Visa resultat

Management of Physical Distribution, 2012, ITR585

Participation

1. Approximately, how much time per week have you allocated to this course?*

22 svarande

Maximum 15 hours/week»		1		4%
About 20 hours/week»		8		36%
About 25 hours/week»		7		31%
About 30 hours/week»		6		27%
More than 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- A late course registration hightened my hours weekly hours spent.» (About 30 hours/week)

2. Estimate the amount of lectures that you have attended to.*

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		13		59%
100%»		9		40%

Genomsnitt: 4.4

- Some lectures where given at the same time as another course taken. Therefore some lectures where not attended.» (75%)
- Since it can be quite tiresome to listen to the same person for 4h and to increase the number of participants at the guest lectures it would be better to have the guest lectures direct after another lecture, eg. 8-10 lecture with Dan and 10-12 a guest lecture.» (100%)

3. Estimate amount of time you have spent on the assignments.*

Less than 20 hours»		2		9%
About 20 hours»		1		4%
About 40 hours»		13		59%
About 60 hours»		5		22%
More than 60 hours»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

Fulfillment of the objectives

4. How understandable are the course objectives for you?*

It is hard to understand the course objectives»		6		27%
The objectives could be more clear»		5		22%
I know what I should learn in the course clearly»		11		50%

Genomsnitt: 2.22 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The goal with the course has been really unclear, it is hard to understand how the different parts of the course are linked to each other and the content has therefore been really hard to grasp.» (It is hard to understand the course objectives)
- The summary lecture at the end was very good because it described in less than a handful of slides what we were supposed to learn.» (I know what I should learn in the course clearly)
- Dan"s clarification in the final lecture really helped.» (I know what I should learn in the course clearly)

5. Are the course objectives in line with your background knowledge and the number of points of the course?*

No, the level of the course objectives is low»		3		13%
Yes, the objectives are clear and in line with them»		19		86%
No, the level of the course objectives are too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.86 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- It was a bit difficult to mdetermine the difference between this course and the Freight Transport course.» (No, the level of the course objectives is low)
- I think the background knowledge is enough to understand the course but the guidelines and structure of the course still makes it really hard.» (Yes, the objectives are clear and in line with them)
- I took the course before being enrolled in the SCM masters programme so I lacked some basic knowledge. Nothing a little hard work couldn"t fix though.» (Yes, the objectives are clear and in line with them)

6. Did the examination test if you have reached the course objectives?*

Not at all»		1		4%
To some extents»		15		68%
Yes, in a high level»		6		27%

Genomsnitt: 2.22 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- the test i thought covered many small part in the course and not so much the larger understanding! also the questions were quite strange, eg three fundamental resons why goods are transported... what exactly do you want there? » (To some extents)
- I think the "new" lectures and material was underrepresented on the exam. Like IT, urban distribution etc» (To some extents)
- The written exam was very much in line with what we were told to learn.» (Yes, in a high level)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.1

Teaching and course administration

7. How much the lectures have helped your learning?*

Very little»		1		4%
Rather Little»		6		27%
To a raher large extent»		12		54%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.77

- The lectures should be better structured, the outcome of each lecture, regarding what will be covered, could be better stated. I also think that the lectures could have a higher variation, for example real examples, movies etc.» (Rather Little)
- I thought the lectures were quite unstructured and it wasnt clear where in the course we were och the goal of knowing what was learned under the lecture. Dan seems like he knows alot, though you usually got confused and basically lost you focus because the larger picture was not clear!» (Rather Little)
- One of the problems with the course is the at some extent the leck of connection between the pricing methods lectures (book) and the other ones.» (To a large extent)

8. How much the course literature and the other course material have helped your learning?*

Very little»		1		4%
Rather Little»		3		13%
To a raher large extent»		15		68%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- The course literature did not really reflect what was important in the course.» (Rather Little)
- If lecture slides are included it sure has helped to a larger extent.» (Rather Little)
- articles was ok» (To a raher large extent)
- But the articles should be better integrated into the course and the book id full of theoretical examples but lack a connection to the reality (and Kent did not add that on the lectures).» (To a raher large extent)

9. How much did the assignment I help your learning?*

Very little»		2		9%
Rather little»		7		31%
To a rather large extent»		10		45%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.63

- The Assignments were probably the biggest disappointment of all since the goals and the objectives of the assignment were never clearly specified and then, when the grading was done, the specifications were clarified. It was probably the worst assignments I have ever done during my four years at Chalmers. It was very much like the following. Before the assignment: "use your imagination and investigate and analyze what you want, we don’,t really know what we want from the assignment" and then afterwards it was a lot of bad feedback saying "you didn"t do this and didn"t do that" To not clearly specify what you want from an assignment and then critizaise the students for not doing something that you failed to communicate is rather awkward and not something that you would expect from a course on a masters level. I"m sorry, these 7 weeks have (to some extent) been a waste of my time. » (Very little)
- The guidelines for the assignments were really unclear. Since it was not clear what you wanted from the assignments it was both hard to fulfill the requirements and hard to learn things that were relevant for the course. By giving a better set of instructions on how you want the assignments to be handled, you could have helped us to focus on what you considered to be important.» (Very little)
- This assignment was good to understand one of the many concepts learnt during the lectures, which is positive because we learn how to implement it in reality.» (Rather little)
- the first assignment was not good, we got two concepts that was not easily combined or basically hard to analyse around within the assignment. we were also given a lot of freedom in how in how we were gonna write it, and what was gonna be included...which later you got markes for not doing! it should be stated what is being grated, and if you want something specific you say that! also vahid was not consisted with was dan said..which obviously was confusing! also the case in it self...did not match the assignment! » (Rather little)
- The assignments seemed to be poorly connected to the course. In the first assignment, the topics seemed to have been chosen because of the lack of literatue explaining what they meant. Thus it was difficult to learn anything from them. It was also unclear whether we were supposed to simply state what the concepts meant or if we were to solve the Holt Renfrew Case. My suggestion is to either get rid of the case (i gues they cost very much) and just explain the concepts or put a stronger amphasis on solving the case.» (Rather little)
- Good concepts and a clear aim. » (To a rather large extent)

10. How much did the assignment 2 help your learning?*

Very little»		5		22%
Rather Little»		7		31%
To a raher large extent»		7		31%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- See prevoius» (Very little)
- Same critique as for assignment 1. » (Very little)
- The purpose and aim of assignment 2 were rather unclear» (Very little)
- the last assignment was to broad and it was hard to understand the task. We also got critique on things we had been recommended to focus on. » (Very little)
- Assignment 2 was a mess. It helped my learning in the way that I learned about our company and how they operate. However, this was apparently not concidered when grading the assignment. Many students felt as if they were told to do one thing and then graded on another thing, sometimes directly contradictive to the instructions given. As an example, students were told "use A, not B" and when the results were graded they received feedback saying "you have used A, this is not good". » (Very little)
- The assignment 2 was very time consuming before the exams and on top of that most of the students did not do it well, according to the grades. Apparently a misunderstanding occured for the large majority of the groups. The guidelines could have been more clear, although all the group attended the tutoring session.» (Rather Little)
- Assignment 2 should be defined more precisely..we were given freedom in organizing and structuring the assignment without certain defined ways..and when the assignment was handed in + we received the feedback waht was expected..expectations should be defined before the assignment not after..e.g. the structure was approved by Joakim in the beginning but in the feedback comment stated that the structure is not correct.» (Rather Little)
- this assignment was also not organised well! here we also got a lot of freedon (it was said) to write however you wanted! though, later bad maeks were given on not using economical tools. this shouldve been stated!!! we also gor quite bad marks for our theoretical senario...this was a senario suggested by joakim on a meeting! badly done!» (Rather Little)
- The instructions must be much clearer. If you already have a aim for who the report should be structure (eg. which chapters to include and what models to use) pleas do not give us instructions that are so broad. And do not say during the tutoring that we can focus on one part of the assignment and then tell us the aim is to narrow after the hand in. » (Rather Little)

11. How much have the guest lectures helped your learning?*

Very little»		1		4%
Rather Little»		12		54%
To a raher large extent»		8		36%
To a large extent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

- The Volvo lecture would have been good to have as a "lunch lecture" but it was not connected to the course.» (Rather Little)
- the guesst lectures has been very good i thought! the volvo guy was excellent!» (To a raher large extent)

12. How much have the calculation exercises helped your learning?*

Very little»		2		9%
Rather Little»		6		27%
To a raher large extent»		14		63%
To a large extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.54

- The calculations made on the lecture were very basic compared with the ones on the exam» (Very little)
- It is more about remembering the maths than learn something in the course. Eg. Exercise Q3 - find the intersection between to lines - it is not difficult but it do not help me in this course. » (Rather Little)
- Good to get the basic knowledge, but is should have been more difficult in other to reflect the level on the exam. » (To a raher large extent)

13. How was the course administration, course homepage and the handed out material?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		4		18%
Rather good»		16		72%
Very good»		2		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- Some of the answers to the exam questions were nowhere to be found in the literature...» (Rather bad)
- Too little information was handed out overall during the course. For instance, we did not know when to expect the results from the assignments» (Rather bad)
- Some information was lost since it was only available in the news on the course homepage. When the information is urgent or very important it would have helped to get an email with the information or a note that the news where updated.» (Rather good)

Study environment

14. How were opportunities to ask questions and to get help from the teachers of the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		2		9%
Rather good»		11		50%
Very good»		9		40%

Genomsnitt: 3.31

- Asked questions regarding where one can one find mor info on "transport corridors" and got the answer "use google"» (Rather bad)
- There was opportunities to ask questions, but the feedback received was not relevant in many cases.» (Rather bad)
- The tutoring sessions was to early. » (Rather good)

15. How was collaboration between you and the other students in the course?*

Very bad»		0		0%
Rather bad»		3		13%
Rather good»		5		22%
Very good»		14		63%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Some personal issues with students in the assignments lowered my efforts.» (Rather bad)
- The assignments allowed to exchange point of vues and different ideas upon the concepts and models that we viwed during the lectures.» (Very good)

Lecturers and the examiner

16. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort Associate Professor Dan Andersson put on the course?*

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		4		18%
To a rather large extent»		13		59%
To a large extent»		5		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- things need to be more organized and better! clearly stated! comunication between him and the two guyes that holds the assignmnets! although he seems to be quite knowledgable in the area!» (Rather little)
- Other course literature than the book should be more integrated in the course (or use another book).» (To a rather large extent)
- I think theese questions about the effort is strange because I suppose that Dan put much more effort on the course than one of the guestlecturers but still I might think they were well prepared...I do not know how to answer correctly» (To a rather large extent)
- The fact that he put an extra lecture after working hours just to get us who were registered late is greatly appreciated. My impression is that Dan really cares about his students getting the proper knowledge.» (To a large extent)

17. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort Professor Kent Lumsden put on the course?*

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		2		9%
To a rather large extent»		17		77%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.04

- He only showed slides from the book and uses examples from the passenger air transports. I lacked examples from the physical distribution part. » (Rather little)
- ok!» (To a rather large extent)

18. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort that Vahid Mirzabeiki put on the course?*

Very little»		3		13%
Rather little»		6		27%
To a rather large extent»		9		40%
To a large extent»		4		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.63

- He was not that helpful during the tutoring of assignment 1 and not that active when we presented the case for the class » (Very little)
- suggestions and comments, did not match with what dan said! also very little information at all!» (Rather little)

19. How is your total assessment about the amount of effort that Joakim Kalantari put on the course?*

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		8		36%
To a rather large extent»		8		36%
To a large extent»		6		27%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- Joakim was really friendly and helpful during tutoring of assignment to, but gave really strict and destructive criticisms when evaluating our work. He also criticized our choice of "significant change", but he were the one recommended it» (Rather little)
- the first meeting was good, though same problem as above! we were given bad marks for things apparently joakim should have told us, also things that he suggestion things to be structured! which is not ok! » (Rather little)
- I only had the oppurtunity to meet Joakim once but he seemed to put an effort into making sure that the students understood assignment 2.» (To a large extent)

20. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Associate Professor Gunnar Stefansson put on the course?*

22 svarande

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		5		22%
To a rather large extent»		16		72%
To a large extent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

21. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Carl-Johan Westas put on the course?*

22 svarande

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		5		22%
To a rather large extent»		14		63%
To a large extent»		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

22. How much is your total assenssment about the amount of effort that Kjell-Åke Hvittfeldt put on the course?*

22 svarande

Very little»		0		0%
Rather little»		2		9%
To a rather large extent»		11		50%
To a large extent»		9		40%

Genomsnitt: 3.31

- Good lecturer but the content was not connected to the course. » (Rather little)

Concluding questions

23. What is your total assessment about the course?*

Very bad»		1		4%
Rather bad»		8		36%
Rather good»		12		54%
Very good»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.59

- The cource is badly structured and its far from clear what the teacher wants from their students in terms of assignments. Joakim guides the groups in one direction and then most groups got bad comments for badly structured assignments which followed the guidelines by Joakim. Very dissapointing since the cource content is quite interesting.» (Rather bad)
- Unclear structure of both course content and assignments.» (Rather bad)
- The overall structure of the cource was quite bad. Even after taking the test im not sure what the cource objective was. But what frustrated me the most was the structure of case 2. There was clearly NO communication between Joakim and Don. Joakim suggested one structure then the group got realy bad comments for following that structure. What made matters even worse was that both teachers showed and expressed their dissapointment over case results during the presentation. Since all cases were not up to standards they should instead have asked themselves if the case description should have been better structured. » (Rather bad)
- mostly due to the assignments and the grading of the assignments.» (Rather bad)
- The lectures were OK but they overlapped the Freight Transport course. The written exam was well aligned with the learning objectives. The assignments were a mess.» (Rather bad)
- Improvements about how to integrate the two main branches of the course should be done. I feel that this course could be divided it two smaller courses. The assignements tried to assess these two components ( prices methods and resource utilisation) but only rather the latter one was possible to evaluate.» (Rather good)

24. Do you recommend the course to the students of the next year? Please motivate your answer*

Yes»		11		50%
No»		11		50%

Genomsnitt: 1.5

- Gives insights in economic theories as well as logistics questions» (Yes)
- I would only recommend if the previous remarks were fulfilled. No doubt the course content is very interesting and important. But since there is lack of coordination and integration between lectures, a better structure may be achieved in the future.» (Yes)
- Its a very good overview of the basics » (Yes)
- Especially when a student had no, or little, previous experience related to the logistics. There is a lot of information that was discussed during previous courses.» (Yes)
- It gives a really good theoretical framework to build the students knowledge of logistics around.» (Yes)
- See previous comment on q 9, 13 & 14» (No)
- Far from!! I know its the first year that Don teaches this cource but Im too frustrated that most groups got way too low grades in their assignments because of unclear espectations and guidelines. » (No)
- It is too unclear! I still do not know what we really earned from taking this course.» (No)
- I would recommend the course if the "logistic concepts" were presented in a more attractive way that allows for more efficient learning. This goes for other slides presented by Kent Lumsden. Also, assignment 2 was was too broad and hard to know what to focus on. » (No)
- I would recommend the course if you remove or rework the last assignment. » (No)
- not if is this badly organised and structured! the content though is informative!» (No)
- Not in this form, due to deviation from description if the course consent and the real course.» (No)
- Because of the overlap with Freight Transport and Customer Relationships I would recommend another course which broadens the knowledge of us students in SCM.» (No)
- I felt this course was rather interesting in many ways but I feel there need to be some changes made in order for me to recommend it to other students. Firstly, it sometimes felt like two seperate courses and it was like there was no alignment or communication between the lecturers, Dan and Kenth. Secondly assignment 1 was rather unfare in my opinion since the difficulty of subjects was very different between groups. And finally assignment 2 was horribly executed by the teachers. For the first, the assignment was very widely defined and felt like students had some freedom in how to approach it but then got some negative comments about very precise things that the teachers felt should have been done, eventhough it had not been mentioned before. Also there was clearly no communication between Joakim and Dan since I have heard about a few examples where the groups did something from a suggestion from Joakim but then got very negative comments on those things from Dan when the grades were given out. These things need to be sorted out before the next course. » (No)
- Maybe, but the assignments brought down the course due to unclear definition of the assignments and the supvervision( I believe that was planned too early and the feedback afterwards was too negative. Also it would be nice to have some activities not so theoretical» (No)

25. Any further comments?

Yes»		6		31%
No»		13		68%

Genomsnitt: 1.68

- I believe the assignments were administrated by Joakim and Vahid, but Dan evaluated them. This made the critique we received totally useless, since you seemed to have different opinions about certain questions. » (Yes)
- The course content was very interesting. Altough the course structure was not very good achieved. The second assignement was too much time consuming which hindered us studying and focusing on exams. Moreover, the guidelines were quite vague. The assignements content were not evaluated in the exam. The exem was also too long to be done in 4h and in my point of view, some of 70 points were not fairly alocated in the exam questions.» (Yes)
- The points allocated to the final grades from the assignments should act as bonus points and thus be added to the exam result. As it is today, it is hard to get a good grade if you dont get a high score on the assignments» (Yes)
- Skip Kents book.» (Yes)
- The essence of why there was such a mess with the assignments: For assignment 1, Dan told us something like "you can basically solve this any way you want" and then he was disapointed when only one group had used the Porter 5-forces framework. What we hear when he says that is: "you can chose your method, but if you don"t chose the one I hoped for you are doing it wrong". This makes us students feel cheated upon and creates a lot of confusion.» (Yes)
- I find the assignments much more represantable to the course content than that of the exam.» (Yes)

* obligatoriska frågor