|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär 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 Project Management, Lp3, DIT896, DIT896Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2011-05-31 - 2011-06-06 Antal svar: 15 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 20% Kontaktperson: Rebecca S»
Your own effort1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?*15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.53 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?*15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.86 Goals and goal fulfilment3. How understandable are the course goals?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.6 4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.73 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?15 svarande(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)
- I feel, it was too much confusing. It could be more clear and with better resources. We could learn it by ourselves so why we need class and teacher!?» (To some extent) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.78 - Considering the degree program, this was one of the most important course, but it was a total mess. To pass the course, you only had to submit two reports: Vision document and Project Plan. Lectures were too general and repetitive and irrelevant.
Only good lectures were from the guest lecturer, and ironically, they were not about Project Management, but organization behavior.
Class exercise included students coming out and giving Miroslaw feedback on the course! Is that in the learning objective?
It is obvious the person who planned the course did in such a way so the least amount of his time is spent. Examples include: no written or anonymous exams, final submissions being graded in 2 days for all students and lectures including random and irrelevant exercises that students work on themselves (like evaluating the course!).» (Small extent) 7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.6 - Other than the shared subject, there was little direct connection between the lectures and the course book.» (Small extent) 8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.13 - The course, its lecture, the grading as well as the anonymous course evaluations were all a mess and short cuts were taken in everything.
No two papers were graded using a fixed and pre-defined format and all grades were given subjectively.
Miroslaw intimidated the students into evaluating the course positively. He started a course evaluation in GUL, where students log-in and complete the survey. And even worse, this was done before the grades were given. Students were basically hijacked, since the final grades were given based on non-anonymous subjective report grading. In other words, Miroslaw knew what student he was grading and he could check how that particular student had evaluated him and the course (since the GUL course evaluation was made available before the final submission).
This patronizing approach is the norm with Miroslaw and its very sad and he is our Program Manager too. I hope his attitude changes. A person in this position should sincerely care about the students, not patronize them and intimidate them.» (Very badly) Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.6 - Questions were answered either by questions, personal view or aggressive statements. This is the usual. Miroslaw should definitely improve his communication skills.
Lecture from the guest lecturer (Jan Wickenberg) were excellent and his approach was very professional and encouraging! » (Very poor) 10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?14 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.35 - We worked in groups of 2, and this was OK in general.» (Very well) Summarizing questions11. What is your general impression of the course?15 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 - This topic is essential for the SEM program, but a more qualified and experienced instructor should take the responsibility. Course plan should be changed 180 degrees.» (Poor) 12. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Project-based and without exam »- The lectures by Jan Wickenberg were great. Exercises as part of the lectures were interesting.» - Nothing but the course name, and perhaps the optional course book.» - Nothing ....» - the responsibilities of the course should be divided into smaller parts (not asking the students if they completely read the book, instead "this powerpoint is refering to chapter 7, when you go home read it"), i was not very motivated» - Course book was ok but never used because its optional.» - the course software project management course main book » - course outline but on some extent.» 13. What should definitely be changed to next year?- Structure of lectures and the way teacher teachs»- Make lectures more aligned with the course book or vice versa. Include material about managing a running project, rather than only the startup part.» - Everything, including the instructor.» - complete course structure, well defined goals, » - Everything.» - the way of teaching the course and the grading system » - Should be exam, not only reports. Change of lecturer.» 14. Additional comments- We are Master students from numerous countries and continents. We expect to be treated with respect. We leave our jobs, families and lifestyles and move here seeking quality knowledge, and spending our savings in the process. The program manager as well as the instructor should understand and respect this, regardless of our background, race, religion or competency levels. The anonymous course evaluation for this course was sent out 2 months late. How is it fair for other instructors who get anonymously evaluated post-exam (anonymous too), while the Program Manager does his course evaluations in GUL (not anonymously) and that too before the non-anonymous submissions are graded? How is it possible a 7.5 credit course is graded in 2 days in an random and subjective manner, not even following grading details given in the course introduction?»- The course is very important but the way it was delivered was not satisfied.» - the course can be more "to the point"» - Teacher rude and biased. It seems he has problem with students from outside of Europe. Very disappointing.» - the outcomes learned from the course could be much better well to some extend the topics was interresting during some lectures » - Very poor!» Additional commentsBeräknat jämförelseindex: 0.46 * obligatoriska frågor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66%