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.

Risk management and safety IPE061, IPE061

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-05-19 - 2011-05-31
Antal svar: 8
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 20%
Kontaktperson: Agnes Maripuu»

General Information

1. Program:

8 svarande

Master Student»6 75%
Exchange student»2 25%
Others»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.25

2. What is your background, i.e. production development, industry or chemical engineering?

- Production engineering»
- MSc biotechnology»
- Management»
- Computer Science and Engineering Bachelor Development Engineer, industry»
- Civil Engineering»
- production»
- Chemisty Engineering»
- Chemical Engineering»

3. How did you find out about the course?

- Recommended in my master program»
- My friend told me he took this course he told me about this course this is related lab safety how u manage every thing in lab»
- The information day about the elective courses during spring.»
- It was optional in the Quality and Operational Management Program which I"m looking at.»
- Throught recommendations of friends»
- in the master course information provided by the school»
- From course selection. »
- From my Erasmus Coordinator in Chalmers. »

4. How come you chose the course?

This questionnaire gives you the opportunity to express your views about this course. The result will be used as part of an overall assessment of the effectiveness of this course and for course improvement.

Please note that you can write your comments about all issues related to the course at the end of this questionnaire. If you like to clarify your answers to the questions below, you can explain it at the end of the questionnaire too.

- It was available (and most interesting choice). Also I think the combination risk, management, and saftey are interesting.»
- I did not select this course, I did select OB but I did not get a place there and had to take another course. So I got a double penalty missed a good course and got one that where a disappointment. I thought that I was going to learn more about how to take risks, like someone stated in the beginning, "high risks, high gains" but the course have been more of "avoid risks, they can be harmful" and perhaps only suitable for chemical (and nuclear power) engineers then anybody else...»
- Because I"m interested in how you effectively quantify and estimate the various factors in the industry and real-world.»
- I was interested on Risk Management as well as safety issues»
- risk management seemed to be an important subject»
- Could be good to have insight to safety. »
- Because I found the topic quite interesting.»

Course Content

5. What did you think about the workload of workshops?

8 svarande

too little»0 0%
little»2 25%
good»6 75%
much»0 0%
too much»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

6. Do you think the workload of home assignment was evenly distributed?

8 svarande

too little»0 0%
little»1 12%
good»3 37%
much»4 50%
too much»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.37

7. What did you think about the workload of project?

8 svarande

too little»0 0%
little»0 0%
good»5 62%
much»2 25%
too much»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

8. How useful did you find the study visit to Preem?

6 svarande

very poor»1 16%
poor»1 16%
good»3 50%
very good»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

9. How useful did you find the study visit to AkzoNobel?

6 svarande

very poor»1 16%
poor»0 0%
good»4 66%
very good»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

10. What percentage of lectures did you attend?

8 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 12%
75%»5 62%
100%»2 25%

Genomsnitt: 4.12

Course Organization

11. Quality of course outline:

(i.e. document concerning course aim and content, organisation of teaching, assignments, reading, assessment, etc.)

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»2 25%
good»4 50%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

12. Course expectations:

(i.e. what was expected of you)

8 svarande

very vague»0 0%
vague»4 50%
clear»4 50%
very clear»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

13. Organisation of lectures

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»2 25%
good»3 37%
very good»2 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

14. Organisation of workshops

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»1 12%
good»4 50%
very good»3 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

15. Organisation of guest lectures

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»1 12%
good»3 37%
very good»3 37%

Genomsnitt: 3

16. Organisation of Lab@Risk

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»0 0%
good»6 75%
very good»2 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

17. When do you prefer to have deadline for home assignments?

8 svarande

Weekly (as it was in this study period)»7 87%
At the end of the course»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 1.12

18. How did you find the course lliterature?

8 svarande

very poor»2 25%
poor»1 12%
good»4 50%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

19. How well did the course lliterature correspond with the course objectives?

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»2 25%
good»4 50%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

Teaching and learning support

20. Helpfulness of teacher?

8 svarande

very unhelpful»0 0%
unhelpful»2 25%
helpful»6 75%
very helpful»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

21. Helpfulness of tutor?

8 svarande

very unhelpful»0 0%
unhelpful»1 12%
helpful»4 50%
very helpful»3 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

22. Availability of course material (e.g. website, handouts, etc.)

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»1 12%
good»4 50%
very good»3 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

23. How effective did you find the course homepage?

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»2 25%
good»4 50%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

24. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Modelling and simulation applying @RISK by Simon Pallin?

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»0 0%
good»6 75%
very good»2 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

25. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Supply risk management by Ulf Pulsson?

7 svarande

very poor»1 14%
poor»1 14%
good»5 71%
very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

26. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Constructing Safety - Obstacles and support by Marianne Törner?

7 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»1 14%
good»5 71%
very good»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 3

27. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Constructing Safety - Obstacles and support by Anders Pousette?

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»0 0%
good»6 75%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.87

28. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Probabilistic safety assessment by Carl Sunde?

5 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»0 0%
good»3 60%
very good»2 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.4

29. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Maintenance, dependability and safety by Torbjörn Ylipää?

8 svarande

very poor»1 12%
poor»1 12%
good»5 62%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

30. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Human factors - Man, technology, organisation (MTO)/Control Room Design by Per Christofferson?

7 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»1 14%
good»4 57%
very good»2 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

31. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Technical design of equipment and systems design by Mats Lindgren?

6 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»2 33%
good»3 50%
very good»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

32. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Risk of poor ergonomic by Anki Falck?

7 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»2 28%
good»4 57%
very good»1 14%

Genomsnitt: 2.85

33. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Risk of Maintenance by Magnus Evertsson?

7 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»3 42%
good»4 57%
very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

34. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) What can go wrong by Andrea Menne?

6 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»1 16%
good»5 83%
very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

35. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Complexity in logistics systems controlling chaos using cybernetics by Per-Olof Arnäs?

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»0 0%
good»7 87%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

36. How do you evaluate the quality of the presentation (only if attended) Risk management in complex systems by Roland Örtengren?

7 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»3 42%
good»4 57%
very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

37. Overall, how would you rate guest lecturers?

8 svarande

very poor»0 0%
poor»2 25%
good»5 62%
very good»1 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.87

38. Overall, how would you rate this course?

8 svarande

very poor»2 25%
poor»1 12%
good»3 37%
very good»2 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

Your perspective

39. Good features of this course:

- Workshops, handins, project work»
- Workshops, and some of the guest lectures (like Nynäs), @Risk»
- Industry related.»
- Good organization and helpful workshops to understand the lectures. The fact that most of the workload is spread weekly.»
- workshops»
- Good subjects and many of guest lectures very good. »
- Guest Lectures, study visits, workshops.»

40. Poor features of this course:

- Coursehomepage (pingpong) one year old slides, a more clear thread between lectures. Now its just a network you realize afterwards how they are connected.»
- Too many guest lectures, the red line disappears. One, two or three are maximum. If MS finds the concepts so important, then he should spend more time teaching them... The idea with hand-ins are good but the quality of these could be improved, like week 2 only asking about DT, strange, easy for us but not very learning.»
- Hard to perceive a continuity.»
- Still has to improve in direction to correlate the guess lectures within each other. »
- The course litterature, poor connection between the lectures»
- Planning and organization. In masterlevel all student take different courses on the side of the course. The course must be flexible in order to handle this phenomena. »
- Lack of intareactive lecture.»

41. Other comments:

- It was hard that Dr Shairiari changed our research topic every week.»
- I actually regret taking this course (I said before I wanted to read OB, but I was rejected), and if I would have chosen again I would have probably chosen lean instead. Not a good grade for this course, I have not learned much, many thinks (except the tools) where of a general knowledge character... »
- -»
- The home assignment just give you training in how to search on the Internet, not in the area risk management.»
- Better planning of presentations, a schedule which have been prepared before could be a good idée. »

42. How could this course be improved?

- Clearar outlines and expectations.»
- Alright, if MS thinks he want to help with the project then he should give hints and tips but not try to steer it. Think of someone driving a car through a telephone. Instead MS should give tips but let the decision making be on the students, being stubborn can be risky... Put the most work of the load home assignments in the beginning.»
- Just leave it as is.»
- Improving the poor features»
- Maybe you should consider to skip the guest lectures or only have a few of them and instead teach yourself in order to get better connection between the different subjects in the course. Also, maybe you should skip the home assignments and have a written exam instead.»
- Better planning and flexibility. »

Thank you!

Kursutvärderingssystem från