good)
- Marco was excellent!» (Very good)

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

Here you can think about the pedagogical skills of teachers and the relevance of lectures for your learning as a whole

79 svarande

Small extent»4 5%
Some extent»25 31%
Large extent»41 51%
Great extent»9 11%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

- I read the book and read the lecture slides and it worked out fine, I think =)!» (Small extent)
- Hendry - very into his subject Berlin - very interesting to listen to Alänge - did not learn anything from his lecture Marco - tried to have a interaction, which sometimes not easy, but he managed more than others» (Some extent)
- Missed quite many lectures as explained earlier.» (Some extent)
- It was an useful summary of the book» (Some extent)
- BPM by Berlin was good. Doe can still be improved as well as SPC. Others were ok!» (Some extent)
- Claes Berlin and Marco was very good. The italian bloke was very BAD. He had no sense of what level to put the teaching on. He spent time on explaining what 1+1 is and didn"t even try to explain harder subjects.» (Some extent)
- Marco did really good explanations to clarify some subjects.» (Large extent)
- All teachers were very good.» (Large extent)
- the practical experiences give us some ideas to deal with the real cases.» (Large extent)
- Some lectures were quite week, 7QT and 7MT.» (Large extent)
- I especially liked the BPM-week.» (Large extent)
- Interesting discussions with Marco.» (Large extent)
- Applicable to all lecturers: the slides contained too much information. A lecture should be an overview and details are left to read in the course literature» (Large extent)
- For those lectures I have attended, yes, the lecturers are very competence.» (Great extent)

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

79 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»16 20%
Large extent»46 58%
Great extent»17 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.01

- maybe more updated papers from other leading university from the world could keep the pace with the current business world.» (Some extent)
- Some areas like SPC were not entirely covered by the book and yet not described very good in the given material. This made the learning not very effective for me. The material for DOE on the other hand was structured very good and complete.» (Some extent)
- some parts of the course there are not in the book, especially about DoE and SPC» (Some extent)
- Could be useful to read something other than Bergman"s book. More articles, like for organizational change would be nice. Also, the lectures of Barone and Raharjo could be better organized, as could their slides. » (Large extent)
- Lecture slides are not for self-studying. I understand that this course is not designed for self-learning but still the slides should be improved to be more descriptive in themselves, especially slides of SPC.» (Large extent)
- The slides --> a lot » (Large extent)
- The book was very easy to read - but also this made it hard to get all facts from it. Maybe there should be an addenda for specific topics.» (Large extent)
- Read through the chapters every week is useful for the studying.» (Great extent)
- Reasoning together with other students often gave more than the lectures. Not including Marco an Claes who were great.» (Great extent)
- The text book is of great help and also various handouts.» (Great extent)
- Good Book!» (Great extent)

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

79 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 1%
Rather good»20 25%
Very good»42 53%
I did not seek help»16 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.92

- It was not a big deal for me, but I think we did not get the offer to contact all teachers for all topics directly (also e.g. by mail) (e.g. professor from Italy). If we had this offer, I did not realize it.» (Rather good)
- All teachers were helpfull and seemed to enjoy answering questions from students.» (Very good)
- All of the involved persons were very easy to communicate with and willing to answer questions.» (Very good)

Course administration

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

79 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»2 2%
Rather well»26 32%
Very well»51 64%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- Hendry should do something about his handouts. It would be great if the powerpoints with his notes on could be uploaded. Then one can remember what he thought was important in each slide! Should be great! It was only Alänge that printed copies of the ppt:s, which all teachers should do!!!» (Rather badly)
- Clear layout in the course homepage» (Rather well)
- The handouts were sometimes published late so that one did not always have the time to print them out before lecutures.» (Rather well)
- updated and really well organised.» (Very well)
- Marco has done a good job.» (Very well)
- keeping updated all the time.» (Very well)
- well organized» (Very well)
- Good work Marco, keep it up!» (Very well)
- clear schedule» (Very well)
- really enjoyed the excell sheet» (Very well)

Study climate

10. How was the course workload?

in relation to the number of credits given for this course

79 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Adequate / Low»9 11%
Adequate / High»63 79%
Too high»7 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.97

- The distribution and time line for chapters was a bit hard though, first week with 5 chapters threw off the pace.» (Adequate / High)
- A demanding course.» (Adequate / High)
- Interesting area made it hard to resist working with it» (Adequate / High)
- As mentioned, the course is too big when combining both theory and practice. The theory part is too much.» (Too high)
- too many labs and i cannot catch up with that» (Too high)

11. How was the total workload this study period?

79 svarande

Too low»1 1%
Adequate / Low»13 16%
Adequate / High»50 63%
Too high»15 18%

Genomsnitt: 3

- My other course was really not time consuming.» (Adequate / Low)
- I read three courses. That"s why it was so high.» (Too high)
- I was studying 150%, otherwise it would have been more adequate.» (Too high)
- the other couse was too much» (Too high)

12. How was the cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

79 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»3 3%
Rather well»30 37%
Very well»44 55%
I did not seek cooperation»2 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.56

- The students which attended were mainly active but some students in our groups for different tasks did not show up at all or did almost not participate. Maybe here kind of a control function for every assignment is needed, since students would normally not go for the teacher and say that other students work poorly. An attending list (if we do not already have it) could be helpful and feedback rounds could be implemented where the studenten also have to show, that they learned something.» (Rather poorly)
- Sometimes it was hard to find a group easily because of the limitations (up to 4 students)» (Rather poorly)
- If participated in the practice sessions.» (Rather well)
- But I do not like that we can"t choose groups by ourselves. Most of the students are studying their last year and we have worked with new people before so there is no need to force us to work with new people. Instead let us work with people of our own choice so we can focus on learning about TQM instead of having to get new "friends".» (Rather well)
- Some persons came much unprepared to some tasks.» (Rather well)
- Would be better to pick or own groups for different jobs considering the number of programs present. very hard to find time together with so different schedules» (Very well)
- Get the chance to know people from different countries and get to work in a good working atmosphere.» (Very well)
- When the forcing of bad group constellations stoped everything started to work better.» (Very well)

13. How was the relationship between you and the people involved in the course?

Some aspects involved in this question are: friendliness, openess to questions from students, arriving on time, respecting time for breaks, etc.

79 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»4 5%
Good»51 64%
Very Good»24 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- Hendry and Alänge should learn when the breaks are! Very friendly tone, except from one case when the lecturer laughed at a student for his question!» (Poor)
- But the assessments could have been better explained» (Good)
- Goup work could be even more developed, it is a good way to interact more (and for new students to meet new people)» (Good)
- Hendry is not really nice.» (Good)
- As before - people involved in the course were vry friendly and willing to answer questions» (Very Good)

Evaluation process and grading

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

78 svarande

Not at all»1 1%
No»5 6%
Yes»20 25%
Yes, completely»6 7%
I have not taken the exam yet»46 58%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

- See earlier comment.» (No)
- Too many questions on the exam. 4 hours isn"t enough for 10 questions. The points for different questions on the exam wasn"t fair, some "high-level" questions gave the same points as some "lower level" questions. Also unfair points regarding the time it takes to answer different questions. No one came to the exam to answer questions from the students!!!» (Yes)
- However, I missed the calculation question. I would have preferred that before only theoretical questions on SPC and DoE. There should have been a compromise between calculation and theory on those parts according to me. That would have been a better reflection of the lectures.» (Yes)
- but in the lecture was more arithmetic and I was very disappointed that there wasn"t realy something about it in the exam! In the exam were only question to write something about it... and after Q6 or Q7 I was slowly bored about this! » (Yes)
- I was somewhat surprised that we did not need to perform any calculations during the exam even though they were important during the course. It was very much to write during the exam.» (Yes)
- It was very teoretical, i thought there would be more calculations.» (Yes)
- It really depends on the results and the right answers for the different questions. It feels like yes but if in the end things were expected which were not discussed in the course, it is no. (We did not get the exam results yet and will probably not get them before the deadline for this evaluation is passed.)» (Yes)

15. Would you change the evaluation and grading system for this course?

For this course it was compulsory to pass the "Helicopter lab", "interactive assessment" and submit one question & motivation per chapter. To get the bonus points, the student had to participate in the Process management assignment, KJ-Shiba method, pass the final exam and fill out this questionnaire.

77 svarande

No change is needed»56 72%
I suggest my system, see below»21 27%

Genomsnitt: 1.27

- the Q&M is necessary as it gives a chance to review the chapter but at times it comes boring to find out questions when i can understand the chapter» (No change is needed)
- the system was really good» (No change is needed)
- Very good system, get bonus points if you want!» (No change is needed)
- I think the Q&M for each chapter is a good thougth but it didnt work to well for me. Instead of reading the book I almost only read the chapters to find a question to ask, this made me focus on the wrong things. (My bad ofcourse) I think the Q&M should only be for people who wants bonuspoints.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- i think the Q & M part is difficult since there will be some courses which student take» (I suggest my system, see below)
- The Q&M is the only one I have problem with, the rest is fine. I would say Q&M for every chapter is too much and some chapters don"t have any interesting aspects to motivate the question. For example, there are some chapter that you read and you get it or you don"t get it and that"s it. It has no room for discussion on that chapter. I would prefer writing Q&M on a chapter that can reflect my ideas on that chapter as a whole, rather than writing a stupid question like "what is advantages and disadvantages of one-factor-at-a-time experiment". Do you get what I mean? Also, the distribution on weeks is not so good, sometimes 4 sometimes 6 chapters. I would suggest that you should select some key chapters for each week (chapters that have room for discussion) and try to make equally distribution on each week also. » (I suggest my system, see below)
- Q&M"s were a little bit to much...maybe it would be enough to just concentrate on the most important chapters of the book here.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- Both questions and motivation + interactive assessment felt redundant. Maybe optional litterature seminars instead of handing in questions.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- since we"ve done quite amount of the project work, it should cost some credits maybe like 2.5 credits, and the exams should be less deterministic to the whole course.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- Yes I think the bonus point should be valid also for the re-exam, since people can miss the exam because of getting sick but they have done all work necessary for the bonus points.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- no question & motivation as compulsory -> just save money making by selling the book (students have to buy it)» (I suggest my system, see below)
- If we make the Questions & Motivations as necessary but increase the number of bonus points at least 5 points as we participate in many labs and do many exercises and have no points for them. in other courses there are pints for every lab and assignments. And there must be two exams, one in the middle with a half book and with 50 % weigtage and the remaining at the end. In this way all the students will remain motivated and will have small load of work.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- I think that you should pass the course if you do the mandatory parts and have a exam for a higher grade» (I suggest my system, see below)
- helicopter lab was good praticle work need more these type of assignment because if you did praticle work you can learn more as throtical.and also need some saminar or conference on this subject and visit to the market and collect the data from people about the TQM which problem they are facing on the different product.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- Introduce more sources for reading» (I suggest my system, see below)
- The Q&M"s were good and served a purpose. However, it made me read the book in a way that was not optimal for learning but instead just trying to find something to question.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- I don´,t really understand why we have to write questions to all chapters. I think it is better to just write for the important ones.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- There could be some grades from the helicopter lab and other reports, for the following reasons : - students would take it more seriously and benefit from it more - soft engineering is about hands-on projects» (I suggest my system, see below)
- All content was very interesting but maybe some parts were handled too shallowly» (I suggest my system, see below)
- A system that could be considered for the compulsory parts is to get academic credits for them, as other courses dose with laboratory parts. Then it will be very clear to the students what they need to pass in order to complete the course.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- I would prefer to have 4 take-home-exams. After each 2 weeks one will have one week to answer home exams. Written exams for such courses do not reflect all we have learnt i guess.» (I suggest my system, see below)
- no compulsory activities as well as no bonus points» (I suggest my system, see below)
- It is stupid to evaluate the course before the results are in.» (I suggest my system, see below)

Summarizing questions

16. Would you recommend this course to other students?

79 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
No»2 2%
Yes»54 68%
Yes, definitely»23 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.26

- Combines many ideas and principles that have been practiced in other courses! Good!» (Yes)
- Tyckte det var värdelöst att vi var tvungna att läsa kaptel och skriva frågor varje vecka, tog alldeles för stor arbetsbelastning. Det var också för mycket obligatoriska moment. Helekopterlab var bra resten borde inte vara obligatorikt.» (Yes)
- Yes and no..» (Yes)
- "Just yes" because it depends on the interest of the people. Interest in more mathematic oriented areas and in softer areas should exist. I like this mix.» (Yes)
- Have given me a good perspective about what TQM is and how to applay some of the tools and so on.» (Yes, definitely)
- Useful tool.» (Yes, definitely)
- The course has given relevant knowledge and skills in areas that probably will be used in a future employment. » (Yes, definitely)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The assignments were good, probably some more time is needed to perform them, but otherwise they helped a lot.»
- The Bonuspoint-System, especially the Question and Motivation task.»
- nothing new needed.»
- Laboratiories»
- the helicopter lab»
- the wide variety of lecturers»
- Clear structure»
- The Q&M since they make you keep up the pace in the course and to reflect on all chapters.»
- the different labs were really interesting. All of them.»
- Practice part and administration»
- the helicopter assignment, and all other practical assignments.»
- the guest course»
- The laborations.»
- The system of question and motivation, that implies people to read the book!»
- The combination of theory and practice!!! It makes the topics more understanable. »
- all the group works and the lecturers»
- Q&M - submitting weekly. Makes you read the book All the exercises. BPM - Berlin, he was realy good!»
- Nicely organized lectures and practical assignments like the Helicopter Lab and the valuable guest lectures.»
- Helicopter lab,Process management assignment,KJ-Shiba method,interactive assessment»
- The balance between labs, submissions and lectures.»
- Q&M... It helped to a great extent to gather knowledge about topic before the lecture.»
- KJ-shiba,»
- Most of the parts, didn"t however like the distribution of chapters that should already been read in the beginning, give some room for getting the book first.»
- The teachers and the book»
- SPC»
- The practical aspect of course was very useful and must be preserved. I learned some new methods to how to manage my ideas in a business form from the experimental assignments.»
- The BPM-week»
- The obligatory sessions with labs. Although the method should be described better in lectures before (KJ SHIBA) on a powerpoint»
- Keep the structure of the course, the global approach.»
- the helicopter lab»
- I think it is a good thing that you have to read the chapters before the lectures. This should be kept!»
- all the groupworks»
- The question and answer sessions befor the exam! »
- DoE, SPC, Process mgmt. »
- See earlier comments.»
- Most of it»
- The mix»
- practical works»
- Hand-ins each week»
- DoE exercise »
- structured way of learning lecturers exercises »
- Hendrys SPC lectures. they were exremly good. »
- the lab and exercise we did in class. I like them, and it helps to remember what we learnt in class»
- I think everyhting was good i attended, but I did not go to the lectures!»
- The teachers, the big number of assignments (also small ones in between particularly during topics SPC and House of Quality were very interesting), the course content»
- the helicopterlab»

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The course book is not the best. It has lot of information but it is too wide. Half of the book is not used for exam»
- The Interaktive Assignement was redundant.»
- too many teachers! change this. »
- More focus on real life examples, not only theory on how stuff works.»
- Marcos lecture about exam administration!!! We are Master students, not first year students! COME ON! If one or two students need help with this, ask them to talk to Marco or the student administration, not as a lecture!»
- nothing»
- Division of groups were messy this year. Exercises should be concluded better. Lectures and slides for DoE and SPC should be better structured.»
- Maybe change the structure of the DoE lectures in some way. I actually feel that i learned more during Marcos last Q&A session about DoE then during the lectures.»
- Maybe asking the question and motivation just for the most important chapters avoiding some easy or historical chapters. See above comment.»
- Q&M and reduce theory part»
- Q&M"s should be considered organising in an other way»
- the motivation questions»
- Find out a structure for the order of the lectures, maybe a kind of story, or a thread...»
- Decrease the number of hand-ins, instead of Q&M for each chapter it could be recomended to have Q&M for each area, such as for DoE, SPC, Management and so on.»
- Better Lab-PM for the Helicopter lab. That was one of the worst I have ever seen. No clear structure and you had to read it very many times before you actually understood. Then you had to jump around in the text to make it clear what was actually going to happen. Reserv bigger classrooms for the exercises! E42(??) for 100 people???»
- Maybe it would be a good idea that there is a seminar in every week after reading the chapters and having the lectures, maybe like a review, and students can talk and discuss the things they got confused. That will make the reading parts before the lectures more efficient.»
- I"ve no idea»
- Nothing comes to mind.»
- Practical work for seven tools of TQM with practical data of industries can be introduced»
- The structure so it feels like one course instead of different parts.»
- see 17....»
- The system of the course»
- make it more practical and market survey to the student»
- DO NOT INCLUDE the chapters concerning the topics of quality indices and awards. They are not interesting nor does they seem as an important part of the course. »
- I think some more references should be introduced to get a better view of whole concepts. The book was not enough and other sources were not given to us.»
- Less focus on SPC and DoE and more focus on the other parts, perhaps introduce a big project to do.»
- If all the questions are handed in, the exam should only be to obtain a higher grade! Hence, studying for an exam is although combined with a lot of stress which can be negative to the learning. Hence, assignments should be better. Exam only to get a higher grade!»
- Maybe incorporate some group works/presentations in the grading, because this is what we"re supposed to do as engineers. It seems to me that, as good as the course is, it gives "one" view of quality management, the one given by the book. Especially as far as the "7 mgmt tools" and "7 QC tools" as concerned. I am convinced that in a couple of years new tools will come... What is more, many companies use their own customized tools. So we should maybe use the term "some very useful tools", instead of "THE 7 ..." which seems quite partial (and I saw some students taking it for granted) »
- the text material for SPC»
- I think that instead of writing your own question and motivation on each chapter, there should be questions to be answered. Both reflection but also theory-based!»
- question and motivation»
- The experiment " Hellicopter lab" should be illustrated a littele bit better. Especially the analysis. »
- See earlier comments.»
- Handouts published earlier, less slide content, a separate compendium with the necessary addenda to the course»
- Look at hte comment on quetsion 15.»
- repeatation in design of experiments»
- more numerical exercise»
- SPC earlier»
- Last week about Change management. the lecturer was kind of not cool!»
- last weeks lecture shall be more considered evaluation shall have more calculations»
- Nothing i can think of»
- There should allways be a feedback after the assignments, give (more) overviews about where in the topic we are (during lectures)»
- nothing»

19. Additional comments

- Did not see the examiner more than first week, should have some more lectures.»
- the course was very interesting and all lectures seemed well connected to each other and the subject of the course. »
- none.»
- The course as a whole was interresting, but sometimes the lecturers were difficult to understand. All in all it was a nice atmosphere what was provided by friendly gestures of the organizing people.»
- thanks to all the lectures~!:)»
- I am absolutely satisfied!!!»
- the part SPC is very tough to understand and heard that its the main covering area for exam..... this is frightening me !»
- Good course! Good work!»
- Nice teachers and friendly classmates, a good studying atmosphere.»
- focus more on important chapters, not necessary to cover all chapters»
- Very good administration and structure of the course.»
- The quality of the course was excellent. »
- Could be less math theory on DoE.»
- I bought the Swedish book, but i feel that everyone should buy the English one because of language difficulties later when you write the Q&M:s»
- Hendry was very eager and energetic to teach students and I think it is very important to be proactive in class and explain concepts in a more simple language. Also,I think Marco was well selected for this course as he was very responsible with a high intention to do team working. It was nice that we had a course lecturer as Bo who wrote the course"s book himself. All the guests were serious to teach and cooperate. It means that the quality of course was managed based on QFD before! :) »
- Except for my criticism on point 18., Good job! »
- It was a very interesting and fun course. I do really think that I can implement the learning from this course and used in future work.»
- no , easier exam~»
- Keep on! nice course!»
- Very good course, Marco was excellent as course assistant!»
- Unfortunately no teacher came for questions during the exam. By now it is clear, that this was based on a missunderstanding.»
- Maybe additional seminars from the industry! »

Kursutvärderingssystem från