ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

Design of Technological Innovations and Markets, Chalmers (CSE/GIBBS/ICM), CIP011

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-11-24 - 2010-11-30
Antal svar: 29
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 65%
Kontaktperson: Anna Tullsten»

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.

29 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»0 0%
Around 20 hours/week»5 17%
Around 25 hours/week»6 20%
Around 30 hours/week»2 6%
At least 35 hours/week»16 55%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Difficult to distinguish the time spent on the DTIM course over the total time spent on DTIM and TBE. » (Around 20 hours/week)
- There were a lot of cases that took where very intensive and took a lot of time to do.» (At least 35 hours/week)
- most hours vere spent on the team assignments» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

29 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»0 0%
75%»2 6%
100%»27 93%

Genomsnitt: 4.93

- If you are sick and have a doctor"s certificate proving it, you should not get a minus point for not attending a lecture» (100%)
- Almost every lecture» (100%)
- missed 1 lecture.» (100%)

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?

29 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»0 0%
The goals are difficult to understand»5 17%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»15 51%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»9 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.13

- The course is very broad so I think is"s hard to make chrystal clear goals» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Read seperately the goals seem clear, the real question is were the goals delivered. I feel not as I expected.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- the helicopter view could have been emphazised earlier.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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.

29 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»26 89%
No, the goals are set too high»3 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.1

- But it might have been better to focus on fewer areas and instead go a bit deeper into them.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

29 svarande

No, not at all»2 6%
To some extent»20 68%
Yes, definitely»6 20%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

- It could have been more based o applying a framework on a case» (To some extent)
- But the same answere here. I think some of the questions were too demanding if you put them in relation to the number of points you could receive.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

29 svarande

Small extent»1 3%
Some extent»11 37%
Large extent»13 44%
Great extent»4 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- Think the course was spread over the two study periods, and the classes didn"t always follow each other. Therefore the course felt disjointed at times.» (Some extent)
- It has been good but hard to get all perspictives. A lot of information on short time» (Large extent)

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

29 svarande

Small extent»4 13%
Some extent»13 44%
Large extent»11 37%
Great extent»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

- Bad book. Too much text without saying anything. The cases is good though.» (Small extent)
- trott-small, articles-some» (Small extent)
- discussing with classmates has taught me more than reading trott» (Some extent)
- The trott book was not very good. It covers a lot but is written in a texty way. The articles and powerpoint slides has been very good in general.» (Some extent)
- The Trott book was good to some extent, but Wikipidia and other webpages were necessary to understand all terms.» (Some extent)
- The only thing I read properly in the Trott book was the cases, but think I did quite well on the exam anyway. The cases were really good though.» (Some extent)
- The book is not good at all, it only lists frameworks and methods without going in to detail. Wikipedia was much better on describing. The slides and the articles were very helpful» (Some extent)
- Trott was not the best book» (Large extent)

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

28 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»3 10%
Rather well»14 50%
Very well»11 39%

Genomsnitt: 3.28

- I don"t understand the question.» (?)
- No clear examples spring to mind, but the administration felt a bit "messy". Probably because of frequent schedule changes communicated in many different ways. » (Rather badly)
- It would have been better if the slides had been handed out before the lecture.» (Rather well)
- It took some time to get the course PM » (Rather well)
- Could have been better structured» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

29 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 3%
Rather good»13 44%
Very good»11 37%
I did not seek help»4 13%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

- Many cases helps the understandinf.» (Very good)
- concerning my personal background it was difficult to ask questions or give comments not because of the atmosphere but because I did not know what to ask.» (Very good)
- But not every answer was helpful» (Very good)

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

29 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 3%
Rather well»4 13%
Very well»23 79%
I did not seek cooperation»1 3%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- Group work is sometimes hard» (Rather well)

11. How was the course workload?

29 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 3%
Adequate»7 24%
High»18 62%
Too high»3 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.79

- Since the assignment were not a part of DTIM (but of BCL) the work load for DTIM was low.» (Low)
- Supposed to be so i guess =)» (High)
- High towards the end because I could not always related the lecture material to the book. And in the end tried to fill in the gaps by reading the entire book.» (High)
- Especialy the workload for the exam preparation is very high» (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

29 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»2 6%
High»24 82%
Too high»3 10%

Genomsnitt: 4.03

- High, but that"s the way I like it. » (High)
- I expect it to be high!» (High)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

29 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»5 17%
Adequate»11 37%
Good»11 37%
Excellent»2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.34

- It was too much blabbing about "the receipe" for becoming "the next Google". It should be a few more short assignments, to force the student to apply theory to some cases. More like the IPS course which was excellent structure. I know we did apply theory on the BCL, but the feedback was really poor and did not relate to specific theories.» (Fair)
- The course is in some parts very fussy» (Adequate)
- Good substance, but the course was difficult to grasp sometimes since it consisted of many different parts.» (Adequate)
- Not very much new stuff. Very much a brief I program» (Adequate)
- I that material of the DTIM course was much more extensive than that of the IP course, though we had less time to fully understand and process the material suggested. » (Good)
- Very interesting course but it"s a lot of things that are covered which makes it a little bit hard to grasp sometimes. » (Good)
- A bit tricky to know how to apply the material directly, but the case studies were interesting and educational. I really liked the interactive nature of the lectures. » (Good)
- The theoretical parts in the first two weeks could have been much more straight to the point, and more focused on less subjects. It feels like we did not have enough time to go through all different theories, models etc. etc.» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Combination of Trott reading, articles and assignments»
- The business models»
- The lectures were in general very good and inspiring.»
- team assignemtnes»
- The connection to real cases and business.»
- The discussions in class»
- The focus on case studies and the interactive lectures. »
- Mats as a lecturer. The cases and interactions during class.»
- The integration with TBE-course»
- The idea of encouraging discussion, but not through this points for saying irrelevant things at times»
- The assesment of class activity, however maybe not on every class but have some classes that are more seminar like. It worked well on Mats" lectures but not as well with the other teachers»
- More useful articles»
- Having seminars and assignment exactly one week before the Exam! »
- the different cases, and the good discussion climate.»
- The concept of combining finance with business models is very good, but can be made with more concrete examples.»
- Gregorys part»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- In my opinion the introduction of 30% assessment during the lectures should be changed. We are too many people in the class which doesn´,t give an opportunity to everyone to speak. Another point is that many discussions based on the cases were quite poor, since the only thing people in the class were saying were the details form the case, which everyone had read. Speaking up or not often depended on where exactly one was seated to be seen by the professor and how fast one would rise his hand, which I don´,t consider fair enough to be the criteria further taken into account for the overall evaluation.»
- Gregory"s slides is not educational on its own. They are difficult to understand afterwards if your were sick during his lecture»
- I think that it would be better to have the course as a home exam instead as it would put even more pressure on the actual understanding more than just remembering lists of thing.»
- it is necessary to focus less on the theory but encourage more practical approach»
- A little bit more of the course litterature shoudl be brought up during lectures, not much from Trott where brought up by the lecturer. I"m not sure of the active discussion points either, didn"t feel that good. Unfair and made the classes too long and not going through what the course and the course book consisted of.»
- try to find a better book then trott»
- the discussion grade. Should be made in smaller groups like the school seminars. Will generate a more dynamic discussion where everyone is giving the oppertunity to speak up. »
- The book should be replaced with a more "direct to the point" book.»
- Points on "discussion" in classes»
- More of the content in the course book should be presented, explained and discussed. »
- The valuation exercise did become a joke without any real benefits»
- the method of the participation grading»
- Instead of Trott, there should be something more reasonable! »
- Having discussions during the seminars would be more useful in smaller group rather than the whole class!!»
- Take out the points for discussion in the class. Discussion is good, however the points made the discussions bad. And in addition to that discussions are better if held in small groups.»
- should look over the oral grading system. it is a very big step when grades become relative, and much more information should be given to the class about it. the openness of how you are graded orally should also increase. however, in general, i like that people are encouraged to talk in class.»
- I would like the first two weeks to be either prolonged or that you cut out some material in order for us to really focus on what"s important, i.e the TEVA, S-curves, competetive advantage, diffusion theory and product development.»
- The participation grading»

16. Additional comments

- The course might be structured in a way that the exam questions refer more to the assignments, since those were the issues we spent most of our time on.»
- Since the exam was much about discussing, reflecting and referring to the literature, I think a home exam is a good idea»

Lectures

Appreciate on a scale 1 (low appreciation) - 5 (high appreciation) the combined competency and pedagogy of the following lecturers:

17. Mats Lundqvist

29 svarande

1»0 0%
2»3 10%
3»5 17%
4»11 37%
5»10 34%

Genomsnitt: 3.96

- difficult to follow and little contents, only considerations, assumptions without no real or practical suggestions» (3)
- The discussions were sometimes not high level, but rather a repetition of facts from the book.» (4)
- have sometime problems with leading the discussions in a good way, otherwize excellent!» (4)
- Since he was responsible for a majority of the classes where participation was graded, I would prefer to have him be better at making sure to have a balanced discussion where different people get to speak. Also, to be able to quit the discussion when nothing more is getting added...» (4)
- Good energy, pedagogy and encourages interaction. Could be a bit more "structured" in facilitating and running discussions in class to keep them on topic. » (4)
- Definitely enjoy each lecture. Mats is very engaging.» (5)
- However, I think he could give more examples and elaborate a bit deeper into some subjects. Some parts were very fuzzy, and these can be cut out to the next year.» (5)

18. Martin Lackéus

27 svarande

1»0 0%
2»0 0%
3»4 14%
4»7 25%
5»16 59%

Genomsnitt: 4.44

- Could have focused more on asking harder questions to people that were speaking during the lectures as sometimes people just spoke to get points.» (4)
- inspiring» (5)
- very practical and understandable» (5)
- Very inspirational and great that he"s so open and honest!» (5)

19. Anders Sundelin

29 svarande

1»1 3%
2»0 0%
3»6 20%
4»14 48%
5»8 27%

Genomsnitt: 3.96

- The worst lecture, Zero class participation, just a long monologue. I had to supplement every class with my own reading, because I learnt almost nothing in the class. » (1)
- Very good slides to rad at home but not when you are there. They were too texty.» (3)
- very high pace its was difficult to adapt for the main issues of the lecture if you have not study the financing before» (4)
- Be a bit faster and straight to the point skip some lull-lull» (4)
- too messy slides some times! Should have a lot of cred for trying to improve his lectures. Want them to be as good as possible. » (4)
- Very knowledgeable and structured (good). Could improve by making the lectures more interactive and giving more examples (of business models for example) to keep people engaged. » (4)
- Excellent structure of the lectures» (5)
- Very educational slides» (5)

20. Gregory Carson

29 svarande

1»0 0%
2»2 6%
3»5 17%
4»11 37%
5»11 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- Uneducational slides» (2)
- It is good to try to intergrate with the students but not by asking retorical questions all the time.» (3)
- A lot of knowledge but could have imporved his slides.» (4)
- it was sometimes hard to see any contents in the lecture or follow the discussion because of the use of terminology, but the exercise given by Gregory was great» (4)
- First class went over my head, but was very enthusiastic» (4)
- Could have used more examples from his experience. Could have foused more on a certain area.» (4)
- Less icebreakers and more knowledge sharing, maybe presenting real life case studies. » (4)
- Very interactive and high level discussions. Excellent practical examples. » (5)
- Very knowledgeable and great lectures in terms of interactivity. The slides could be a bit more pedagogical and clear though. Impossible to understand most of them when looking at them after the fact. » (5)
- Highly spirited, definitely a great lecturer.» (5)

21. Per Hulthén

28 svarande

1»1 3%
2»2 7%
3»7 25%
4»9 32%
5»9 32%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- He started of with pointing out the importance of having breaks then he forgot to give us one...» (2)
- Very interesting but could have plannes his time a little bit better.» (3)
- very practical» (5)
- Very inspirational and fun to listen to!» (5)
- Best lecture this fall!» (5)

Kursutvärderingssystem från