Visa resultat

MMA127 Course-evaluation, MMA127

1. Where did you study your Bachelors degree?*

Sweden - Chalmers»		11		61%
Sweden - other university»		0		0%
University in Europe»		5		27%
University outside Europe»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 1.88

2. Approximately how many hours per week did you work with the course?*

18 svarande

At most 10 hours»		7		38%
Between 11-20 hours/week»		7		38%
Between 21-40 hours/week»		4		22%
Between 41-50 hours/week»		0		0%
More than 50 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.83

- Very easy course» (At most 10 hours)
- More during exam-week.» (At most 10 hours)

3. How large part of your total study time was spent on the shipping project?

18 svarande

Mainly on the shipping project»		3		16%
More or less equal»		12		66%
Mainly on theoretical studies»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 2

4. How much of the teaching offered did you attend?

18 svarande

0-4 lectures»		1		5%
5-8 lectures»		2		11%
9-12 lectures»		7		38%
13- lectures»		8		44%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- Distance learning.» (0-4 lectures)
- Hade många schemakrockar...» (5-8 lectures)
- Some stupid games occured during the lectures. Keep this on a masters level please. SO close I would go to the lectures thanks to this.» (13- lectures)

5. How many of the guest lectures did you attend?

18 svarande

all five»		6		33%
four»		6		33%
three»		2		11%
two»		2		11%
one»		1		5%
did not attend»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

6. Have you read the course goals on the course-memmo?

Yes»		10		55%
No»		2		11%
I did not read them but remember from class»		6		33%

Genomsnitt: 1.77

7. How understandable are the course goals?

The goals are very difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		3		18%
The goals are clear»		11		68%
The goals clearly describe exactly what I should learn»		2		12%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- But the PhD goals could perhaps be somewhat modified...» (The goals are clear)

8. How did the course fulfill the goals?*

18 svarande

Not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		3		17%
Almost»		7		41%
Yes definately»		7		41%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- Some course goals could only be reached by the lectures and not the lecture sides on the homepage or any other materials. I attended to most of the lectures but this is wrong. All information regarding the course should be possible to reach from the homepage.» (To some extent)
- Shipping project and guest lectures were not efficient. » (Almost)

9. Are the course goals reasonable for a master degree?*

No the goals are set too low»		3		17%
Yes the goals seem resonable»		14		82%
No the goals are set to high»		0		0%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.82

- The lectures is very childish. Almost redicilous.» (No the goals are set too low)
- Although the PhD participation in the course need to be revised... » (Yes the goals seem resonable)

10. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?*

18 svarande

No, not at all»		1		5%
To some extent»		4		22%
Yes, definitely»		10		55%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- Some questions were very brief while other was very deep.» (No, not at all)
- It was to easy and did not test our ability to analyze the subject. » (To some extent)
- Some of the questions were quite hard to understand since some terms are used in several parts of the course. Furthermore I think the questions could be "harder" and the gradelimits lowered. » (To some extent)
- Do not remeber the goals.» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

11. How was the total workload during the entire study period?*

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		8		44%
Adequate»		8		44%
High»		2		11%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Shipping project took a lot of time from me. It later showed up that some people just made a tiny work within 5-10 hours while others made bigger more proff. work with 30-40 hours. Everyone passed, even if the calculations was wrong. Nothing was checked.» (Low)

12. How was the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?*

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		11%
Adequate»		2		11%
Good»		6		33%
Excellent»		8		44%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- Sometimes the teaches was very helpful but sometimes she was in a very bad mode, which affected the asking student.» (Fair)

13. What should definately be preserved in the course Marine Transport Systems?

14. What should definately be changed in the course Marine Transport Systems?

15. Do you think this course will benefit you in your future professional life?*

18 svarande

Yes definately»		6		33%
Yes to some extent»		7		38%
Probably but not sure how»		5		27%
No probably not»		0		0%
No definately not»		0		0%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- I learned shipping terms and got a brief view about the industry but it could be getter.» (Yes to some extent)
- Shipping terms.» (Yes to some extent)
- The basic concepts yes, but I could probably have managed with a 1-2 day seminar course to get the general understanding, in addition to the shipping project.» (Probably but not sure how)

16. To what extent has the course litterature (Maritime Economics) been of help for your learning?

No extent at all»		2		11%
Some extent»		5		27%
Large extent»		8		44%
Great extent»		3		16%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Little. Mainly studied lectures and notes.» (Some extent)
- The book is repetitive.» (Some extent)
- Väldigt mycket text för inte så mycket budskap, kanske lite för fokuseratpå ekonomin vilket jag tycker gäller kursen i allmänhet.» (Some extent)
- The book is very good and contains all information and arguments necessary, however it is very time consuming to read it all as it is not so condensed.» (Large extent)
- Very good litterature!» (Large extent)

17. Please rank the lecturers. Start with the lecturer you liked best.

1.		Anna Eliasson (Chalmers, various)		1.1
2.		Mathias Nestorsson (DNV - Classification societies)		1.5
3.		Christopher Gramming (Ship finance and shipping risk)		2
4.		Prof Anders Ulvfarsson (ship types and system engineering)		2.6
5.		PhD student Francesco Baldi (Chalmers, speed & consumption)		3
6.		Ronnie Hanzén (IMO and port state control)		3.2
7.		Tomas Olsson Neptun (Chalmers, tankers integrated systems)		3.6

- Can"t really rank this, also I missed one of the guest lectures.» (?)
- Did not attend the other guest lecturers» (?)
- First two were quite satisfying. The rest of them were not. » (?)
- Maritime forecasting is missing. Did not attend the T.O and A.U lecture.» (?)
- I will not answer this question becouse it is a unfair compairison» (?)
- Both Ronnie and Tomas cant give lectures in english. Ronnie does not have a any structure in his presentations. I cant see what Tomas lecture adds to the course. » (?)
- Gramming and Baldi was good» (?)
- Christopher Pålsson (maritime forcast) is missing, but anyway i could not decide between Tomas Olsson Neptun and him who is the worst» (?)

18. How satistfied are you with the administration (pingpong etc)

Not satisfied at all»		2		11%
Satisfied»		7		38%
Very satisfied»		9		50%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.38

- We was referred to some files on pingpong that didn"t excist. It happend several times.» (Not satisfied at all)
- I dont like ping-pong!» (Satisfied)
- Loved that we can find so much resources on ping pong to study» (Very satisfied)

19. What is your general impression of the course?*

Poor»		1		5%
Fair»		1		5%
Adequate»		7		38%
Good»		9		50%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- I disliked some of the » (Fair)
- It feels like the course is an introductory course on bachelor level. It should be a master level course. » (Adequate)
- Som sagt, ganska spretigt innehåll. Gästföreläsningarna behöver kollas igenom och kanske styras upp lite och jag tycker man borde få lite mer "fartygskunskap" och kanske minska lite på det ekonomiska.» (Adequate)
- But not made for me, but I got the impression that the master students learned quite a lot during the course, and it forced them to interact and create a good class environment for the rest of the master"s courses.» (Good)

20. Additional comments, feedback of your choice.

- I think that the course is very good and I think that Anna is good in creating a good atmosphere on the lectures. The following is just general thoughts and should not be taken as criticism. Either one can raise the level of the course and demand a deeper understanding of the economics of the maritime industry, OR decrease the amount of material covered in the course and add an introduction to ship design perhaps? or something else they might need an introduction to? In the latter case, the time required by PhD-students could then be conveniently decreased :) Just suggestions... »
- You have a great involvement and you should keep it that way. It would be nice if you could be a little bit more structured both in your lecture and the assignment. »
- With less guest lectures the course will be easier to follow and the not so good lectures will probably be removed. I think that the goals should be set higher. The reports and presentations in the project part where very poor. I would like to have the course divided into to parts one Technical and one Economical. This will give more structure to the course. »
- Anna talks with a very alive body language (which is good!) but it can sometimes be too much and make it childish. After all, this is masters level. She also doesn"t upload some files in times, change times for lectures the evning before and let her mode affect students. She need to work on a more proffesional approach.»
- In my oppinion the shipping project is not really necessary for our future work, the economics are important to have heard about but that should be enought. Doing the presentations and the learning activity are very good to train for the future. The way of Teaching is very interesting because of the different medias and methods are used.»
- I think the economy part of the course was fairly good but as a whole I belive the course should be reworked to better suite the standards of a masters programme in engineering, especially the project needs some work. A bit more details about how different aspects of the shipping economy will affect us as naval architects would be interesting.»

* obligatoriska frågor