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.

Quality Management - Autumn 2011, IEK312

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-10-14 - 2011-10-26
Antal svar: 31
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 37%
Kontaktperson: Marco Santos»

Your own effort

1. Which of the following alternatives applies to your case at the moment of answering this survey?

(for this course there were four compulsory assignments: (1) AIM or KJ-Shiba, (2) Business Process Management, (3) Helicopter Lab and (4) Interactive assessment or oral examination)

31 svarande

I have completed all compulsory tasks» 31 100%

I have not completed all compulsory tasks» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1

- Really good to have these assignments! It really "forces" you to study the different areas. Also very good with the Interactive assessment is that you get like a check what you know/ don´,t know about for the exam.» (I have completed all compulsory tasks)

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

31 svarande

0% - 25%» 2 6%

25% - 50%» 1 3%

50% - 75%» 7 22%

75% - 100%» 21 67%

Genomsnitt: 3.51

- I had another course at the same time otherwise I would have attended more lectures.» (0% - 25%)
- I am working in Örebro, and attended only the compulsory parts» (0% - 25%)

Teaching and course administration

3. What is your general impression of the course?

29 svarande

Very negative» 0 0%

Negative» 1 3%

Positive» 16 55%

Very positive» 12 41%

Genomsnitt: 3.37

- Took this course by chance, since the other course I was about was full. Have never studied QM before and the course really opened my eyes for the subject!» (Very positive)

4. How was the structure of the course?

(a good structure means that the time spent on each subject is adequate and the sequence of the subjects is clear and logical)

30 svarande

Very negative» 0 0%

Negative» 3 10%

Positive» 22 73%

Very positive» 5 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- Spc should be in the beginning of the course, since it is the hardest part (together with DoE), in order to have time for a lot of training before the exam.» (Negative)
- Too much time was spent on "soft issues" in the beginning, before things like DOE and SPC came into the picture.» (Negative)
- It would have been better to have SPC in the earlier weeks. I think this is a part of the course, which you need some weeks before the exam to let it sink in.» (Negative)
- » (Positive)
- SPC should however NOT be introduced when there is 1,5week left of the course, very difficult and time-consuming to get back into the statistics theory.» (Positive)
- Quality in product development and DOE should be taught one after the other.» (Positive)
- Spc could have been put earlier. Since this is a more difficult subject. » (Positive)
- More time should be spent on SPC. I found it to be the hardest to understand when studying for the exam!» (Positive)
- The general structure of the course was okay, but the structure in some lectures was terrible. Sometimes, I could not see the straight line in the topic. I think, that can be improved.» (Positive)
- Nothing to complain about here. Easy to understand the aim and objectives of the course. » (Very positive)

5. Concerning the proportion of theory and practice:

(by theory it is meant mainly lectures whereas practice means mainly exercises and group work)

31 svarande

The course was too theoretical» 2 6%

The course had a good balance between theory and practice» 29 93%

The course was too practical» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.93

- Exercises were very good!» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)
- I liked that it was not that much theory in the course but more practical exercises etc. It was very learning to implement the theory in practice. In the beginning of the course I was afraid that it would be just another course where you, at the end of the course, knew everything about the subject but could not do anything in the subject. I am very happy that I was wrong on that point!!!» (The course had a good balance between theory and practice)

6. Please assess the different parts of the course. For each week, how did the following persons do in the given topic?

W1 stands for week 1, etc.
HH: Henrik Eriksson
MM: Magnus Marmgren
HR: Hendry Raharjo
CB: Claes Berlin
TG: T N Goh
MA: Marcus Assarlind
MS: Marco Santos
VS: Vanajah Siva
PH: Peter Hammersberg

Matrisfråga

- TN Goh Was excellent! Question and answer session could have been more structured»
- W1 MM: He presented his topic in a very boring way. It was difficult to follow him, because he talked very bored about a boring topic. W4 TG: I think he knows much about his topic, but it seemed so unstructured. He couldn"t answer the questions properly and stressed things, which were clear to me.»
- Did not participate during the first week because I started the course at week 2 due to a course change. I feel that everyone performed very well. The only downside to Hendrys lectures is that he sometimes talk too fast which makes it hard to follow. On the other hand is his PowerPoint handouts very good! Marcos SPC-lectures worked out quite well. The downside was the errors he made (though small errors) which made it sometimes irritating and hard to follow both during the lecture and after when looking at your lecture notes. I think it is a good initiative to bring in people from the industry to lecture! Good to hear cases, both successful and less successful, from the "real" world.»

W1 - HE in: Introduction and overview of Quality Mgmt
31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 2 9%

Rather well» 15 68%

Very well» 5 22%

I did not participate» 9

Genomsnitt: 3.13

W1 - MM in: Management systems guest lecture
31 svarande

Very poorly» 8 34%

Rather poorly» 7 30%

Rather well» 5 21%

Very well» 3 13%

I did not participate» 8

Genomsnitt: 2.13

W2 - HR in: Quality in product development
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 3%

Rather poorly» 2 7%

Rather well» 13 50%

Very well» 10 38%

I did not participate» 5

Genomsnitt: 3.23

W2 - HE in: AIM or KJ-Shiba assignment
31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 1 3%

Rather well» 19 63%

Very well» 10 33%

I did not participate» 1

Genomsnitt: 3.3

W3 - CB in: Process and change management lectures
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 3%

Rather poorly» 3 10%

Rather well» 14 48%

Very well» 11 37%

I did not participate» 2

Genomsnitt: 3.2

W3 - CB in: Business process mgmt assignment
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 3%

Rather poorly» 5 17%

Rather well» 14 50%

Very well» 8 28%

I did not participate» 3

Genomsnitt: 3.03

W4 - TG in: Design of experiments and robust design
31 svarande

Very poorly» 2 6%

Rather poorly» 3 10%

Rather well» 10 33%

Very well» 15 50%

I did not participate» 1

Genomsnitt: 3.26

W5 - HR/MA in: Helicopter lab assignment
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 3%

Rather poorly» 3 10%

Rather well» 16 53%

Very well» 10 33%

I did not participate» 1

Genomsnitt: 3.16

W6&7 - HR/HE in: Interactive assessment
31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 1 3%

Rather well» 25 83%

Very well» 4 13%

I did not participate» 1

Genomsnitt: 3.1

W6&7 - MS in: Statistical process control
31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 3 11%

Rather well» 16 61%

Very well» 7 26%

I did not participate» 5

Genomsnitt: 3.15

W6&7 - VS in: Statistical process control
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 3%

Rather poorly» 4 14%

Rather well» 11 39%

Very well» 12 42%

I did not participate» 3

Genomsnitt: 3.21

W6&7 - PH in: Lean Six Sigma at SKF
31 svarande

Very poorly» 1 5%

Rather poorly» 3 17%

Rather well» 11 64%

Very well» 2 11%

I did not participate» 14

Genomsnitt: 2.82

W6&7 - HR/HE/MS in: Question and answer session
31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 1 5%

Rather well» 13 68%

Very well» 5 26%

I did not participate» 12

Genomsnitt: 3.21

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

31 svarande

Small extent» 1 3%

Some extent» 10 32%

Large extent» 15 48%

Great extent» 5 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.77

- Some slides were terrible. The one of T N Goh had no clear structure. He wrote many things on it. It was too hard to learn from them. » (Some extent)
- Book is easy-read and it is easy to follow and connect the slides to the book» (Large extent)
- The book is easy to read and with good examples» (Great extent)

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

31 svarande

Very poor» 0 0%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 9 29%

Very good» 17 54%

I did not seek help» 5 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

- Marco was very kind to ask any questions about SPC at basically any time of the day!! Very good» (Very good)

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

31 svarande

Very badly» 1 3%

Rather badly» 0 0%

Rather well» 19 61%

Very well» 11 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- The course homepage and all the handouts should be put on the studentportal rather then having 2 separate systems! » (Rather well)
- The only handouts that took a lite bit too much time to get was sthe SPC. I prefer to have the handouts before the lecture, also so that I have time to print it and make notes on the handouts» (Very well)
- The homepage was extremely easy to navigate and having the material sorted by weeks made it very organised!» (Very well)

Study climate

10. How was the course workload?

31 svarande

Too low» 0 0%

Low» 3 9%

Adequate» 24 77%

High» 4 12%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.03

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

30 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 0 0%

Rather well» 9 30%

Very well» 21 70%

I did not seek cooperation» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

12. How well has cooperation between you and the people involved in the course worked?

31 svarande

Very poorly» 0 0%

Rather poorly» 0 0%

Rather well» 11 35%

Very well» 18 58%

I did not seek cooperation» 2 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

Examination and grading

13. Did the exam reflect the course in a fair way?

30 svarande

No, not at all» 0 0%

No» 6 20%

Yes» 11 36%

Yes, definitely» 6 20%

I have not taken the exam yet» 7 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- Extremely "wide" questions which makes it very hard to know what one should focus on in some of the questions, even though one know the topic well. For instance questions like "compare" or "relate" is very general.» (No)
- I think the statistics part shouldn´,t be multiple choice answer» (No)
- Some big questions were not focusing on the same aspects that seem to be emphasized during the lecture. For example the process. And the spc questions were rather complex since they were poorly formulated and several answers were correct. This made me not want to answer sine wrong answer would give minus! » (No)
- The SPC part was a time consuming part of the exam» (No)
- In general yes, but not that part with the mutliple choice questions, it was to difficult for only 2 lessons and I would prefer calculations about that topic.» (No)
- With the comment that SPC should be introduced earlier so that you have a better chance for a deeper understanding of SPC.» (Yes)
- But the questions about SPC with alternatives was rather bad because you had to do a lot of calculation for just 1 point.» (Yes)
- It was a fair exam! Exciting approach to SPC by having multiple choice questions. My only complaint is that it should be five alternatives to choose from instead of four, and also an incorrect answer should generate a deduction of 1 point instead of 0,3» (Yes)

14. Would you change the examination process and grading for this course?

(for this course there were four compulsory assignments for you to be able to get a grade. The compulsory assignments were assessed on the basis "pass", "non-pass")

29 svarande

No change is necessary» 23 79%

Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment» 6 20%

Genomsnitt: 1.2

- I think it is very good that you have these compulsory assignments, it helps you to remember and understand when you do something practical. You were also flexible in that people could write a report if they could not attend, which was also appreciated!» (No change is necessary)
- More concrete questions on the exam.» (Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment)
- Such assignements should count for the final grade somehow.» (Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment)
- Instead of focusing who said what, i think its more important to focus in general the way they work. Memorizing cant be the answer for quality! More important to show as we spoke all course "how"» (Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment)
- Skip the alternative questions for SPC. Works rather bad because you had to do a lot of calculation for just 1 point.» (Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment)
- interactive assesment could be graded, so that final exam is not 100% for grading.» (Change is necessary, I add my suggestion below as a comment)

Summarizing questions

15. Would you recommend this course to other students?

31 svarande

No, not at all» 0 0%

No» 1 3%

Yes» 19 61%

Yes, definitely» 11 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.32

- Yes I enjoyed it a lot and it is very stimulating and fun when the teachers (specially Henrik and Hendry) are so passionate about quality! :)» (Yes, definitely)
- I think almost everyone should take the course :)» (Yes, definitely)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the structure is good»
- the practical assignment should definitely be preserved. I found those very good. »
- The teachers and the groupwork that you only need to pass,»
- The nice attitude from all teachers, especially HE has a positive attiude and Marco Santos is very structured.»
- Exercises, lectures, summary session. Vanajah was very interesting, she gave a lot of practical advice from industry which I enjoyed. »
- aim, helicopter and cookie group works.»
- I think it is a good mix between theory and practice»
- The content of the course.»
- Design of Experiments»
- Interactive assesment»
- Lab»
- the sompulsory assignments were a lot of fun and a good chance to do some practical experiences»
- The practical stuff was good.»
- The course layout (assignments etc.)»
- For me all the lectures were useful. May be more information about DOE!»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- make your presenation look nice (same colors, same font size etc.) it is a quality management course»
- The length of the lectures is too long. For the last hour most of the people didn"t fallow the lecture.»
- SPC and DOE too late in the course.»
- SPC - earlier. Guest lectures Markus Marmgren (ISO) and Peter Hammerberg (SKF) had interesting topics but the way they presented it was not very inspiring. The lecture slides on DOE and SPC was very difficult to practice for the exam, since they are rather incomplete. A lot of questions without answers and a lot of tables/numbers without explanation, would be great if they were more clear and informative so you can repeat easier or catch up if you miss a class.»
- guest lectors should focous on practical aspects not try to teach basics. that is a better job for the regular prof.»
- The lecture on Quality management needs to be change, it was hard to follow. »
- The pratical part of the exam and the gradind of the assignments»
- SPC could have been taught early stages of the course as it involves calculations»
- The SPC part should not be at the end of the lecture period and there should be no mc questions about that topic»
- There has to be more structure in it. If you start learning for the exam, it is difficult to find the way through some lectures because of the structure of it. It is difficult to regain the knowledge, if you did not get it in the course or lost it during the course.»
- Can´,t think of anything that should be changed except for the SPC-part on the exam that I wrote about in question 13»
- you should put more assignments indidividually.»
- SPC might be earlier in the course in my opinion»

18. Additional comments

- none»
- Thank you for a very nice course!!»
- Overall it was a really good course! I will give it a 5! :)»
- Good course overall!»
- Work load can be increased by having more continuous assessments, for example, seminars, case work etc...»
- Great course!»

19. Comments on this survey

(How much time did it take for you to complete this survey? Was it too long? Were some questions unclear? etc.)

- 8"»
- It took me few min to answear the survey so it was not too long.»
- just a couple of minutes.»
- Great survey, very good structure and good that it is possible to leave feedback in relation to each question.»
- Adequate.»
- 10 minutes. It was a fair survey. »
- Good :)»
- It was a clear and structured survey, did not take too long time.»
- 2 minutes!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från