|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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.
TEK145 Quality and Operations Management 2011Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2011-10-17 - 2011-10-29 Antal svar: 23 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 57% Kontaktperson: Nina Edh» Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Industriell ekonomi 300 hp
Your own effort1. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4 - missed one presentation» (75%-100%) General questions on the course2. What is your general opinion of the course?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.21 - It was not obvious from the beginning if the course was an overview course or one where we should get deep understanding.
It is obvious that you try to connect the weeks, but it feels more like you try to say that they are connected more than actually connect them.
But I would still say that it could be a really good overview course, if we can come up with a solution an the small problems. » (Negative) 3. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.73 - A clear distinction must be made here, the teaching helped me understand the master program as a whole but it didn"t help anywhere as far as the exam goes.» (Some extent) 4. How was the course workload?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.65 - Could have been a 7.5 course if there were a few less assignments» (Too low) 5. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.08 - I picked rather good instead of very good because many people asked questions on stuff they did not understand and the answers they got sometimes went over their heads.» (Rather good) 6. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.43 - I picked rather well here. We had A LOT of articles to read which our direction was "Go to the library at school". Though one of us took it on them to gather all articles and post them out to everyone.» (Rather well) 7. What is your overall impression of the weekly course?Matrisfråga- Group contracts: We never had to reconnect to it because we had 0 problems. I"ve done group contracts before. Never had any problems that got resolved by a contract.
All weeks (2-7) were so much info in so little time. The stuff covered by lecture is not even CLOSE to what we are expected to learn until the exam.» Week 1: Introduction to master"s program in Quality and Operations Management - Torbjörn Jacobsson
Genomsnitt: 4.09 Week 1.1: How was Karin Lindqvist as a lecturer (group development)?
Genomsnitt: 3.21 Week 1.2: How useful has the work with group contracts been for your group?
Genomsnitt: 3.18 Week 1.3: How did you like Boda Borg (team building exercise)?
Genomsnitt: 4.78 Week 2: Operations Strategy - Mats Winroth
Genomsnitt: 3.86 Week 3: Service Operations Management - Markus Ejenäs/Jon Rognes/John Söderström
Genomsnitt: 3.78 Week 4: Product Development Dilemmas - Lars Trygg
Genomsnitt: 4.17 Week 5: Quality Management - Andreas Hellström
Genomsnitt: 3.65 Week 6: Design for Quality - Hendry Raharjo
Genomsnitt: 4 Week 7: Improvement Processes - Sverker Alänge
Genomsnitt: 3.73 8. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?Matrisfråga- I read through them every week. Didn"t really give me anything of value for that weeks assignments (Except the articles the assignments were on of course).
But now when studying for the exams - They are vital.» Week 1: Introduction to master"s program in Quality and Operations Management - Torbjörn Jacobsson
Genomsnitt: 1.9 Week 2: Operations Strategy - Mats Winroth
Genomsnitt: 2.73 Week 3: Service Operations Management - Markus Ejenäs/Jon Rognes/John Söderström
Genomsnitt: 2.6 Week 4: Product Development Dilemmas - Lars Trygg
Genomsnitt: 2.95 Week 5: Quality management - Andreas Hellström
Genomsnitt: 3.04 Week 6: Design for Quality - Hendry Raharjo
Genomsnitt: 2.95 Week 7: Improvement Processes - Sverker Alänge
Genomsnitt: 2.91 9. Do you have any opinions on a preferred sequence of the weekly themes?- Improvement Processes first!!! If we had gone through that first our work processes for the other weeks would been a lot better!»- I would probably have liked having quality management earlier, discussing the cornerstone model, etc. Since it is quite central to the entire course.» - No. But please don"t say it"s any connection between them when you consequently prove that wrong in teaching and examination. We know when you succeed in connecting them, we"re smart enough for that...» - IP could benefit (or rather the other themes) of being earlier. PDD and DFQ should be grouped.» - No» - No, they"re all interconnected but with no real clear sequencing or order of importance.» - No. It is good like it is I think.» Summarizing questions10. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- The system of new themes and projects every week»- Team building! Weekly assignments!» - company visits and guest lectures are a good way to get connections to the "real" world» - guest lectures and company visiting» - The guest lectures » - Sverker and Bodaborg» - Teachers, they were all really good. General outline of the course, also great.» - BodaBorg, literature seminars, study visits and tools practise» - I liked week 2 & 3, they both gave me a lot.» - All the different themes, The studie visits, guest lectures and practical exercises.» - Company visits and guest lectures to gain insight into actual implementation of theory.» - The first week with teambuilding. The visits on SKF and Volvo was great!» - Many study visits! Very good» 11. What should definitely be changed to next year?- There should be grading on each project which will give extra credit on the final exam. This will make groups work harder and learn more»- What is taught on the lectures should reflect what we need to learn in the course. Not simply going through a whole eight week course in a single week making it all very very shallow and hard to know what is important to bring with me from each occasion.» - Think about the connections. Is it really necessary to make the connection part so big and make it sound so important? If it is as important as I think, I think it is good if the teachers every week try to connect to what the previous teacher has talked about. Maybe look at the choice of cases, here I think there are big possibilities to make the connection clearer.» - I think that the weekly group assignments could be more specific cases, offering enough information. Most of the group assignments we have done this time were chosen by ourselves and most of the groups finished in a gerneral way, only used part of the theories and models, kind of shallow.» - The size of the course literature» - The group assignment in the Quality week. Too many articles in Service week. » - Group psychology lecture in the first week (Karin Lindqvist). Don"t pay for that kind of lecture before you know if anything will actually be presented. She just stood there asking us to think ourselves, like a bunch of masters student couldn"t do that on our own... Waste of our time and (since group activity funds were depleted before we could do that much on our own) the departments money.» - No questions like 1b on the exam. 5 of 60p for remembering 5 words on a slide from a guest lecture is not what you expect from a master course exam. The Flagstaff case, or at least give better reason for having it. Better connection of the themes. A better sequence could help. Better connection of the cases as well» - Week 5 could definitely be improved. After a whole week of Quality Management I still didn"t understand it..» - the week with improvement processes could be turned into a more interactive assignment with mandatory exercisses and then be exluded from the exam. » - Karin Lindqvist» - All the exam questions should be in line with the course goals and aims.» - The emphasis on guest lectures and including company-specific questions on exam which is not relevant to the course aim or goals.» - Maybe can you skip Karin Lindquist, she doesn"t came up with so much useful idea. The feeling of the weeks compare to each other must be stronger, this is the real weakness of the course. » - ?» 12. Additional comments- I guess you catch my drift from the other comments. C:»- Don"t say there"s a connection between the weeks when you all prove that wrong with action (specifically the exam). We are smart enough to see if you manage to connect them, it"s almost insulting when you don"t realize that. Like you teach us: "don"t talk about it, do it!". » - a remark on the examquestion regarding Skanskas five zeroes, is that realy a master level type of question. What use will I have of it in my future work? » - This evaluation is ok but i would have appreciated somewhere where you could air you opinions during the study period. Like a online suggestion box. Anonymous suggestions link in ping pong e.g.» - More student interaction and thought-provoking questions.» - Not so good to ask about the strategy zeroes of Skanska on the exam. There should be so much more relevant questions to ask.»
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0%