Visa resultat

TEK285 2010, TEK285 2010

1. How many percent of the lectures did you attend?*

<25%»		2		8%
25-50%»		1		4%
50-75%»		4		16%
>75%»		18		72%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Bad»		0		0%
Average»		2		8%
Rather well»		4		16%
Very well»		19		76%

Genomsnitt: 4.68

- + The slides can be found before the class. + Also, the class and report material were well provided. - The time schedule and on the course homepage was always incorrect and miscommunication.» (Average)
- The slides were generally available after the lectures. No problems.» (Very well)
- This is the best from what I have been before.» (Very well)

3. How demanding was the course?*

Not at all demanding»		0		0%
Slightly demanding»		4		16%
Quite demanding»		11		44%
Demanding»		9		36%
Very demanding»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.28

4. Did you buy the course book?*

Yes»		19		76%
No, too expensive»		5		20%
No, other reason»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 1.28

- But it was indeed quite expensive...» (Yes)
- But I barely used it» (Yes)
- The book is very easy to read and follow.» (Yes)
- Though it is very expensive, it is very well written and the course is excellently correlated to it. » (Yes)
- It is very good one.» (Yes)
- The electronic book should be available in the Chalmers library.» (No, too expensive)

5. How many of the recommended chapters in the book have you read?*

0-25%»		5		20%
25-50%»		0		0%
50-75%»		4		16%
75-100%»		16		64%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- I might read more if the eBook were available on Chalmers library.» (0-25%)

6. How would you rate the book?*

Poorly written»		0		0%
OK»		12		48%
Well written»		13		52%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- Have barely read it» (OK)
- If the exam questions are the knowledge we should learn from this course, the book does not give any clear answers for them. » (OK)

7. How useful were the lecture notes? (slide handouts)*

Did not use them»		1		4%
Useless»		1		4%
Somewhat useful»		9		36%
Good to have them»		8		32%
Very useful»		6		24%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- They were maybe good during the lecture but unusable to learn for the exam because it"s almost only pictures and no text. I also found that it was sometimes difficult to follow the lecture when too much time was spent on the same slide (sometimes up to 45min!)» (Useless)
- But there are something missing in the ppt, such as the example of ABC method. The data was saved in an excel document and the caculation was explained in the lecture. But after that, those data and caculation could not be found anywhere. » (Good to have them)
- There was not too much information on the slides and a lot of explanations wer added during the lectures : perfect.» (Very useful)

8. On average, how would you rate the amount of material covered in one lecture?*

Boringly little»		0		0%
OK but more could be added»		3		12%
Just about right on average»		15		60%
OK but some could be removed»		7		28%
Way too much to absorb per lecture»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- The essential was there. The book was a good way to emphasize some points.» (Just about right on average)
- Hard to give a concrete answer, some guest lecturers where much more interesting than others, I therefore refer to lectures by Gunnar Stefansson in the answer to this questions» (Just about right on average)
- not nessesary to mention exactly the same in the lecture as disussed in the book. Would prefer to dig deeper into the most important part of each chapter during the lectures...» (OK but some could be removed)
- Would like to add more practical cases.» (OK but some could be removed)

9. How would you rate the lectures?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		2		8%
Good»		9		36%
Very good»		12		48%
Excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.56

- see above» (Good)
- In general good. However, sometimes (a few too many) it was too much information covered in one slide. Perhaps it would be better to have more slides during the lecture, slides that are more to the point and that are easily read and understood when rehearsing for the exam» (Good)
- Same principle applies here, I am refering to the lectures by Gunnar Stefansson» (Very good)
- A lot of very good examples which support the slides. We feel that the lecturer has a professional experience.» (Excellent)

10. How would you rate the Beer Game Workshop exercise?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		2		8%
Good»		3		12%
Very good»		11		44%
Excellent»		9		36%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- It was fun but it took hours to make a point that could have been made by tree sentences mentioned instead.» (Rather poor)
- I understand the billwhip effect more from this workshop.» (Very good)
- Brought a clearer understanding of the basic principles we had covered theoretically, so it was an interesting experience to see how the "real world" actually functions.» (Excellent)

11. How would you rate the group project assignment?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Good»		11		44%
Very good»		11		44%
Excellent»		3		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- The project presentations was way too long and very heavy to follow having just one brake. I suggest that the presentations can be splinted in two days sessions. » (Good)
- There should be a member assessment form which should be a part of report grading since some members did not spend much effort like other members.» (Good)
- can only speak for my own experience but we really enjoyed it. » (Excellent)

12. How would you rate the consultation/supervision for your group project assignment?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		4%
Good»		8		32%
Very good»		13		52%
Excellent»		3		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- Our group were on track so the consultation were more or less just good. » (Good)

13. In general, how do feel about the availability of teachers?*

25 svarande

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Good»		1		4%
Very good»		17		68%
Excellent»		7		28%

Genomsnitt: 4.24

- i got rapid responses to all my e-mails» (Very good)

14. Did the exam reflect the course in a fair way?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Good»		8		32%
Very good»		15		60%
Excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- it very much did...» (Very good)
- It is in the advanced level.» (Very good)
- Each part of the course is well covered in the exam.» (Excellent)

15. What is your general impression of the course?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		4%
Good»		5		20%
Very good»		17		68%
Excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.8

- It provided a good over view of logistics but I had thought we would learn more in-detail models etc.» (Rather poor)

16. How would you rate Gunnar Stefanssons efforts in the course?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Good»		4		16%
Very good»		14		56%
Excellent»		7		28%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

- Not enough visual support in his lectures in my opinion» (Good)
- Gunnar is very prepared and he explains really good.» (Very good)
- The lecture time can be shorter.» (Very good)

17. How would you rate Kenth Lumsdens efforts in the course?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		3		12%
Good»		9		36%
Very good»		11		44%
Excellent»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

- too much information in these lectures» (Rather poor)
- This were two very interesting lectures,k although perhaps he went into far too much detail, so the amount of material covered was perhaps too extensive. Perhaps the material should be reviewed and emphasize just those themes or issues which are deemed most important.In any case, I learned a lot of things I was unaware of.» (Good)
- Who is Kenth?» (Good)
- Very good lectures, a little bit to much on details regarding types of containers of the different transportation modes. Very interesting to know how the different transportation modes system work. Very clear and useful content. » (Very good)

18. How would you rate Andreas Hagens efforts in the course?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Good»		2		8%
Very good»		15		60%
Excellent»		8		32%

Genomsnitt: 4.24

- The explanation of the Wilson formula was very poor.» (Good)

19. How would you rate Roger Lindaus (guest lecture) efforts in the course?*

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		4%
Good»		12		48%
Very good»		6		24%
Excellent»		6		24%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- I was not there» (Good)
- I think he put effort on the lecture but the content was not very usefull. He took a lot of time to explained details. » (Good)
- There were too many slides which are not quite well organised comparing to amount of lecture time. I think the lecture could be more concised and focused. Some of his experiencces on the lecture should be put into the slides since it is easier to follow.» (Good)

20. How would you rate Alvaro Varela (Meridion guest lecturer) efforts in the course?*

Very poor»		1		4%
Rather poor»		9		36%
Good»		13		52%
Very good»		2		8%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

- lack of preparation and not well customer-focused» (Rather poor)
- The material covered may have been interesting, but the delivery was not so good. He had very little eye contact with the public, and although the theme should have been more interesting, it sounded more like a publicity campaing for the firm, or an attempt to attract new customers.» (Rather poor)
- There were too many slides comparing to amount of lecture time. I think the lecture could be more concised and focused.» (Rather poor)
- I was not there» (Good)
- I did not attend. It should be this option available. I just select good in order to completed close the evaluation» (Good)
- Unfortunately I could not make it to his lecture.» (Good)
- Did not participate during that lecture.» (Good)

21. Other comments/suggestions for how the course can be improved?

* obligatoriska frågor