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.

Software leadership and quality management, Lp2 H10, DAT180

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-02-10 - 2011-02-18
Antal svar: 32
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 23%
Kontaktperson: Victoria E»

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?*

32 svarande

At most 15 hours/week» 14 43%

Around 20 hours/week» 11 34%

Around 25 hours/week» 3 9%

Around 30 hours/week» 2 6%

At least 35 hours/week» 2 6%

Genomsnitt: 1.96 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

32 svarande

0%» 0 0%

25%» 1 3%

50%» 0 0%

75%» 10 31%

100%» 21 65%

Genomsnitt: 4.59 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.28

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

32 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals» 4 12%

The goals are difficult to understand» 2 6%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 15 46%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 11 34%

Genomsnitt: 3.03

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

28 svarande

No, the goals are set too low» 2 7%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 25 89%

No, the goals are set too high» 1 3%

Genomsnitt: 1.96

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

32 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

No, not at all» 3 9%

To some extent» 20 62%

Yes, definitely» 10 31%

I don"t know/have not been examined yet» 0 0%

- Yes, with the exception of the leadership part. It was somewhat vague what exactly we had to take away from that. (Not saying it was not useful!)» (Yes, definitely)
- really really enjoyed Miroslaw"s lectures and thats the reason i got VG.He gave open discussion topics always!His classes are very nice to attend» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

32 svarande

Small extent» 5 15%

To some extent» 10 31%

Large extent» 15 46%

Great extent» 2 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

- Truth, worst course ever. Will exchange this course with another one!» (Small extent)
- Especially, leadership part of lectures did not improve my knowledge.» (Small extent)
- The course was unstructured and uncoordinated which proved to be an obstacle during learning.» (To some extent)

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

32 svarande

Small extent» 3 9%

Some extent» 15 46%

Large extent» 13 40%

Great extent» 1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- The large amount of papers on statistical analysis of SW quality seemed somewhat unbalanced in comparison to other topics.» (Large extent)

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

32 svarande

Very badly» 4 12%

Rather badly» 4 12%

Rather well» 19 59%

Very well» 5 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- There were a lot of problems i.e. we waited more than one month to learn our exam results. » (Very badly)

Study climate

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

32 svarande

Very poor» 1 3%

Rather poor» 4 12%

Rather good» 11 34%

Very good» 12 37%

I did not seek help» 4 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- I myself wasn"t affected personally, but when answering questions in full-class the teacher sometimes was rather harsh if he considered the question to be not-so-clever.» (Rather poor)
- Quick response to questions posed in emails was greatly appreciated.» (Very good)

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

31 svarande

Very poorly» 2 6%

Rather poorly» 3 9%

Rather well» 11 35%

Very well» 9 29%

I did not seek coopeation» 6 19%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- We had a group discussion before exam.» (Very well)
- Had some friends, but we all kind of had the same opinion regarding the course» (Very well)

Summarizing questions

11. What is your general impression of the course?

32 svarande

Poor» 8 25%

Fair» 4 12%

Adequate» 3 9%

Good» 16 50%

Excellent» 1 3%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- As I said... Would not recommend this course. Bad layout, bad planing, unmotivated examiner/teacher. Best part was leadership, he was really great, but he only help to classes!» (Poor)
- Very aggressive tone in the lectures. I agree that many questions were of low quality, but the way questions were answered probably made the people who actually had decent questions/comments hesitate to state them. The code churn question on the exam was horrible. In the diagram one you had to assume that it was incorrectly stated. Also, a lot of irrelevant talking during the exam. (also only one visit during the exam). the icing on the cake was how the exam reviews were handled... kind of represents the quality of the course.» (Poor)
- The course was taught in a very unplanned way as it was aiming at leadership and quality management at the same time hence creating ambiguity what exaclty should be the learning outcomes.Also there were were no real assignments and no practice or exercise stuff which could enable students to learn well. » (Poor)
- Too few lectures spent on leadership. When questions were asked by the teacher, only one answer was the correct one. Other answers were ridiculed.» (Poor)
- Could be more wel-organized in materials, specially papers» (Fair)
- The course name is quality but, the quality of the course was really bad. » (Fair)
- To much Ericsson!!!» (Fair)
- This course should be completely handled by Miroslaw only» (Excellent)

12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Quality part»
- Quality control and methods.»
- leadership, well defined, good teaching!»
- The slides shown on the course and the example of exams.»
- Thought Courses as they were»
- Guest lectures»
- Firstly,leadership part should be separated from quality management. Secondly,for quality management there should be good assignments like making quality assurance plan.»
- the material»
- Science papers to the problems of the area.»

13. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- the type of lecture was a question and answers and that took more time than if it was just a normal lecture,,,i mean sometimes the discussion took us to some other place the what was the question about,,,so just type of lectures :)»
- The practical tool usage with IBM tools should be extended and be more solid. The leadership should be separated as a different subject not merged with Quality.»
- The whole layout!»
- The lecturer"s ability to ask follow up-questions to completely irrelevant questions and thus taking the discussion to somewhere, that is not even remotely in the area of what he was trying to teach. Also, the discussion mentioned, should not be a discussion, it should be a lecture, but the teacher did not take any measures to steer it towards an ordered lecture. Furthermore, the teacher should make an effort to not make snide remarks when a student asks something.»
- Give pages number to read on the course literature.»
- Some guest Lecturers that are not good at teaching»
- Lab organisation, introduce compulsory labs»
- Some additional lectures should be given on Quality as well as leadership and try to give some assignment so that student can easily understand all the concepts.»
- Leadership should be separated from quality management.»
- Other insight than Ericsson.»
- The exercises should be removed or changed substantially. »
- more practical aspects»
- The teacher"s attitude towards teaching and the students. Master suppression techniques (härskartekniker) are not appreciated.»
- Lecturer»
- More group work.»

14. Additional comments

- It might be interesting to add some lectures on the practical aspects of testing, and the various ways of software testing. Also, TDD might be an interesting topic to touch upon in relation to QA.»
- Exam problem. During exam we had typo (mistake) requirement according which I wrote my answer to question but I got 0 point because it appeared teacher came and informed about the correct requirement verbally which I did not listen or was not there at that time when he announced. This is bad. There were 2-3 questions which I got less points than maximum and without any comment on them why it is not maximum point. Bad.»
- Att lämna ordet fritt och försöka få delaktighet under föreläsningarna är en god tanke. Men i realiteten blir det jävligt oproduktiv tid. Till stor del är det ointressant det som kommer upp och det blir svårt att få fokus på det som är väsentligt när det sägs så mycket annan skit. Att hålla tiderna borde vara a och o. Att börja på rätt tid, ta rast vid rätt tid och avsluta vid rätt tid. Det misslyckas vid ett flertal tillfällen. Föreläsningssalen som vi var i var sådär. Tidvis låter det som en gymnastikhall från våningen över. Har man pluggat på Gibraltargatan så är det ett riktigt nerköp att åka till Lindholmen. Det kan näppeligen kännas som ett Campus för de som kommer från Chalmers. Inga passerkort, ingen aning om var det finns uppehållsrum, ingen information what so ever. Föreläsningarna kunde i princip ligga vart fan som helst. Nu är inte det ett problem enbart för den här kursen. men det var den första kursen som var obligatorisk som hölls på Lindholmen för MPSEN. Jag förstår hur vilsna studenterna från GU känner sig när de är på Chalmers. Det är väl positivt att man vill bygga en stark sektion inom Software Engineering och knyta starka namn till sig och har då som argument att det måste ligga närs industrin. Även att man kan locka gästföreläsare från industrin. Kanske blir det bra, även för studenter, kanske inte. Nu får man enbart de negativa sidorna och lär få så ett tag framöver. Chalmers borde rimligtvis överväga att införa en policy om att banda sina föreläsningar. Det görs på initiativ av föreläsaren i Requirements Engineering och SPLE. Det borde inte vara svårt att införa rutin för det och det skulle höja kvalitén för många studenter. Det är väl det man ändå eftersträvar?! »
- I expected to learn much from the course but as mentioned above the course structure,assignments & more concentration towards administrating course in a more structured and organized manner is definately required.»
- Poor evaluation , almost random in nature »

Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.28
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.57

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från