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.

Technological change & industrial transformation, ht 09, IDY040

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-12-09 - 2010-02-02
Antal svar: 49
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 68%
Kontaktperson: Kathrine Jahnberg»

1. I am a student originally coming from,

49 svarande

the School of Technology Management and Economics»28 57%
another school at Chalmers»3 6%
another Swedish University»0 0%
I am an international student within the MEI-program»15 30%
I am an exchange student (e.g. Erasmus)»3 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.22

2. Of the lectures, I have attended,

49 svarande

20%»1 2%
40%»4 8%
60%»4 8%
80%»19 38%
100%»21 42%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

3. Overall the course was:*

On a scale where 1 = very poor and 5 = very good

49 svarande

1 2%
0 0%
4 8%
28 57%
16 32%

Genomsnitt: 4.18 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Interesting but it felt like we discussed the same concepts at every lecture.» (4)
- Lectures could be more dynamic but it was quite interesting.» (4)
- Nice content!» (4)
- I found this course extremly useful and interesting. I would have liked the course lasted more than a quarter. » (5)
- This has been so far my favorite course! I really found extremely interesting all the content of the course and also the professor was one of the best professors I"ve had.» (5)

4. How much did you learn from the course?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Nothing at all
5= Very much

48 svarande

1, Nothing at all»0 0%
1 2%
11 22%
27 56%
5, Very much»9 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- Much of the course felt like a repitition of things we"ve already learnt. » (3)
- Much was similar to other courses.» (3)
- The real leaning comes from reading» (3)
- Big overlaps from other cources» (3)
- What I didn"t learnt was my falut and not the course"s» (4)

5. The structure of the course was

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Difficult to follow
5= Easy to follow

49 svarande

1, Difficult to follow»0 0%
1 2%
8 16%
24 48%
5, Easy to follow»16 32%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

- Overally the course is not so tough. But some topics are a kind of hard to follow.» (3)
- I like that the course broke the normal course structure ad had the lectures ad exam early, and finished with the essay. Very good» (5, Easy to follow)

6. The pace of the course was

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Too slow
5= Too fast

49 svarande

1, Too slow»0 0%
3 6%
33 67%
12 24%
5, Too fast»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- The time was really good allocated with the exam early, and time to write on the paper afterwards, also, since all literature has been covered I felt that the paper got more quality» (3)

7. The administration of the course was

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Very poor
5= Very good

49 svarande

1, Very poor»0 0%
2 4%
9 18%
22 44%
5, Very good»16 32%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- Easy and quick contact» (4)
- The lecturer and supervisor were both responsive and helpful.» (5, Very good)

8. Did the course meet your expectations?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not at all
5= Very much

49 svarande

1, Not at all»0 0%
2 4%
6 12%
28 57%
5, Very much»13 26%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- In some aspects the course outweigh my expectations and in some others it just didn"t met them.» (4)

9. How demanding was the course?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not demanding at all
5= Very demanding

48 svarande

1, Not demanding at all»0 0%
2 4%
21 43%
24 50%
5, Very demanding»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- The demanding thing is the scientific paper. But in the end it was worthy to work on it.» (3)
- Good amount of reading, and the time for the course felt good and acceptable. » (3)
- Especially the paper was demanding, but fun.» (4)
- A lot to read.» (4)

10. How difficult was the course

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not difficult at all
5= Very difficult

49 svarande

1, Not difficult at all»1 2%
4 8%
24 48%
20 40%
5, Very difficult»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.28

- The main contents were not so hard to understand. And the lecturer was good at explaining things using his own experiences.» (3)
- Here as well, the hardest but most interesting part was writing the paper.» (4)

11. Did the examination form mirror the course content?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not at all
5= Very much

48 svarande

1, Not at all»0 0%
0 0%
4 8%
21 43%
5, Very much»23 47%

Genomsnitt: 4.39

- I didn"t take the exam yet.» (?)
- Don"t have comments on favor or against. » (3)
- The exam was related with the course well.» (4)
- You need to memorize many things.» (4)
- Good exam in general. It would have been nice if the 3 hour time had been a little more highlighted. I discovered it when there was 15 min left. I would probably have distributed the writing time differently would I have known it was only 3 hours, since the usual chalmers exam time is always 4 hours.» (5, Very much)

12. Did the examination form give opportunities for reflection and learning?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not at all
5= Very much

48 svarande

1, Not at all»0 0%
0 0%
10 20%
23 47%
5, Very much»15 31%

Genomsnitt: 4.1

- I didn"t take the exam yet.» (?)
- Interesting to argue for several matters, however, I felt that there was little time during the exam. » (4)

13. Overall the supervision of writing the scientific paper was

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not good
5= Very good


- Magnus is really great, best supervisor I"ve had!»
- Good help with structure and information.»
- The supervision was very good. Maybe one more supervision could have halped to develop a better article.»
- Han var endast närvarande i slutet men då bra.»
- We did not have a perfect supervision process but it was mainly our problem since we did not have a complete version at the supervision. It is quite hard to only have one supervision, especially when the time was limited.»
- The single meeting we had with Staffan was the best supervision meeting I have ever had. With questions that questioned our discussions, that created an interest to find a better answer, rather than just creating a negative opinion was wonderful. This was the first time I felt that the supervision actually gave something. »
- Very good supervision! All our three tutors did a great job in guiding us! »
- Hard when you got different persons supervising you everytime. further it felt like different group got different supervision time, some groups got comments on all their text but we only got on half of it, for example.»

Staffan Jacobsson
23 svarande

1, Not good»0 0%
0 0%
0 0%
4 17%
5, Very good»19 82%

Genomsnitt: 4.82

Hans Hellsmark
9 svarande

1, Not good»0 0%
1 11%
2 22%
4 44%
5, Very good»2 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

Magnus Holmén
9 svarande

1, Not good»0 0%
1 11%
0 0%
1 11%
5, Very good»7 77%

Genomsnitt: 4.55

Daniel Ljungberg
6 svarande

1, Not good»2 33%
1 16%
1 16%
2 33%
5, Very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

Eugenia Perez
15 svarande

1, Not good»0 0%
0 0%
2 13%
5 33%
5, Very good»8 53%

Genomsnitt: 4.4

14. How did you perceive your lecturer"s (Staffan Jacobsson"s) competence on this topic?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Very poor
5= Very good

49 svarande

1, Very poor»0 0%
0 0%
0 0%
4 8%
5, Very good»45 91%

Genomsnitt: 4.91

- He was very into policies.» (4)
- And interesting subject, good with renewable energies etc. We have learnt so much about "regular" products in previous courses so it was nice with something else that also is very important.» (5, Very good)
- I like that Steffan always repeat the important content, this helps me in terms of focusing the main issue.» (5, Very good)
- Very Competent and recognized in the area» (5, Very good)
- Extremely competent» (5, Very good)
- He is the best!» (5, Very good)
- The assume the topic means technological change and industrial transformation» (5, Very good)

15. How did the lecturer (Staffan Jacobsson) present the information?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Very badly
5= Very well

49 svarande

1, Very badly»0 0%
0 0%
4 8%
23 46%
5, Very well»22 44%

Genomsnitt: 4.36

- Feels like he needs some more examples, not only the development of cellular phones.» (4)
- Sometimes a little bit slow?» (4)

16. How was the lecturer"s (Staffan Jacobsson"s) commitment and interest?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1= Not good
5= Very good

49 svarande

1, Not good»0 0%
0 0%
1 2%
9 18%
5, Very good»39 79%

Genomsnitt: 4.77

- Vissa föreläsningar bra, vissa utan entusiasm» (4)
- One of the most committed lecture"s I have had on Chalmers. » (5, Very good)
- Very commited and with a very deep interest and knowledge is his subjects.» (5, Very good)

17. How did you perceive you lecturer"s (Eugenia Perez) competence on this subject?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1=Very poor
5=Very good

43 svarande

1. Very poor»0 0%
1 2%
5 11%
19 44%
5. Very good»18 41%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

- Did not attend that lecture.» (?)
- Never met» (2)
- Did not attend her lecture» (3)
- pratade väldigt fort för att hinna med för mycket information på för kort tid dock med entusiasm för ämnet» (3)
- Felt like very narrow information.» (4)

18. How did the lecturer (Eugenia Perez) present the information?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1=Very poor
5=Very good

43 svarande

1. Very poor»0 0%
5 11%
13 30%
15 34%
5. Very good»10 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- Did not attend that lecture.» (?)
- Too detailed. Could have taken one example/factor and explained that one better» (2)
- Did not attend her lecture» (3)
- Too detailed. Lost the big picture» (3)
- More enthusiasm would have been nice. More questions, rhetorical and others» (3)

19. How was the lecturer"s (Eugenia Perez) commitment and interest?

Please grade from 1-5 where:
1=Very poor
5=Very good

43 svarande

1. Very poor»1 2%
1 2%
7 16%
18 41%
5. Very good»16 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.09

- Did not attend that lecture.» (?)
- Did not attend her lecture» (3)
- I would have graded 6 here. She really likes what she is talking about.» (5. Very good)

20. For the course as a whole, too little or too much attention was paid to?

- I think little attention to the practical (industrial) use of the knowledge we gathered. Course was quite theoretical indeed.»
- I want to say the attention was put in suitable places in the topics.»
- I think it was a great balance»
- Too little attention was paid to show the differences between clusters and innovation systems.»
- Too much on policies. »
- It was ok, medium attention which was paid, not too much or too less work.»
- It was really good.»
- To little attetion to he difference between cluster and innovation system, the concepts overlap and some times were blury when we were talking on he lecture about it.»
- God attention»
- Too little to write examination, how to deal with the exam sucesfuly.»
- I think everything was quite balanced.»
- More attention can be paid to connecting the meso discussions with micro, i.e. firm level. Sometimes hard to see connections»
- normal»

21. Reflections on the usefulness of writing an academic paper?

- It was very useful and meaningful for us to write a scientific paper with the help and advices from supervisor. The lecturer gave us a lot of free to choose topics based on our interest. Even our topic was kind of out of the main area of the course, the lecturer encouraged us to follow and find something related.»
- Useful, but it was really hard to chose a subject. Would have been good with some restrictions.»
- We learnt a lot! Good that you got to chose subject yourself.»
- I really learn how to write properly.»
- I do not know really what I have learned form writing the paper. »
- Should have more time and space for this task.»
- Both fun, interesting and challanging. »
- I learned a lot from writing scientific paper process both for theoretical skills in the content an the writing skills.»
- It was funny. We have never done anything like that before. »
- A good experience»
- It was very useful, but it is quite difficult to do it in group. But still it was good experience!»
- Good!»
- Good with another kind of paper that differed from the other hundreds of cases written during the program..»
- Very useful to future works, good supervision and lectures related.»
- Good, but the lecture of "how to write an academic paper" would be better to have in the course "managing development projects" since the paper written in that course also was very academic. »
- Interesting to write an article. First time»
- I think is very useful to do this kind of projects because it does not only provide us aditional information about a specific topic but also give us the opportunity to improve our writing skills.»
- The first time we do it with proper instructions, quite interesting.»
- Usefull, but we have already done such writings»
- Fun for a change to be able to choose you"re own topic. It trains the creative and analytical mind.»
- very good»

22. Reflections on the supervision for writing an academic paper?

- Magnus was knowledgeable and willing to help. Supervision meetings did a lot of help.»
- Really really good supervision!!!»
- We got a lot of support from our supervisor.»
- I could be helpfull to have more meeting with the supervisor»
- Really good that we handed in advance and got commented in word and sentback in advance of supervision so we got time to think of questions »
- We had two different supervisors. When we had eour second meeting our supervisor was jetlagged. The system with only two supervisions is not clear enough, and by the way, it is NOT working!! Students who have supervisors down at departments belonging to the MEI-programme get hours of supervisions. People I have talked to have had approximately over 5 hours of supervisions. Put that it contrast wit your concept that it is one supervision only on the abstract (30 min) and one on the draft (30 min). The system is slightly unfair. Make it more clear that it is only two supervisions that is allowed and take away the rules of twhat should be discussed, life is not fair, don"t punish the ambitious.»
- Extremely good supervision from Magnus Holmén.»
- Very good, the best supervision I have had in any course. It is rare to get so extensive comments and opportunity for discussing during the writing process.»
- My supervisor which is Steffan helped us very much.»
- It was good.»
- Good»
- Great!»
- Very good and useful.»
- Very good with the guidance to state a clear purpose»
- It was extremely useful because our supervisor gave us a lot of tips and good ideas that help to improve our paper.»
- Very good.»
- Very good suervision with Staffan»
- very good. not only gave guidelines and general supervision but also drove us to think for ourselves.»
- good»

23. Are there overlaps with other courses and, if so, please point these out and evaluate whether or not the overlaps were negative.

- This course had some overlaps with Magnus"s course "Economics of Innovation". But I think the overlaps are not negative as the lecturers explain in different ways and their own insights. It is okay.»
- I think it is good with some overlaps, it is not a problem.»
- It was going to overlap the examination with a quiz from CNB, but they changed the CNB quiz, try to prevent this from the beginning.»
- Yes, there are overlaps. Both from the Ekonomisk Analys 3 (I3) with Ove Granstrand and Economics of Innovation with Magnus Holmén. »
- Yes there was, but I think the teachers solved this in a very good manner.»
- Yes there are, regarding technology/innovation life cycles. I think it"s good since you get a reminder and can connect the different subjects.»
- There are some overlaps with the course Technical Change and the Environment, but these are beneficial and one of the reasons why I choose the course.»
- Yes, we had a lot of work on the other course, and we somehow did not have that much time for this course.»
- Yes, there is overlaps. I think overlaps help to connect things that finally form a whole structure. Absolutely positive »
- No»
- With Economics of Innovation but I think is useful and positive.»
- Some overlaps to the economics of innovation course, but nothing negative.»
- there were some overlap with other courses, but it felt excellent since it was presented in other perspectives thus complementing previous knowledge. »
- There were some overlpas but it was not negative at all because it helped me to get a better understanding about different topics.»
- There are a lot of overlaps in general in the MEI program unfortunately. »
- It overlaps with economics of innovation a great deal. But I didn"t think it was negative. The course can maybe dig a little deeper into the topic-»

24. Comments on the course literature?

- Energy papers can be replaced by some more basic but comprehensive ones.»
- The course literature was good. The lectures and literature were related and useful to understand the content better.»
- Would have been good if we could have bought printed articles.»
- Good literature, can be expanded by having more about innovation system where it is more explicit.»
- Good articles and a suitable amount to read.Qualtity instead of quanity. Thank you»
- Some articles were very long, the shorter ones where often better, more precise. »
- Good choice not to have a book. I think the corse could handle a couple of more articles, however not that long articles. I feel that the long articles often not add too much value. Add more 10 pages articles instead. They tend to express stuff more clearly.»
- First time ever I read all articles from start to end, very interesting and good choices!»
- Sometimes, the articles were really hard to read and to catch the main ideas. »
- It might be a bit extense but pertinent though»
- Good»
- The date switch for the examination and the article worked very well»
- Quite interesting.»
- Course literature was good, some articles are obviously (as always) not that interesting. I would have preferred to get the articles in a compendium, rather than have to write all of them out. »
- Good articles»
- Good course and fun with the academic paper»
- he has lots of knowledge.»

25. What other comments or recommendations would you make for a future course?

- Maybe, I am not sure, that students can handin the papers earlier and give presentations to the class. I think it will be meaningful.»
- Have more different examples of clusters will be helpfull.»
- Change the rules for supervision. »
- More time for the scientific paper (4-5000 words is too short as well). More articles and shorter ones. Good to have such a clear connection to the course literature on the lectures as well. »
- state each lecture "learning objective" clearly please. It would have helped (me at least) to understand and learn better in the end. »
- Congratulation to Prof. Staffan Jacobsson, thanks for the lectures and your enthusiasm. I really learned during this course.»
- Nothing»
- Excellet course!!! :)»
- Litterature Seminars to make students read and reflect more on course litterature.»
- Point out clearly that it is a 3 hour exam and also maybe dig a little deeper into the topic.»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 4.18

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 4.18
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.79

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från