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 2010, IEK311

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-10-14 - 2010-10-27
Antal svar: 33
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 45%
Kontaktperson: Marco Santos»

Your own effort

1. Which of the following alternatives applies to your case at the moment of answering this survey?

For this course there were three compulsory tasks: (1) the report of the helicopter lab, (2) the interactive assessment, and (3) the guest lecture

33 svarande

I have completed all compulsory tasks»32 96%
I have not completed all compulsory tasks»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 1.03

- All tasks were relevant and really helped with understanding the material and especially was (2) good to "force" you to catch up with all the reading. (3) was very interesting and I enjoyed it very much. However the lecture went 20 minutes past the regular time which I think was unfair against students, especially this late in the study period where everyone is already extremely busy with their studies. The examiner should have told the lecturer about the time limits and ask him not to exceed them except he would have notified the students in advance that the lecture would be longer than normal. I thought this was also rude against the lecturer because people were started to get anxious and lost their concentration and even few people left. It was very disrespectful towards the lecturer but however understandable since he did go 20 past the time.» (I have completed all compulsory tasks)
- The time used in the interactive assessment could be allocated for SPC or DoE in order to divide time for longer period. Now both SPC and DoE were studied during one week. » (I have completed all compulsory tasks)
- I really liked the form of the interactive assessment. I enforced us to really start reading and studying the concepts.» (I have completed all compulsory tasks)
- The written makeup assignment is yet to be graded.» (I have not completed all compulsory tasks)

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

33 svarande

0% - 25%»2 6%
25% - 50%»2 6%
50% - 75%»9 27%
75% - 100%»20 60%

Genomsnitt: 3.42

- Dont have time to be a part of the rest» (0% - 25%)
- Took two other courses at the same time and got an extra job. Maybe not the best combination :/» (25% - 50%)
- Could not attend to the lectures first two weeks.» (50% - 75%)
- I attenden to all part of teaching offered.» (75% - 100%)
- In general, I really liked the lectures and I found the guest lectures add important perspective to the course.» (75% - 100%)

Teaching and course administration

3. What is your general impression of the course?

33 svarande

Very negative»0 0%
Negative»2 6%
Positive»21 63%
Very positive»10 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- It was not at all what I expected from the course description/syllabus on Chalmers website. I don’,t think it fits into my master program since it’,s focusing too much on product development » (Negative)
- It did not give me a better understanding of what TQM is. It was just a lot of statistic tools, but nothing about how they fit into the organization of a company. I am really lacking a broader picture of TQM and a wider understanding of the concept. Which is really odd, since this was presented as a course that should give an overview of the concept of TQM...» (Negative)
- 3 nice guys that have the course!» (Positive)
- A well structured course. The content was not the most intresting but it was structured.» (Very positive)
- » (Very positive)

4. How was the structure of the course?

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

33 svarande

Very negative»1 3%
Negative»3 9%
Positive»19 57%
Very positive»10 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- Did not find any logical connection between the different parts of the course, could not make out what was really important and hence i can not say if time spent on each area whas adequate.» (Very negative)
- Too much time on processes in the beginning with Clas Berlin and on Assessments and Methods in the end, while we rushed through DoE and SPC.» (Negative)
- Very scattered. Hard to now what was important besides DOE and SPC.» (Negative)
- In some guest lectures i really missed a clear structure. I had to read the book to get the important information because during the lecture there where just a few examples. i thought the book should support the lecture and not the other way round.» (Positive)
- Good work Marco!» (Very positive)
- Structured, with good administration. Still, I felt that compared to other covered subject and the seemingly high importance of Design of Experiments, it would have been nice to get an holistic introduction on that subject (like for the other subjects), i.e. the purpose, general advantages/disadvantages.» (Very positive)

5. Concerning the proportion of theory and practice:

By theory it is meant mainly lectures whereas practice consists mainly of exercises and group work.

33 svarande

The course was too theoretical»3 9%
The course had a good balance between theory and practice»28 84%
The course was too practical»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 1.96

- about spc, we should solve more numerical questions at the class,we just have some exercises paper, it should be explained also. » (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- But if you want us to get what the Helicopterlab is all about, PLEASE do the exercises that were handed out BEFORE the lab.» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- I don"t want to say that it was too practical but some material about general theoretical background was missing in mainly DoE and some in SPC. Some was provided in lectures but after few days you forget what was mentioned in lecture. You have to be able to go back to your reading material to review. » (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- I think the balance was fine, but it might even improve the student"s understanding to have some case where e.g. parts related to customer satisfaction would be dealt with. » (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- In my opinion the amount of the group work during the lessons was a little bit too much. » (The course was too practical)
- The practice on DoE and SPC is really good but the other things with the KJ method and processes really didn’,t feel relevant.» (The course was too practical)

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

33 svarande

Small extent»1 3%
Some extent»8 24%
Large extent»21 63%
Great extent»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- I have been learning through dicussions with other students, only by trying to sort out the meaning of the subjects did we get some kind of understanding. The litterature and lectures were of very little help. Henry"s lectures did however explain the statistical tools very well.» (Small extent)
- Hendrys lectures was really helpful. » (Large extent)

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

33 svarande

Small extent»2 6%
Some extent»11 33%
Large extent»15 45%
Great extent»5 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

- I really think that the book is rubbish. It is filled with of-the-topic mumbo jumbo and has no self critique what so ever. Maybe it worked when Bo had the course and could complement it but now it is way too detailed on some things while it doesn’,t explain other things at all, just raising more questions than it answers. The SPC for example is impossible to understand based on the book without the lectures. If there are other books on the topic you really should look around for something better. » (Small extent)
- The book does not give any information at all. For example, i do not know what quality control groups are, because the book only stated how many there had been in different companies and how many there are today. Not any information about WHAT a quality control group actually is, HOW it works at it best and WHY you should have them in your organization.» (Small extent)
- The book is not optimal for the course. For important aspects like DoE and SPC there are not enough infos in the book. And in addition the book is really boring.» (Some extent)
- Like I said before, material missing on DoE and SPC. Also I was not to happy with the lecture notes once I started studying for the exam. They worked really well during lecture I thought but generally notes should help you study and they should point out the things that you are expected to learn and know. It is difficult to have notes that don"t really tell you anything or give you no information once you are studying for the exam. » (Some extent)
- The slides were really useful. The book was not so useful in some cases (DOE).» (Large extent)
- The book was kind of poos in some sections, e.g DOE. » (Large extent)
- Maybe more detailed material for the basics of DoE would be needed.» (Large extent)
- Slides generally very good, especially in QPP, SPC and Intro. What is in the book was helpful but sometimes more detailed discussion in book would be preferable. Also, we felt there were quite a big difference in book"s discussion on DoE compared to discussion in lectures.» (Large extent)

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

33 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»6 18%
Very good»24 72%
I did not seek any help»3 9%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- Hendry was even available for questions on the phone during the exam week!» (Very good)
- All teachers were very open for questions.» (Very good)

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

33 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»12 36%
Very well»21 63%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- Indexing in the course book and the rest of the litterature would be quite a help when studying.» (Rather well)
- Announcement of the use of the spare lectures should have come earlier. It is hard enough for us students to plan our time without having changes one day in advance. » (Rather well)

Study climate

10. How was the course workload?

In relation to the 7,5 credits for this course

33 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»3 9%
Adequate»22 66%
High»7 21%
Too high»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- Quite high for the weeks of SPC and DoE.» (High)

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

33 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»2 6%
Rather well»8 24%
Very well»22 66%
I did not seek cooperation»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- I think there were too many "cases" and "interactive stuff" to do during the lectures. But I know that some people on the other hand really liked it.» (Rather poorly)
- it is good to have group works just in class » (Very well)
- I can answer “,very well”, on this question because I refused to be a part of Marcos games of mixing the groups randomly. We are adults and capable of taking responsibility for our own education. We can divide ourselves into groups. Stop that nonsense and stop treating us like 5 year olds.» (Very well)
- Cooperation in course group work went well.» (Very well)

12. How well has cooperation between you and the people involved in the course worked?

32 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 3%
Rather well»9 28%
Very well»17 53%
I did not seek cooperation»5 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.81

Examination process and grading

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

33 svarande

Not at all»1 3%
No»3 9%
Yes»16 48%
Yes, definitely»2 6%
I have not taken the exam yet»11 33%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

- This was one of the worst exams I have seen on Chalmers when it comes to structure and the division of points. I don’,t doubt that I will pass, that’,s not the point here, but way to many of the questions were just repeating information you have read in a book without reflection, like a parrot. And the division of points where crazy, questions at the same level could be worth 1 point or 5 points, with no reason why some things were more “,valuable”, than others. And the questions about the criteria for some award: why do we need to know that? No one needs to know things like that, if you want that information, you just look it up!» (Not at all)
- some questions are so detailed, it is not just what you get from the lecture, not for just your understanding. I think this is not very fair way to measure learning.» (No)
- In the parts of SPC and DoE there were questions that I did not remembered had been that much emphasised during the lectures or in the book. The things that had been discussed a lot during the lectures, which was the UNDERSTADING and not the CALCULATIONS, were however absent. How could the structure for trying to win an award be more important than understanind the concept of organizational learning? How does an award really make any sustainable change towards a better behaviour and culture in an organization?» (No)
- But many exam questions were very detailed questions. Which perhaps is not bad.» (Yes)
- Yes but with some exceptions. I thought a couple of them were too specific. There is A LOT of material in this course and it is impossible to know/remember everything for the exam. Couple of the questions I thought represented the fact that you should remember EVERYRHING.» (Yes)
- Quite specific questions though.» (Yes)

14. Would you change the examination process and grading for this course?

For this course there were three compulsory tasks for you to be able to get a grade. The compulsory tasks were assessed on the basis "Pass", "Non-pass".

33 svarande

No change is necessary»27 81%
I suggest my system below in the comment field»6 18%

Genomsnitt: 1.18

- Maybe the procedure and the aim of the interactive assesment should be mentioned and explained in advance. It was a little bit confusing because nobody knew what really was the aim of the assement» (No change is necessary)
- Just make a better exam!» (No change is necessary)
- maybe the helicopter lab should be graded with extra points for the exam because it was a lot of work.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)
- perhaps a midterm exam on the TQM-part.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)
- I think, the midterm or lab should give som kind of bonus points to the exam. Otherwise it is hard to motivate oneself to do those parts even if its compulsory.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)
- the attandance and interactive assessment are fair but maybe for writing a report for DoE is not a good way just for pass or fail, it should be graded. and also %100 grade from just exam is too much proportion for a whole course.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)
- I suggest to grade the helicopter lab report (maybe interactive assesment too), because we did a lot of work and spent much time on it, so it would be fair to evaluate our work.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)
- It depends on how much you want the student to put down. A pass and non-pass system the student will only do enough to pass. With some sort of bonus points extra time will be put down unless it is a really busy moment with other courses.» (I suggest my system below in the comment field)

Summarizing questions

15. Would you recommend this course to other students?

33 svarande

Not at all»1 3%
No»3 9%
Yes»15 45%
Yes, definitely»14 42%

Genomsnitt: 3.27

- Since it does not give any understanding of TQM, I think it is just waste of time to take this course. » (Not at all)
- For students in some other master program maybe it can be useful, for students in my master program I would definitely not recommend it. » (No)
- It covers important points and every engineering student should know these subject generally. » (Yes)
- This course is relevant for any engineer. You should "advertise" it more in different departments.» (Yes, definitely)
- Very good package about quality issues regarding the future. I will regard this important for my working life. » (Yes, definitely)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- froup works are quite useful to learn the topics. And since they weren"t graded I didnt feel stress about them I just focused to learn in group works.»
- The project works during the lectures. like the cookie-experiment, the card-experiment. Hendry lectures where really good. Also the guest lecturesw from claes and claes were good. Maybe claes berlin should talk less about the design of the headquarter but nevertheless a good lecture»
- The lecturer from SKF»
- practical events»
- Pieces of the course are quite good. Hendry is a very interesting lecturer and his parts were good. The helicopter lab was fun.»
- The practical moments with process mapping, helicopter lab & KJ-shiba. Those during Henry"s lectures as well related to SPC (I unfortunately missed HoQ). Also henriks business excellence, but if possible longer time for it and something else included with it. Practical works always make things more fun (for me), and one can actually relate it to something more than just words on the slides.»
- Good balance between theory and practical knowledge»
- Henry"s lectures about SPC. He can really describe and give an understanding about the tools and methods, even if I never got how and were they fit into the organization.»
- The course administration»
- The people! I interacted mostly with Marco, Hendry and Henrik, all great teachers and explain very well and have good answers to all your questions.»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- mandatory guest lecture was quite boring.»
- Maybe less is sometimes more. The chapters for reading in the schedule of the last week just looks as if you have the pressure to put everythin in instead of clearly leaving some chapters out of the course. »
- the course book»
- Focus more on Six Sigma and its application»
- Influence on Scheduling of course, Because my other courses clashed with this course. So couldnt attend many interesting classes.»
- The course needs some structure. At the moment you are just handing us a toolbox without telling us when to use the tools or how to use them in real life, just lots of theory about it. It’,s one thing to tell us to find out what the customer wants, everyone knows that. But the hard part is to know HOW to do it, just to mention one example. The course also needs some self critique, a method that basically claims to be the salvation of mankind has clearly not gotten it, it has missed something. TQM is portrayed as a quick fix when we already know that there are no quick fixes. I don’,t think that you teachers believe that but that is how it is presented to us, partly because of the rubbish book. You need to have that discussion in class much more, that this is not the perfect method and there are weaknesses to it. Take a look at the course in Lean, they have done it really well.»
- All I can think of is perhaps the grading of compulsory. And also perhaps give students bonus points for taking part in the practical. However, some students will only be there physically for the points. Perhaps nothing you want.»
- The course litterature. Take a good look at the course "Lean production", it is a course that give a really good understanding of a concept but it does so by presenting information both from articles rising "lean" to the sky and from articles saying it is, almost, bullshit.»
- The co-ordination with »
- DoE part. Make it more general but also take examples. Some more reading material. The notes from Marco are good but need to be extended. Perhaps you can make some general and more theoretical notes on that or make a copy from some other book. DoE chapters in the book are very insufficient, at least with respect to what is expected of the students to know.»

18. Additional comments

- I hope that you don’,t take the critique personally! You have all tried to make a good course and the intentions were good, we know that. It just fell on execution. Henrik just needs to “,bli varm i kläderna”, and pull everything together to form a good unit and turn the course into his own. I’,m sure the course will be better next year.»
- Thanks for this interesting quarter. I have got more knowledge and perspective on quality, I think. We will see after the exam has been corrected. Until then Im just a customer with no understanding of my needs.»
- The teacher answering students questions during the exam should be able to solve all the questions in the exam himself. Otherwise, why should we have to?»
- Took this course (which is recommended by the PD-program administration) in parallel with the compulsary course PLM. These two courses often clashed which ment that I was unable to attend all the lectures and group-exercises (eg. sw5 all the lectures coincided). Since the literature did not always cover the content of the lectures it was hard to understand the entire course content retrospectively. This will hopefully be better next year.»
- One comment about Hendry"s notes. I know he said they are not self explanatory (and wow he is right) but it should not be a problem to include the answers to the questions he raises on the slides. I was in lecture and didn"t write all of them down because in lecture he showed the answer maybe. But then on the notes in student portal the answers were not there. Sometimes it happens that people miss class. You should still be able to understand the noted even if you miss class. They should be your learning tool. It is very hard to make use of his notes in case that happens (people do get sick you know) But still I have to say, Hendry is one of the best lecturers I have had in my university studies, if not THE best. I really like how he uses the computer pen. He really explains well and repeats and repeats and repeats. Very good job Hendry! »

Kursutvärderingssystem från