Visa resultat

Management of Physical Distribution, ITR585

Participation

1. Approximately, how much time per week have you allocated to this course?

34 svarande

Maximum 15 hours/week»		11		32%
About 20 hours/week»		8		23%
About 25 hours/week»		9		26%
About 30 hours/week»		4		11%
More than 35 hours/week»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.35

- Almost the entire course was the same as the Freight transportation course which was sad since it didn"t inspire me. It"s a good course but not in the SCM program as long as the Freight course is mandatory» (Maximum 15 hours/week)

2. Estimate the amount of lectures that you have attended to.*

0%»		1		2%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		2		5%
75%»		14		41%
100%»		17		50%

Genomsnitt: 4.35

- Had another course in parallell with this on tuesdays.» (75%)
- Closer to 100% then to 75%» (100%)

3. Estimate amount of time you have spent on the case studies.*

Less than 20 hours»		6		17%
About 20 hours»		13		38%
About 40 hours»		10		29%
About 60 hours»		4		11%
More than 60 hours»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.44

- THe first case studie was an external analysis of a company which was the second case I did during my first year on Chalmers. Hence, it was too easy and didnt give me any extra knowledge since the learning experience was "each company has different distribution systems" Please remove this case since I cant se the objective with doing it.» (Less than 20 hours)
- Case studies always take much more time than expected!» (About 60 hours)

Fulfillment of the objectives

4. How understandable are the course objectives for you?*

It is hard to understand the course objectives»		5		14%
The objectives could be more clear»		17		50%
I know what I should learn in the course clearly»		9		26%
I do not know»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.29 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The scope of the course is too wide, many things are repeated from earlier courses and there is no depth in the new knowledge.» (It is hard to understand the course objectives)
- I saw the objectives maybe too broad and it was difficult to catch up core ideas. » (The objectives could be more clear)
- But I almost know everything before taking this course.» (I know what I should learn in the course clearly)
- I didnt read them.» (I do not know)

5. Are the course objectives in line with the your background knowledge and the number of points of the course?*

No, the level of the course objectives is low»		10		29%
Yes, the objectives are clear and in line with them»		24		70%
No, the level of the course objectives are too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.7 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- There is a lot of repetition from previous courses in the Supply Chain Management program.» (No, the level of the course objectives is low)
- Cause I already took the Freight course» (No, the level of the course objectives is low)

6. Did the examination test if you have reached the course objectives?*

Not at all»		1		2%
To some extents»		24		70%
Yes, in a high level»		9		26%

Genomsnitt: 2.23 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The exam was what could be expected, based on the low level of the course overall.» (To some extents)
- But the course objectives were way to easy to achieve!» (Yes, in a high level)
- But I dont think it"s fair to choose one concept with 10 points since the group that chose that concept will have 10 points directly. The things asked for at the exam should have been mention during the lectures not during the presentations since you just listened to half of the class.» (Yes, in a high level)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.07

Teaching and course administration

7. How much the lectures have helped your learning?*

Very little»		5		14%
Rather Little»		11		32%
To a raher large extent»		15		44%
To a large extent»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

- Without the lectures it was impossible to understand the books (First book and the concepts)» (To a raher large extent)
- I still perceived that only a part of the subjects were handled in the lessons. » (To a raher large extent)

8. How much the course literature and the other course material have helped your learning?*

Very little»		5		14%
Rather Little»		9		26%
To a raher large extent»		13		38%
To a large extent»		7		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- The book gives no deeper knowledge about anything, but is rather like a summary. Parts of the book are for imbecils and the language use and notation made it necessary to interpret every paragraph to get something at all out of it.» (Very little)
- Well, rewrite the book please. Make it understandable!» (Rather Little)
- Unfortunately the course main literature (Economy of Transportation) is very poor organized and it takes time to just understand the language. The text is not coherent and has lots of mistakes which makes it difficult to trust all you read! » (Rather Little)
- The course literature is a bit difficult to understand sometimes. For example clearer explanations and definitions of concepts and terms used could be helpful in the book.» (Rather Little)
- I think that the course book would be much better if it would be all in English. The concepts were very hard to understand from the kompendium. » (Rather Little)
- It was hard to read becasue of mistakes in the book and direct translation from Swedish» (To a large extent)

9. How much did the case studies help your learning?*

Very little»		9		26%
Rather Little»		10		29%
To a raher large extent»		13		38%
To a large extent»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.23

- You really have to come up with better cases. The description was very foggy of what we were supposed to do! The second one was even more foggy since the concepts that could be desrcibed in two sentences were to be written about in ten pages! that just gives 10 pages of bullshit makeup writing. Construct one or two "made up" interesting cases instead. Some kind of calculating could be interesting where you could look at efficiency and effektiveness of different distribution systems. » (Very little)
- The cases were very vaguely described and the goals of them were inexisting. This is an area that needs to be improved.» (Very little)
- The first case was like a pre school project (choose a company and describe it). The second project was better, at least the idea behind it, but the concepts were very random. Overall, the case studies gave very little deeper knowledge about anything and it was very hard to see how they were connected to the lectures and the scope of the course. » (Very little)
- What did anyone learn from the first case study?» (Very little)
- The connection between the cases and the course was unclear.» (Rather Little)

10. How much have the guest lectures helped your learning?*

Very little»		4		11%
Rather Little»		14		41%
To a raher large extent»		13		38%
To a large extent»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.44

- Some of the guest lectures were similar to the ones in the course "Freight transport systems". However, it is very good to have guest lectures to see what happens in the industry, but they should be informed about the course content and be convinced to talk about specific aspects (e.g. transport costs or pricing) and not only give general speaches about the company or "logistics" as is generally the case.» (Rather Little)

11. How much the calculation exercises have helped your learning?*

Very little»		6		17%
Rather Little»		6		17%
To a raher large extent»		15		44%
To a large extent»		7		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.67

- the exercises were very simple» (Very little)
- I didn"t attend at those at all. » (Very little)
- The calculation exercises in this course are too simple. » (Very little)
- but the calculations were too easy, like preschool.» (To a raher large extent)
- The difficulty of the calculation exercises was very low. These exercises would have been appropriate on a bachelor level, and not a master level and we have done very similar things in early economics courses (Profit equals revenue minus cost etc.). This makes me question whether the course really needs to have a mathematical element. If it does it should probably introduce something new instead of repeating old knowledge. However, the exercise lectures were very well executed and structured. » (To a raher large extent)

12. How much the host companies have helped your understanding about the course contents?*

Very little»		19		55%
Rather little»		9		26%
To a rather large extent»		5		14%
To a large extent»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.64 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- not at all» (Very little)
- The host company task was really useless» (Very little)
- This was very bad planned. We felt emberresed to meet our host company with these questions that we already knew the answers to! » (Very little)
- The host company is a good idea but the case involved with it in this course didn"t seem so thought throu. Could have been better excecuted.» (Very little)
- We didnt visit our host company since we already had all answer from earlier meetings in the Freight course» (Very little)
- The extra exercise that was put in in the last minute about the host companies was pathetic. It was embarrassing for us to ask these questions. It would have been much better to incorporate the host companies in one of the actual cases. One interesting aspect would be to look at tranport costs for the host companies. » (Very little)
- The provided question was not good, and our previous visits and interviews have not been taken into consideration when choosing the questions. Also it was much better if you did not send the questions directly to the companies.» (Rather little)
- Most of the questions for host company had been covered in previous course.» (Rather little)

13. How was the course administration, course homepage and the handed out material ?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		12		35%
Rather good»		12		35%
Very good»		10		29%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- student portal could be better managed» (Rather bad)
- Would be nice with more folders and better use of the portals diffrent functions, such as handin. » (Rather bad)
- More old exams earlier.» (Rather bad)
- Course administration have been pretty good by the material in form of the books could be better - all in English and better more info about the concepts. » (Rather bad)
- The course web page was ok.» (Rather good)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 1.64

Study environment

14. How were opportunities to ask questions and to get help from the teachers of the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		3		8%
Rather good»		18		52%
Very good»		13		38%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

15. How was collaboration between you and the other students in the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		3		8%
Rather good»		17		50%
Very good»		14		41%

Genomsnitt: 3.32

- we had to do course administration our selves to get all the powerpoint slides we needed...» (Rather good)

Lecturers and the examiner

16. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort Professor Kent Lumsden put on the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		5		14%
Rather good»		19		55%
Very good»		10		29%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- There were only lectures the first four weeks! I hardly learned anything at all in the course since it was only repetition from previous courses. I thinh this course and the Freight Transport Systems course should be merged to one 15point course with a large project and a real termpaper in it. Kent"s English was rather bad and he has the bad habit of ending every sentence with "you know". I counted once and during one lesson (45min) he said it 176 times!!!!!» (Rather bad)
- He is intressted in his subject, however he didn"t distributed the time very well. » (Rather good)
- As a teacher, i think that Kent Lumsden has great passion about his subject and brings som interesting topics, but this course needs to be restructured» (Rather good)
- Kent is a smart and eperienced lecturer. However, i think he feels like he has to cover the whole area of logistics instead of one aspect of it. This makes everything he says sound like a summary instead of an explanation, which it should be. More depth and less width would be preferrable.» (Rather good)
- Mr Kent is really fast! he teaches as tough he is lecturing the Swedish government officials. Needs to come down to students level and teach» (Rather good)

17. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort Vahid Mirzabeiki put on the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		5		14%
Rather good»		20		58%
Very good»		9		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- He did not contribute much to the students.» (Rather bad)
- he was always present if you had some questions.» (Rather good)
- Didn"t attend » (Rather good)
- Vahid tries really hard to cope with everything, but it seems that he has too much on his plate with the course andministration. As a supervisor for the case he did not have enough knowledge about the concepts, but the calculation exercises were well presented and structured nicely. » (Rather good)

18. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort Joanne Ellis put on the course?*

Very bad»		1		2%
Rather bad»		10		29%
Rather good»		20		58%
Very good»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

- who was she??» (Rather bad)
- We never met her so have nothing to base our evaluation on.» (Rather bad)
- Well we did not meet her much but the little time we had was good. the case needs to be restructured.» (Rather good)
- We just met her once!» (Rather good)
- Dont know.» (Rather good)
- The only time I met her was the mandatory supervision for case one, so it is hard to give a real judgement. » (Rather good)
- She had a very small part in the course regarding the case from students point of view but I think she still took care the meeting rather good. » (Rather good)

19. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Per-Olof Arnäs put on the course?

33 svarande

Very bad»		1		3%
Rather bad»		3		9%
Rather good»		21		63%
Very good»		8		24%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

- He wasnt bad per se, but we had had exactly the same presntation by him in the previous course, Freight Transport Systems. Merge the two courses to one!!» (Very bad)
- He is very nice visitor but we already had his lecture in the freight transport course. The content was pretty much same. » (Rather bad)
- dont knwo» (Rather good)
- Parts of the lecture was repeted from the course Freight transport systems and the subject area was a bit too general, but he is a very good lecturer and has some very interesting new ideas.» (Rather good)
- One of the best lectures in this course.» (Very good)

20. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Kjell-Åke Hvittfeldt put on the course?

31 svarande

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		1		3%
Rather good»		13		41%
Very good»		17		54%

Genomsnitt: 3.51

- Missed this lecture. » (?)
- Some of the stuff we had already heard when we did a fieldtrip to volvo in the Freight Transport Course.» (Very good)
- Execellent!» (Very good)

21. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Carl-Johan Westas put on the course

34 svarande

Very bad»		1		2%
Rather bad»		6		17%
Rather good»		20		58%
Very good»		7		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.97

- dont know» (Rather good)
- New lecturer. Interesting to get the perspective of the supplier of distribution services.» (Rather good)

22. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Hans Hygrell put on the course?

33 svarande

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		4		12%
Rather good»		17		51%
Very good»		12		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- Missed this lecture.» (?)
- didnt attend» (Rather bad)
- dont remeber» (Rather good)
- Execellent!» (Very good)

23. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Bo Hallams put on the course?

33 svarande

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		5		15%
Rather good»		20		60%
Very good»		8		24%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

- New lecturer. Interesting to get the perspective of the supplier of distribution services, but very general information.» (Rather good)

24. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Arvid Guthed put on the course?

34 svarande

Very bad»		4		11%
Rather bad»		4		11%
Rather good»		20		58%
Very good»		6		17%

Genomsnitt: 2.82

- The lecture was the same as the one we had last period and it was not structured.The lecturer was not sure about what he wanted to talk about!» (Very bad)
- I think he had no idea what he is going to tell us. Maybe because we had visited the port and he had a lecture at that time, so he figured out that his slides are the same!» (Rather bad)
- Well, he had a good lecture, but it was the second time we had him. i do not know if you know that we had him as a guest lecturer in Freight Transport Systems?» (Rather good)
- First half of the lecture was an exact replica of the lecture we had heard from him in the course Freight transport systems, but he was informed in the break and thereafter successfully tried to mix it up with some new knowledge.» (Rather good)

Concluding questions

25. What is your total estimation of the course?*

Very bad»		3		8%
Rather bad»		12		35%
Rather good»		15		44%
Very good»		4		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.58

- No new material in the course. Guest lectures were ok but to have a course that is only repetition from previous courses feels like a waste of time.» (Very bad)
- THis is mainly cause its very similar to the freight course. If I hadn"t took that course I might have liked this.» (Very bad)
- To much overlapping with earlier courses!» (Rather bad)
- some parts are worth saving but it need to be restructured, especially the cases!» (Rather bad)
- It was very hard to see the use of this course. Much of the knowledge seemed evident. If the focus had been more narrow and if it would hade given some indepth knowledge about for example pricing and cost the grade would have been better. » (Rather bad)
- I think what the course is about is interesting and important to learn, but the book is not very good and it was hard to get a feel for what the course was really about and what was important in the course.» (Rather bad)

26. Do you recommend the course to the students of the next year? If NO, please motivete your answer*

Yes»		22		64%
No»		12		35%

Genomsnitt: 1.35

- Yes, if the course is better structured and comments above are listened to. Otherwise no.» (Yes)
- Too similar freight transport systems or the distinction between them were difficult to see.» (No)
- not much new new knowledge, the course literature had a very low quality. Supply & Demand was tought in the very first course at the Industrial Engineering & Management program.» (No)
- Freight transport systems and this course are too similar. It would have better to merge these 2 course into 1. » (No)
- The course was too easy. Only repetition from previous courses. I guess if you never had any logistics or basic economis (supply and demand-curves) it would have been an okay course...» (No)
- no! it was so similar to FTS course» (No)
- Since the administration was bad regarding the cases and it did not give us anything new. It was some kind of mixture of the other courses.» (No)
- Repetition from previous courses.» (No)
- I dont think it should be mandatory for the SCM program since almost everything is included in the Freight Course.» (No)
- textbooks are suck too much economics overlapped» (No)
- At least not without a change of book, new, more interesting cases, and a more clear focus. » (No)
- Not very good literatures or lectures for that matter» (No)
- not interesting at all» (No)

27. Any comments?*

Yes»		7		20%
No»		27		79%

Genomsnitt: 1.79

- it wasn"t in a quality I expected from chalmers university» (Yes)
- Extensive modifications should be done on the book "Economy of Transportation" Regarding the cost and pricing lectures, the dominant viewpoint was socio-economical while I think we need to know more about the private perspective considering the world"s trend. » (Yes)
- Take my ratings with a big piece of salt. I only did the exam as I had only done this course before, thus I didn"t attend anything from this year"s course... » (Yes)
- The entire subject has been really vague, with limited text and studying only graphs by its face value seems to be senseless. There should be documentation of the examples too. The grammar and english used in the translated book is very poor and sometimes difficult to understand.» (Yes)
- Information about host company assignment were not given at the beginning of the course. Later we didn`t get any specific requirements for assignment. Information should be given at least in student portal. Information about assignment 1 and 2 were not full. No information about points possible to score. » (Yes)
- The book has a lot of mistakes, sometimes is hard to understand and some parts are not translated from Swedish or the look like translated directly from Swedish word by word» (Yes)
- If possible to sharpen the core objectives would be great. Now the course content may have too broad sense. Personally I liked transport economy section but logistics concepts had a lot of material and different methods (intresting but maybe too much for the one course). If possible to balance those subjects somehow would be good. » (Yes)
- Sorry if it is harsh words but I simply feel that I didnt learn anything new in this course. As i said before I think you should merge this course with the Freight transport course to a 15 points course. Then you could have a bigger project, maybe in corporation with real companies. That could have been fun and I think it has a great potential. As it is now some of the course litterature is the same in both courses and so are some of the guest lecturers... » (No)

* obligatoriska frågor