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.

Six Sigma Black Belt course, TEK 170

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-05-30 - 2010-06-08
Antal svar: 19
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 38%
Kontaktperson: Stefano Barone»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Industriell ekonomi 300 hp
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Industriell ekonomi 300 hp

Your own effort

General questions on the course

1. What is your general opinion of the course?

18 svarande

Very negative»5 27%
Negative»3 16%
Positive»9 50%
Very positive»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- indifferent rather than any of the above. the lectures needs to be more related to the projects. » (?)
- The administration of the course has been terrible and the three different teachers very uncorrelated. Two times the same slides were shown for us. At several occasions the time has been unefficiently used, which has been very stressful for industrial participant who go to lectures instead of work. And it is terrible that the stundent had to go to mandatory lessons about DoE, robust design, and other subjects that they already had during autumn. Terrible that the projects were not handed out until 5 weeks into the course, and terrible that there seemed to be no assurance from the schools side about what projects were suitable for a six sigma course.» (Very negative)
- The most DISORGANIZED course ever. I cannot imagine we have such a course in CHALMERS...!!!» (Very negative)
- I was disappointed with the course because we got the projects at such late stage. Moreover, the teaching was too theoretical mosttimes. An suggestion is to have more practical examples which shows on those theoretical points that are important in statistics. » (Negative)
- it helped me to learn how to use statistical methods in a DMAIC framework» (Positive)
- The lectures were perfect,but our project didn"t fit into Six sigma format. The industrial participant also couldn"t bring necessary information to the team. » (Positive)
- But I would improve the schedueling of the classes in terms of project start set up and that some guest lecures would appear in different timing. ( i.e. selection of the six sigma project came in the very end - 7th session, which I would heavily appreciate on thea early session instead, before the project has been chosen.» (Positive)

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

18 svarande

Small extent»3 16%
Some extent»13 72%
Large extent»1 5%
Great extent»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2

- Most of the knowledge that I used during the project I had already learned from previous courses at Chalmers and not on the SixSigma lectures. » (Small extent)
- I had undertaken most of the statistical tools/methods during my undergrad studies. however, the perspective of DMAIC was new to me.» (Some extent)
- More focus on training of the analysis-steps. The exercises provided was not possible to understand under the short and stressful walkthroughs and they were not possible to understand afterwards, without the guidance from the teachers.» (Some extent)
- as stated above, the lectures needs to be more related to the projects.» (Some extent)
- The project was contributing most to my learning. » (Some extent)

3. How was the course workload?

19 svarande

Too low»1 5%
Adequate/Low»10 52%
Adequate/High»8 42%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- After ONE month having nothing to do in the beginning of the course, we encountered very poor projects, very poor cooperation, very very disorganized meetings...» (Too low)
- We wanted to do so much, but we couldnt, becuase of the project and other constraints.» (Adequate/Low)
- Because we didn"t get any good material to study the statistics, it was difficult to study in between sessions. It is very difficult to study to slides.» (Adequate/Low)
- the project selection was late, three weeks of our time were lost. it would be nice to select the projects earlier.» (Adequate/High)
- that was mainly due to the project heavy work load otherwise I was missing "home work"» (Adequate/High)

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

19 svarande

Very poor»1 5%
Rather poor»5 26%
Rather good»8 42%
Very good»5 26%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.89

- hard to get a hold of our supervisor.» (Rather poor)
- You should strive hard to get answers, but if you do you may....» (Rather poor)
- The supervision for the projects has been great» (Very good)

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

19 svarande

Very badly»2 10%
Rather badly»2 10%
Rather well»9 47%
Very well»6 31%

Genomsnitt: 3

- thank you for that, the administration worked out perfectly well and smooth.» (Very well)
- I really appriciated that the lecture material was accessable prior to the lecture, in order for you to take notes on the slides» (Very well)
- Although we received the handouts very close to the lectures, but it was really good to have them at the lecture, whether printed out or on the screen.» (Very well)

6. Do you have any opinions on the sequence of sessions?

- start the project earlier»
- I think all lectures should have been placed "earlier" in the spring. I think it would have been great to know more about the future phases when starting the project.»
- yes , see Ans on Q1»
- Plan them better! And give us real references, where we should read to follow the session. In the references we got for each session was only the name of a book, no pages or anything of where to read.»
- Sequence of the sessions was not bad, the only problem was that nobody could keep the pace with the sessions. None of the projects could exactly follow what was said during the lectures in the close future.»
- I would have preferred to have all sessions earlier on to be able to get "the complete picture" of the project sooner.»

Summarizing questions

7. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The session contains are good, if required make modifications as per new treads.»
- Overall, it was pretty good.»
- Handouts, agenda in advance»
- Project cooperation with companies.»
- Nice atmosphere»
- More reading instruction, pages in the book»
- Hand outs and close supevision to the projects. Perhaps earlier.»
- Henry"s lecture were very informative and he held the most rewarding lessons. The guest lectures. »
- Maybe web page work and handouts.»
- lectures from company representative that presents how they implemented SixSigma in their company. Also the SixSigma management lecture that we had from the swedish man in the last week - he was really good! »

8. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- There should be some session arranged before for the industrial participants, so that they will get familiar with modern quality tools before to contribute more in the project. Also if possible arrange more session for JMP or other related software so that student will get more knowledge about its applicability.»
- Planning and scheduling errors - felt unprofessional. I disliked the amount of software usage lectures (even though I"m sure they were good) as I can"t afford a laptop.»
- More practical exercises, laborations. Easier to learn by doing it your self. Better planning when the sessions take place,e.g not in exam periods.»
- The content of the lectures. Way too much overlap with earlier courses.»
- More practical examples,less statictics»
- I´,m from industry, your expectations from. We didn´,n know that we should have a clear problem to solve before the course started.»
- Oh my. Call me.»
- * Projects should be handed out the first meeting. It was very bad that the projects was handed out after w5. Stefano and the industriel particpants cannot count that the students will work on the Easter holiday and the re-exam week which make the time period very short. * The first session was very unorganized. The start of a course is the most important to catch the attention. I good way would be to get the projects the first day. * There were too much repetition from previous courses, one example is that Chalmers students have already covered DOE with Ida until fractional design and Bo held the same lecture about variation several times. * Finally I hope the quality on the projects are better next year and that only a smaller group is admitted to the course. »
- I think you should reconsider the way software teaching was done. Most people do have their own laptop these days, but surely there will always be some that dont. I think you should have "home work" assignments with prepared exercises that we can take home.»
- It should not be mandatory for everyone to be present at all lectures, especially not the students that had to be present at lectures which they already had good knowledge in (for example the 2 days about DoE). Make shore that you really know what is already taught on the master program so that you don"t repeat! Be better prepared for the lectures, sometimes it seemed unstructured. Make shore that the industrial participants brings appropriate SixSigma projects that are realistic to conduct during the course weeks. Present and distribute the projects as soon as possible in the course (first course week) so that the participants can start working with their projects early on. »

9. Additional comments

- It has been a great experience and learning from the course.»
- It has been a great experience and learning from the course.»
- The projects should be initiated much earlier. Important too have time for data collection and iterations.»
- Please do something about this course! It is not fair to neither students nor industrial participants who put both money and effort to learn six sigma.»
- It was a shame that many students occupied themself with other activities during the lecture than listening to the lecturers but unfortunalty I think this is a result of sometimes too much repeptition, as the two days of DOE, and sometimes too theoretical lessons. The lectures Henry had about control charts and HoQ contained a practical task which makes it easier to particpipate and you can work together in your group. »
- Very poor written exam. It"s good to show the questions to other teachers and have their opinions about them before the exam date. This type of written exam, definitely cannot evaluate student"s knowledge about the course material. This was SIX SIGMA course, but we didn"t have any strong statistical questions in the written exam. Maybe the reason is that we didn"t have very strong statistical arguments during the lectures. The book which was introduced in the first session as a reference was the most IRRELEVANT reference that one could suggest. It"s the SixSigma course but the reference book doesn"t even have ONE complete example of the DMAIC cycle with different tools in each phase.»
- Improve overall for next year! otherwise the SixSigma course at Chalmers will get bad reputation out in the companies which will not give good references for the course participants and Chalmers. The teachers must also be correctly informed about how a course is normally conducted at Chalmers, for example to know that you can´,t schedule any lectures or presentation or meetings in the exam week. Best luck for next year! »
- ad more easy examples and excersises where students take active part»

Kursutvärderingssystem från