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.

Design of Technological Innovations and Markets, Chalmers, CIP011

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-12-13 - 2012-12-19
Antal svar: 18
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 43%
Kontaktperson: Anna Tullsten»

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

18 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»2 11%
Around 20 hours/week»4 22%
Around 25 hours/week»2 11%
Around 30 hours/week»5 27%
At least 35 hours/week»5 27%

Genomsnitt: 3.38

- I assume this doesn"t include the time spent on procejts in the TBE course.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- i try and recapture what I did in this course and i think the most time was out into group work. I had read the textbook literature in advance and did therefore not spend that much time on that» (Around 20 hours/week)
- lectures and group work. » (At least 35 hours/week)

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

18 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»0 0%
75%»6 33%
100%»12 66%

Genomsnitt: 4.66

- I missed one lecture» (75%)
- all the lectures, I left early on the Product development lecture because I felt like I had heard al of it before and I had som other stuff to deal with.» (100%)
- Some really good classes and some where i felt that it didi not gave that much. » (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

18 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»1 5%
The goals are difficult to understand»2 11%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»6 33%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»9 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.27

- as I remeber it I used the goal when I was studying for the exam to see that I had learnt all I should know» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- However they weren"t at all tested during the exam. My impression is that the exam didn"t reflect the most important parts of the course. The exam was based around cases that you had to memorize. I would have appreciated if 1) you had access to the cases or 2) you get a complete new case. Now I couldn"t remember if the focal firm was a subsidairy or not. Which for example would have implications of my chosen strategy. The exam wasn"t well thought trough. » (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- Clear enough» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.

18 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»1 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»17 94%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- it"s a very general course and would have appreciated some more reading on innovation management and to have compared it in different industries, to understand examples of innovation pace and pattern.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

18 svarande

No, not at all»1 5%
To some extent»8 44%
Yes, definitely»8 44%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- However they weren"t at all tested during the exam. My impression is that the exam didn"t reflect the most important parts of the course. The exam was based around cases that you had to memorize. I would have appreciated if 1) you had access to the cases or 2) you get a complete new case. Now I couldn"t remember if the focal firm was a subsidairy or not. Which for example would have implications of my chosen strategy. The exam wasn"t well thought trough. » (No, not at all)
- But hard to say before we have received the feedback of the exam. » (To some extent)
- As I come from an technical background I would"ve liked the opportunity to see someone like mats go through an a similar exam. Showing what gave points etc. I ground this on the fact that people like me haven"t had the opportunity to write exams like this and have no idea what is relevant. I figured I answered all the questions correctly but I still didn"t get the grade I think I deserved.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

18 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»5 27%
Large extent»9 50%
Great extent»4 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- Mats classes were really good, the otters felt really un structured. » (Some extent)
- I knew a lot about this before and the lectures were alright. It was good with the case studies but they could have been utilized better. For examples like in the excercisens in the IPS course. The setting we had in it was pretty boring. » (Some extent)
- there were pretty good structure on lectures covering diffrent subjects» (Large extent)

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

18 svarande

Small extent»1 5%
Some extent»7 38%
Large extent»7 38%
Great extent»3 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- the book is all right» (Some extent)
- good book!» (Large extent)
- Schilling was good, the articles (ck theory and mental models) wasn"t at all tested during the exam. The overall impression is that the exam was "lazy written" and that the questions could have been more extensive. For ex could new questions (not from the book) have been formulated that also took extra knowledge (from the articles and classes) into consideration» (Large extent)
- The Shilling book is very good» (Great extent)

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

17 svarande

Very badly»1 5%
Rather badly»5 29%
Rather well»7 41%
Very well»4 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.82

- web page good. Course administration failed during the last part. (evaluation assignment and scope to the exam)» (?)
- Presentation slides always late, sometimes never showing up.» (Very badly)
- I have been rather slow i think. » (Rather badly)
- same thing as above. good when mats had the classes but really bad during the other weeks. » (Rather badly)
- The week with Gregory, not to good... » (Rather badly)
- Sometimes it has worked very well and sometimes extremely bad. » (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

18 svarande

Very poor»1 5%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»3 16%
Very good»12 66%
I did not seek help»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

- I asses mats to be very open for questions» (Very good)

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

18 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 5%
Rather well»3 16%
Very well»14 77%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

11. How was the course workload?

18 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»15 83%
High»3 16%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

12. How was the total workload this study period?

18 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»7 38%
High»11 61%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- But this is something all student are prepared for when applying for the program. I do not see the high overall workload as a problem.» (High)
- Due to group work, which was very time demanding» (High)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

18 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»2 11%
Adequate»2 11%
Good»13 72%
Excellent»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.72 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- As said above. Mats parts were really good, but Anders and Gregory"s classes were so unstructured so it really lowered the over all impression. » (Adequate)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- All parts but better sturcture. »
- schilling»
- The TEVA-presentation from a startup companie like Nimbell.»
- The content and disposition of the course was very good.»
- The book was really good.»
- The assignments - learned a lot from those»
- the links between this and the TBE course.»
- The lecturers from Cip-ps»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- better structure for the finance week»
- The structure of the Finance part way to messy and no one really know what we should focus on....»
- exam and case studies»
- The valuation part were fuzzy and the double info, unstructurered assignments during the week and late changes according to hand-ins. »
- Maybe have the business model and valuation part a little bit more concentrated.»
- Maybe good to fit in an extra lecture about valuation for those students that are not from Chalmers»
- the financing part of the course should be totally reevaluated. And I think it should be integrated earlier in the course. So that the ones who doesn"t have any either numerical or economic background doesn"t have to panic.»
- The cases - too technical and for the most part not even plausible, there was a reason for them being cancelled. The business plan focus - need to update the course curricula if you want to be taken seriously when teaching entrepreneurship in 2012. Look into the course TEK010: Creating new business held by Sören Sjölander in the MEI-programme. This is a course that should be offered on our programme. It has a project-based aspect that could entirely replace the business plan that the BCL is centered around. »
- Ge oss case som är aktuella! Nu har vi gått och ljugit hela hösten i alla arbeten för att träna på att pitcha något som inte är av värde för någon. När vi kontaktat folk med frågor för att uppskatta marknad etc har de flesta skrattat åt att vi använde silverteknologier. Det samma gällde investor negotiations. Det vi fick mest frågor var kring varför vi använde silver, vilket var det enda valet vi inte gjorde själva. Det är demoraliserande att inte kunna stå för det man skriver eftersom man måste vara säljande hela tiden. »

16. Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.72


Appreciate on a scale 1 (low appreciation) - 5 (high appreciation) the combined competency and pedagogy of the following lecturers:

17. Mats Lundqvist

18 svarande

0 0%
0 0%
4 22%
6 33%
8 44%

Genomsnitt: 4.22

- I had no problem understanding. The content from the book was covered. It was good but a bit boring. I"m sure there is a lot of ongoing industry examples that can be used as complementing material.» (3)
- Sometimes Mats gets off track» (4)
- Really good. » (5)

18. Marine Agogue

17 svarande

1 5%
3 17%
4 23%
6 35%
3 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.41

- Verry interesting and pedagogic.» (4)
- A bit confusing presentation.» (4)
- Didn"t attend the lecture» (4)

19. Anders Sundelin

18 svarande

0 0%
1 5%
2 11%
5 27%
10 55%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

- I know he was ill but it was not good.....felt like he just wanted to get rid of the class.» (2)
- good outline and structure. » (4)

20. Gregory Carson

18 svarande

2 11%
3 16%
5 27%
7 38%
1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- Seemed very nice and like he really wanted us to learn, but he could have been much more structured in his teaching.» (1)
- I like him, he seems to know so much, but i have never had a more unstructured class so it really lowered his grade» (2)
- No red thread. Good knowledge.» (2)
- I think he would be good if the week was structured and well planed. he had three lectures and should use them to cover different aspects and not talk about the same thing really fast three times» (4)
- I liked the edge. Maybee this should have been an extra opportunity to learn more fore those who wanted to. In this case I would have appreciated more time with him and with the case studies. Overall impression was good!» (4)
- Passionated but somewhat fuzzy presentations with some lacking of red thread.» (4)
- Gregory was good but the administration of the tasks did not work at all.» (4)

21. Per Hultén

16 svarande

0 0%
0 0%
5 31%
5 31%
6 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- cant remember this guy....» (?)
- Vem var detta? Han gjorde inget vidare intryck om jag inte minns honom...» (?)
- informative.» (3)

22. Jonas Mårtensson

17 svarande

0 0%
1 5%
2 11%
5 29%
9 52%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

- dont remember him» (?)
- I"m not sure which jonas this is. But if it is the CIP jonas I think he should be replaced. He is extremely boring to listen to and they way he talks about subjects is most terms thrown around. » (2)
- Didn"t attend the lecture» (4)
- Inspiring entrepreneur who added the perspective of an entrepreneur.» (5)
- Inspirerande!» (5)

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.72
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.68

Kursutvärderingssystem från