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.

Interaction Design Methodology, TDA496

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-11-01 - 2011-11-08
Antal svar: 16
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 25%
Kontaktperson: Jon Mjölnevik»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Informationsteknik 300 hp

1. It was clear from the beginning what was expected of me in the course.

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»4 26%
6 40%
5 33%
4, Agree completely.»0 0%
No answer.»1

Genomsnitt: 2.06

2. Do you think that you had enough knowledge to take the course?

- YEs»
- No»
- Yes.»
- yes»
- yes»
- Yes»
- No, there were some things I had never heard of before, which I was expected to know, for example Bauhaus.»
- Yes.»
- Yes.»
- Yes, I do not think there was some special prequisite required to take the course.»
- yes»
- yes, dispite the lack of the human computer interaction course»
- Sure»
- Yes»
- Yes.»

3. As a whole, how satisfied are you with the course?

- 2/5»
- Don"t know.»
- It was ok. Maybe a bit too abstract. It would have been nice with more methods and more information about the different methods, instead of examples.»
- i bit wierd»
- It was good»
- 5/5»
- Not satisfied. I still don"t really know what to use it for, and during a big part of the course I had no idea what it really was about.»
- 50-50. Some lectures was interesting but some didn"t feel relevant and nothing was gained from them.»
- On a range between 0 and 9: 4»
- I would say I am fairly satisfied in general. Did not come across any significant difficulties.»
- 2/5.. the course had huge mental distress becasue it was extremely fluffy and we did not ever know what were expected from us. »
- It was a bit too thoeretical»
- Not so much»
- 4/5»
- It was interesting and thought-provoking.»

4. Regarding lectures, seminars, projects, etc you have participated in: Please mention three good things in the course and three things that can be improved.

- It was fun to work with the assignments in groups. »
- guest lectures, short projects and design intervention project were very helpful. Time boundaries could be increased more for better outcome of the course. »
- +speed,quality,relevancy -litterature»
- good: -referring to many articles to base it on previous research -good to have all articles in one book combined - can be improved: -explain in normal words what the course is about, and what you can use it for -some articles were unreadable, not only because of confusing words, but also because of just scrambled characters in the text and unreadable images -»
- The exercises we did in group were the most rewarding in the course. The "tool-box" didn"t feel useful at all.»
- + guest lectures - some of the reading material was poor, redundant Why It would be nice if the assignments were more industry-oriented»
- Good ----- 1)Lectures were very well prepared (material, professors, lecturers) and had a flow. 2)People responsible were showing active interest in our progress with projects and exercises, and were very approachable. 3)The material was taught using real-life examples and there was presence of people working in the industry. Can be improved ---------------- 1)The course seemed a bit abstract at times. The introduction could include some elaboration on why the course deals with methods, so the students understand the usefulness from the start. 2)More orientation on how to use a method, maybe through a number of steps that also illustrate its importance and why it makes things easier (if it does) would be appreciated. 3)The individual project had a bit of a general concept which, for our case, was not very helpful. Also it wasn"t that easy to do proper research in the given time, due to general workload. Maybe using the exercises of the lectures as a setup of what it is to follow could have provided the foundation for dealing with the project (e.g. for a research method, do some research about Kuggen that we could later use in the project instead of doing it from the beginning).»
- no good.. give more concrete what you want out of the students..»
- Improve: More structure, clearer goals, more IT-related. Good: Some fun examples, interesting litterature, good with hands on practice each week»
- Guest lectures, exercises and pressure projects»
- +Nice with so many guest lectures. +Quality teachers. +Fun and relevant project. -The designer"s toolbox was a little bit fuzzy as an exercise, I thought. -Some exercises seemed silly (though perhaps I am only small-minded). -Some unclear points in the exam, though this was answered in an email.»

5. The information about the examinations was clear.

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»1 6%
4 25%
7 43%
4, Agree completely.»4 25%
No answer.»0

Genomsnitt: 2.87

- I did not know how to properly prepare for the exam» (2)
- Hard to know what was the important part in some questions and what you should put focus on.» (3)
- Since the exam was more about critical thinking we don"t really know how it will be graded. Maybe some examples of good reflective writing could have been helpful. Everything else was very clear I think.» (3)
- The first question was a little bit unclear.» (3)

6. The information about schedules was good.

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»1 6%
2 12%
6 37%
4, Agree completely.»7 43%
No answer.»0

Genomsnitt: 3.18

7. How did you experience the physical work environment?

- Ok»
- The room was way too small for that many people. The fact that some of the lecturers whispered like they were telling you secrets about lord Voldemort when giving their lectures did not improve the situation.»
- Nice»
- Good»
- the room High is too small for this many people to follow a lecture.»
- Good.»
- It was OK. »
- All in all it was convenient, just some minor issue with the available seats that have a view of the projected material, mainly in the beginning.»
- There was a lack of seats during the lectures. I think the lectures could have been held in a lager room.»
- Best part»
- Lecture room was to small for the amount of students»
- High was too small for lectures, but otherwise very good!»

8. How did you experience the psychological work environment?

- Ok»
- The room was way too small for that many people. »
- Nice»
- Good»
- the take home exam was stressful»
- Good.»
- I mostly felt comfortable.»
- Not stressful and supportive to a good degree.»
- bad, see above»
- Maybe too many people in same place»
- Due to comment above, the lecture room got short of air, noisy and tiresome»
- Good!»

9. The course literature such as books, articles, and compendia functioned as a good support in your studies.

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»4 25%
2 12%
6 37%
4, Agree completely.»4 25%
No answer.»0

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- didnt even read the book.» (1, Do not agree at all.)
- I found them hard to read and learn from. The things I "learned" and found interesting from the compendia was things I already heard in the lectures, only that it was harder to understand it in the articles.» (1, Do not agree at all.)
- I borrowed the course book, and I only read one chapter...» (1, Do not agree at all.)
- like i said above: Some articles were unreadable, not only because of confusing words, but also because of just scrambled characters in the text and unreadable images» (2)
- Generally yes. Some papers were a bit hard to read, mainly due to the level of detail that may have disoriented the student from the actual point: the usage of the method. Some conclusive punch lines for the methods at the end would improve that.» (3)
- Moggridge had some very interesting parts (and some not so interesting). A couple of the papers from the compendium were really quite fuzzy and difficult, but most of them were interesting!» (3)

10. You have acquired the knowledge and skills specified in the goals of the course plan?

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»2 14%
0 0%
9 64%
4, Agree completely.»3 21%
No answer.»2

Genomsnitt: 2.92

- i do not know» (No answer.)

11. What do you think about the teachers’,,pedagogical abilities? (Could they explain course content in a comprehensive way?)

- Way too little concrete information in the power point slides. »
- they are good,»
- yes»
- Good»
- He used a lot of "scientific words" which make it seem like the course is a lot of talk about nothing»
- Was good most of the time. Some guest lectures weren"t that pedagogical though.»
- Yes.»
- Yes, their approach and teaching style were of high standard.»
- they need to be able to give better answers»
- I think it was very unclear what the course was about and what we were supposed to learn, what is this course about? What do you want us to learn?»
- 3/5 Sometime everything was not clear, for example when showing examples it could be made clearer, why they are showing these examples and how they relate to the subject»
- Very good, no real complaints. Perhaps now, looking back at it, it could have been made clearer how it all fit together, in the overall picture. For instance, making it clear where the different things we discussed fit in in the design process. Or maybe it was just I who missed those parts!»

12. It was clear from the beginning what was expected of me in the course.

16 svarande

1, Do not agree at all.»4 25%
5 31%
4 25%
4, Agree completely.»3 18%
No answer.»0

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- I didn"t know what the course would be about» (1, Do not agree at all.)

Kursutvärderingssystem från