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.
Brand Management (SA)
Status: Avslutad Öppen för svar: 2013-03-01 - 2013-03-08 Antal svar: 6 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 31% Kontaktperson: Anneli Hildenborg»
Your own effort1. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend? 6 svarande
0%» | | 0 | | 0% |
25%» | | 0 | | 0% |
50%» | | 1 | | 16% |
75%» | | 2 | | 33% |
100%» | | 3 | | 50% |
Genomsnitt: 4.33
Goals and goal fulfilmentThe 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.2. How understandable are the course goals?6 svarande
I have not seen/read the goals» | | 3 | | 50% |
The goals are difficult to understand» | | 0 | | 0% |
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» | | 2 | | 33% |
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» | | 1 | | 16% |
Genomsnitt: 2.16 3. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?6 svarande
No, not at all» | | 1 | | 16% |
To some extent» | | 2 | | 33% |
Yes, definitely» | | 1 | | 16% |
I don"t know/have not been examined yet» | | 2 | | 33% |
Genomsnitt: 2.66
Teaching and course administration4. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?6 svarande
Small extent» | | 2 | | 33% |
Some extent» | | 3 | | 50% |
Large extent» | | 1 | | 16% |
Great extent» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 1.83 5. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?6 svarande
Very badly» | | 1 | | 16% |
Rather badly» | | 0 | | 0% |
Rather well» | | 3 | | 50% |
Very well» | | 2 | | 33% |
Genomsnitt: 3
Study climate6. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?6 svarande
Very poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
Rather poor» | | 2 | | 33% |
Rather good» | | 0 | | 0% |
Very good» | | 4 | | 66% |
I did not seek help» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3.33 7. How was the course workload?6 svarande
Too low» | | 0 | | 0% |
Low» | | 2 | | 33% |
Adequate» | | 3 | | 50% |
High» | | 1 | | 16% |
Too high» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2.83
LecturersIt is also useful for us if you can provide feedback on specific lectures, whether in terms of content, administration or other aspects. This helps us learn which lectures to include, which lecture formats are most appreciated, and allows us to communicate results to our external lecturers, who are almost always interested in hearing how their lecture went. Try to comment on as many lectures as you can.
Appreciate on a scale 1 (low appreciation) - 5 (high appreciation) the combined competency and pedagogy of the following lecturers:
8. Jonas Lindgren (9h: Intro to brand management, Fundamental concepts in brand management, Brand strategy and portfolio management)6 svarande
1» | | 1 | | 16% |
2» | | 1 | | 16% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 3 | | 50% |
5» | | 0 | | 0% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3 9. Sebastian Palmgren (2h: Principles of brand valuation)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 4 | | 66% |
5» | | 1 | | 16% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 10. Ulf Petrusson (2h: Fundamental brand elements: descriptive concept and distinctive mark)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 2 | | 33% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 3 | | 50% |
5» | | 0 | | 0% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3.16 11. Christoffer Hermansson (2h: International trademark and marketing law)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 2 | | 33% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 2 | | 33% |
5» | | 1 | | 16% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3.33 12. Agnes Andersson, Setterwalls (3½,,h: Trademark and marketing law in practice)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 2 | | 33% |
4» | | 3 | | 50% |
5» | | 1 | | 16% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3.83 13. Wibeke Sorling, MAQS (2h: Introduction to franchising)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 4 | | 66% |
5» | | 0 | | 0% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 1 | | 16% |
Genomsnitt: 4.16 14. Lars Andersson (3h: Brand-based business models)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 1 | | 16% |
4» | | 4 | | 66% |
5» | | 1 | | 16% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 15. Caroline Fjellner, Andreas Kåreby, Lynx Eye (2h: Brand management in practice)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 0 | | 0% |
4» | | 2 | | 33% |
5» | | 4 | | 66% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4.66 16. Tony Leidenkrantz, Leidenkrantz & Partners (2h: Branding in M&A)6 svarande
1» | | 0 | | 0% |
2» | | 0 | | 0% |
3» | | 0 | | 0% |
4» | | 0 | | 0% |
5» | | 4 | | 66% |
No opinion/Did not attend» | | 2 | | 33% |
Genomsnitt: 5.33
Summarizing questions17. What is your general impression of the course?6 svarande
Poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
Fair» | | 2 | | 33% |
Adequate» | | 0 | | 0% |
Good» | | 3 | | 50% |
Excellent» | | 1 | | 16% |
Genomsnitt: 3.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex) 18. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- The "Assessing Trademarks" assignment.»
- LynxEye»
- Lynx eye and tony leifencrantz»
19. What should definitely be changed to next year?- The franchising debate article.»
- More focus on course litterature and/or articles»
- The workload»
20. Additional comments- N/A»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.5
Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.5 Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.62
Kursutvärderingssystem från
|