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.

Integrated Product Development 09, TEK150

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-01-12 - 2010-01-24
Antal svar: 24
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 47%
Kontaktperson: Lars Trygg»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Klass: Övriga

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.

24 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»5 20%
Around 20 hours/week»10 41%
Around 25 hours/week»5 20%
Around 30 hours/week»3 12%
At least 35 hours/week»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- Very unsure.» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

24 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 4%
75%»8 33%
100%»15 62%

Genomsnitt: 4.58

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?

24 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»5 20%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»6 25%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»13 54%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

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.

21 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»2 9%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»19 90%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.9

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

22 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»11 50%
Yes, definitely»7 31%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»4 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- Too easy and too specific questions. » (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

24 svarande

Small extent»2 8%
Some extent»6 25%
Large extent»12 50%
Great extent»4 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- The teaching does not clarify that much of the book. The book is so old and confusing. Sometimes teaching contradicts with the book.» (Small extent)

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»7 29%
Large extent»11 45%
Great extent»5 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- The course book is very old and I was not convinced during the course that it was in generall up to date as Lars Trygg argued. By having guest lecturers that work in real projects, describing the dilemmas described in the book, it can be shown that the literature is up to date. As for now, only consultants and peoples from the academia was lecturing which was not creditable enough.» (Some extent)
- would like to have a book newer than 17 years. » (Some extent)
- too much group work takes a a lot of time...» (Some extent)

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

24 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»12 50%
Very well»12 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Rather well because of the late annoncement.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 4%
Rather good»8 33%
Very good»13 54%
I did not seek help»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- Lars Trygg was very fast in responding to questions per mail which is appreciated. » (Very good)

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

24 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»5 20%
Rather well»8 33%
Very well»11 45%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

11. How was the course workload?

24 svarande

Too low»1 4%
Low»1 4%
Adequate»15 62%
High»6 25%
Too high»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

12. How was the total workload this study period?

24 svarande

Too low»1 4%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»11 45%
High»10 41%
Too high»2 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- I would have preferred a more balanced workload for both courses we had.» (High)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

24 svarande

Poor»1 4%
Fair»3 12%
Adequate»6 25%
Good»10 41%
Excellent»4 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.54

- One very main problem is the course literature, the very old book, with old literature and language.» (Fair)
- There is a good structured organization. The topics have a wider scope of choice. » (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- 1. The lecture about Lean Product Development was interesting and should be preserved. 2. The literature review should be preserved because it is a fun and interesting way of learning but it should be more interesting if we each week instead of discussing W&C, discussed one article about one of the topics. With different topics each week. »
- This type of literature reviews and also lectures.»
- All of the courses,workshops,game,case and topic should be preserved to next year.»
- Good literature»
- games, literature seminars»
- Literature seminare. I think it"s a shame that not many students attended. (including me at some points). However, I think it"s a really good way of learning. »
- literature seminar, activities for help understanding the course»
- Seminars»
- Innehålet i kursen var både intressant och roligt även om vissa delar kunde förbättras se nästa svar. »

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- 1. Explain more the purpose and some more theory of the Lean Production Development Game before conducting it. As for now, it was not clear what Lean Product Development was when we were running the game which made that learning opportunity lost. 2. Add a study visit where the dilemmas of product development projects are highlighted. 3. Add more focus on project management instead of rapid prototyping which most of the class already has covered (all mechanical students+industrial engineer students) 4. Don"t focus that many points on the exam on questions which could only be answered if the student attended the class. I hope that the exam should cover what the lecturer think is most important in class. In that case this information should also be possible to study in articles and not only on a slide. As example, the question about the differences between the volvo and ericsson product development process. This could not be understood by only reading the slides but you had to hear what Lars Trygg said during that lecturer. This lecturer was held in a very small rectangular class room were hearing and viewing of the small projector picture was limited. 5. The presentation of the topic reports could be placed earlier in the schedules and not all at them same afternoon. In such way, you learn more and can reflect on the subjects during other lectures. 6. Skip the chapters 9&10 in W&C since Ida Gremyr is covering methods and tools. »
- Some practise should be added such as visiting the local factories. So we can clearly understand the product development process in site.»
- A bit more related to the program, how we are supposed to use the knowledge on a workplace. The theory was good but the reality is often different.»
- The course literature (book)»
- De första lektionerna känndes bara son repetition från tidigare period och kunde användas till något mer intressant. »

16. Additional comments

- I didn"t know that there will be this much emphasize on guest lectures and articles in the exam. it would be better if it was mentioned. at the time of choosing topics for topic report, we had almost no idea about any of them. it would be better if we have had more information about each of them so that we could choose topic more relevant to our field of interest.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från