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.

Evaluation admissions process 2011

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-05-17 - 2011-05-27
Antal svar: 9
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 75%
Kontaktperson: Anneli Hildenborg»

Admissions process 2011

Please answer the following questions in as much detail as you can, given your time constraints. The questions are intentionally open-ended questions, please answer them in based on the way you interpret the question. The objective of this questionnaire is to establish discussion points for the forthcoming evaluation meeting.

1. Did you experience the admissions process as primarily a positive experience or a negative experience, and why?

- Positive. It gives a great perspective and understanding of the detailed and elaborated work that it is done on the applications that the applicants spend so much time writing. It also shows how hard is it sometimes to deny a good candidate because of space limitations.»
- Negative experience, different procedures among the schools made it quite messy.»
- Mkt positivt»
- Jag tycker att det var en positiv upplevelse förutom möjligtvis några beslutstillfällen under antagningsmötena. Den ena var för att min bedömning blev ifrågasatt och den andra för att det känns som att vår process inte är riktigt säker så det var mer en generell känsla.»
- primarily positive»
- For me it´,s a positive experience.(Still I get comments from people in my surroundings, when they are speaking of the record, that this is more of a must than a want to participate process.) »
- Primarily a positive experience. The interview couples had done their "homework", and most discussions in the meetings were constructive»
- Positive! Everything worked very smoothly »
- Positive - it feels good to contribute to the education and it was also positive for my personal development.»

2. How did the process meet with your expectations?

- It exceeded my expectations because of the thorough analysis used for the evaluation of every single candidate, and the different steps they have to go through. The criteria on which they are evaluated was also wisely chosen and applied.»
- not very good»
- fungerade utmärkt»
- Jag hade nog lite lägre ställda förväntningar och tycker att det gick riktigt bra i år!»
- on par with expectations»
- Fine»
- Actually it exceeded my expectations. Compared to the last previous years, this year has been fairly smooth»
- Better than expected! »
- It meet my expectations.»

3. How did the outcome meet with your expectations?

- I am very happy with the outcome. I think that the three classes have a great balance between backgrounds, gender, skills, culture, and experience. »
- see above»
- bra»
- Bättre än väntat! Många studenter och riktigt bra ansökningar, kul!»
- on part with expectations»
- Good»
- In the end I"m satisfied witth the outcome, a sufficient amount of high quality students were admitted (at least at Chalmers). For ICM and GIBBS it would have been desireable to perhaps have more candidates to choose from, but that is not tied to the admissions process»
- As expected »
- The outcome i.e. the students approved was high over my expectations. The quality of the applicants was over EDPs rations.»

Regarding the purpose of the admissions process: (please explain your reasoning)

4. Did you, from the start (please define what start means for you) have a clear understanding of the purpose of the admissions process?

- The start was when I was asked if I wanted to become part of the evaluation committee for the business design programs, and yes, I was aware of the purpose of the admissions process. What I was not totally aware of it was the amount of time and thorough thinking behind every single applicant. Perhaps I thought at the beginning that it was a simpler process, but when I received the first applications I realized the amount of effort that they required.»
- I thought so»
- Ja, helt klar över hur processen går till ända från planering av tidsschema, sammansättning av grupper som ska läsa ansökningarna, antagning etc»
- Ja, eftersom att jag har arbetat med detta i flera år.»
- yes - receipt of first info and first applications »
- Yes, from day one. »
- Yes (since I"m part of the formulating the admissions process)»
- Yes»
- Start- when I accepted the task. The purpose was clear.»

5. Do you have a clear understanding of the purpose now?

- Yes, the purpose was to analyze the different applications that were coming into the business design program to decide which applicants would be joining the classes of 2013 for GIBBS, CSE and ICM.»
- Have a better understanding now what needs to be done»
- Ja»
- Ja»
- yes»
- Yes»
- Yes»
- Yes»
- Yes»

6. What should be communicated better from the start next year?

- What the benefits are of having a common admission process»
- Att inga avvikelser från processen får ske.Alla studenter måste behandlas lika.»
- Ett ännu bättre introduktionsmöte och sedan ett uppföljningsmöte med information innan processen drar igång. Eller kanske under processen eftersom att de nya inte vet vad de vill fråga förrän man har börjat arbeta. Tror jag.»
- my understanding is primarily from prior experience with the admissions process... any new persons need to be involved from the beginning (i.e. an pre-admissions meetings by the organizers)»
- The way we use the different criteria, they should be the same for all schools. »
- How we value candidates. We have had the discussion and it is difficult to accomplish equal evaluations, but it became quite apparent this year when some applicants had been read by more than one couple, and the outcome was different depending who had read the application»
- The communication was good as it was »
- The number of applicants that can be accepted through the different schools. I would prefere if it could be clearer how the information should be presented.»

Regarding the stages of operation of the admissions process:

7. Did you, from the start (please define what start means for you) have a clear understanding of how the admissions process was to proceed?

- The process started for me when we I received the first applications in my mail. I understood that I was supposed to read thoroughly every single application and make comments upon the different criteria that were being evaluated. Then this would lead to a decision meeting where we would decide upon who goes to a case exercise/interview and who doesn"t. »
- I thought so.»
- Ja, kan processen från att programmet är sökbart på studera.nu»
- Ja. Se ovan.»
- sort of - the start being receipt of first info and and first applications - I was not aware that all interview partners would be reviewing applicants from all schools»
- Yes, from day one.»
- Yes. See above»
- Yes»
- Start- when I accepted the task. No»

8. Do you have a clear understanding of the admissions process now?

- Yes, even though I understood it from the start, now I am even more clear of the process and the expected outcome.»
- Average»
- ja»
- Ja.»
- sort of - unclear whether this will be carried forward for future years»
- Yes»
- Yes»
- Yes»
- Yes, but I also believe that it can vary.»

9. What should be communicated better from the start next year?

- Common goals, prodeure rules etc.»
- ok»
- Hm, samma som ovan?»
- ALL participants - including organizers and interview pairs should be selected and informed of this before the first applications go out»
- The dates and the time should be clearly stated when I´,m asked for attendance in the process. Meeting dates, interviewing date and so on. »
- Nothing that I can think of right now »
- It would be good that the same applicant is not sent to several couples responsible for interviews. Double check needed.»

The following questions are regarding how decisions are taken:

10. Where (with whom) is the decision power in the different stages of the admissions process?

- The decision power rests on the evaluating couples at all times (unless the application is not eligible because of requirements from the central administration), as they are the ones motivating why an applicant is good or not. It is very seldom that the evaluation couple was questioned about their decisions, and if they were challenged, the motivations had to be clear and concrete. The only decision power where the evaluation couple was not in charge fully, is when applicants were evaluated face-to-face to decide which would be filling one single spot. Here the decision relied partly on their background, CVs, etc.»
- Interview couples and the admission panel»
- Step 1 hos studera.nu Step 2 - hos mötet med inspiration från skolledarna Step 3 - mötet men med inflytande från Mats»
- primarily with the interview pairs at the initial stages, but this is shared with the admissions "board" (i.e. all interview pairs)and ultimately the school managers»
- With the interviewers. »
- Who to admit in the end is up to the admissions committe (i.e. the collective of interview couples). How the process should look like it"s more unclear who actually decides. »
- The ones that has been involved in the process for a longer time has more impact on the decision making. All over the process.»

11. What is your responsibility when taking decisions?

- My responsibility is to be a fair judge regarding the eligibility of an applicant based on established criteria that they have to fulfill. If they fulfill the criteria they they are in and if they don"t then they are out. Applicants who were a bit unclear were double checked and discussed with other evaluating members. This helped to take the decisions for those cases.»
- To make sure that every applicant have a fair application procedure that meet the requirements of legal certainty»
- Att ge en så bra bild som möjligt av de sökande vilket är extremt svårt. Försöka att berätta så mycket som möjligt som kan vara relevant för beslut vilket betyder att man behöver fråga så mycket som möjligt och få fram viktig information från intervjun.»
- review and communicate characteristics from applicants in relation to admissions criteria and provide assessment, input and information to motivate and support decisions»
- Making sure the "regulations" will be followed.»
- That I adhere to established principles, that I"m willing to compromise, that I"m capable of seeing the bigger picture»
- consistency and impartiality »
- Making sure that the applicants that are approved for the education fulfills the criteria.»

12. What factors impact decision taking, and how?

- Essentially, the established criteria and the way the applicants fulfill it. It is up to each applicant to show how they represent a good asset for the education and what they will extract from it. The better they communicated this, the easier the decision was to make. The maturity and self-awareness were two factors that helped me in my decision making, as they represent important skills that great professionals possess. Therefore it was good to see it in the applicants.»
- The interview couples assessment»
- Bra diskussioner och att man lyssnar på varandras argument gör att det känns som att antagningen sker på ett säkert sätt.»
- Helt uppenbart så påverkar personliga möten extremt mycket! Detta är något jag absolut tycker att vi måste se över.»
- availability of information - both through written and in-person sources - because these provide a complete picture of the applicant in relation to the criteria»
- - »
- (For me) Pragmatism, that we can see long term consquences of our decisions, that we can stand for the decisions we make, »
- Time. Interests.»

13. Is there "veto" power?

- I"m not really sure if we had a veto power, but either way, there was no need to use it. The decisions came along smoothly.»
- yes»
- vet ej»
- Ja, från MatsBoo»
- Not in my opinion - objections can be raised and motivated, but ultimately a reasonable consensus is still needed»
- No»
- According to me, No»
- I am not aware of this.»

This year, CSE/GIBBS/ICM had a common admissions process.

14. What impact did this integration have on the process?

- It was good to see the differences between the applicants that applied to the CSE/GIBBS and the ICM tracks. These are educations that attract different kinds of applicants and to be able to evaluate them both was interesting. Especially the applicants who applied to ICM and GIBBS/CSE, as their motivation towards each track was challenged. I think that this integration should be kept.»
- Made it messy, both regarding assessment of the applicants, how to use templates, motivations etc. In a common admission process only CSE will read CSE applicants etc.»
- bra överblick över sökande, troligen en mer likabehandling»
- Det blir tydligare vilka profiler som passar var vilket kan ses som positivt. Större förståelse mellan programmen.»
- Not much this year, but ONLY because there were not many applicants for CSE and GIBBS - in my opinion this is not feasible or desirable for future years and should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.»
- It went smother and the meetings were more efficient. Still I think you need more information about each school to be able to take better decisions about the applicants. »
- Primarily positive. However, there are things that can be improved. »
- Unclear»

Kursutvärderingssystem från