Visa resultat

TEK170 Six Sigma 2013 Course Evaluation, TEK170

Your own effort

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

16 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		1		6%
Around 20 hours/week»		5		31%
Around 25 hours/week»		5		31%
Around 30 hours/week»		1		6%
At least 35 hours/week»		4		25%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

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

16 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		3		18%
100%»		13		81%

Genomsnitt: 4.81

- CLoser 100% than 75 %. Missed one lecture.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		1		6%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		6		37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		9		56%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

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

15 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		15		100%
No, the goals are set too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		9		56%
Yes, definitely»		4		25%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		3		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- However, the format of the exams could be revised. Even if you knew something sometimes the questions were formulated in a very tricky way, and sometimes the answers were very similar.» (Yes, definitely)
- I feel that there was a mismatch between what were in the exam and what was taught during class.» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Teaching and course administration

6. As for lectures subjects, which of these is more important and needed?*

16 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

More statistics»		5		31%
More tool applications»		13		81%
More project examples»		5		31%
All of the above»		2		12%
They were all sufficient»		0		0%

- more time for group discussion and help, both Peter and Vanajah could stay to help in the end of each seminar» (More tool applications, More project examples)
- I feel that we would have needed more p2p guidance with what statistic test to do and how to order the data columns in Minitab, sub-grouping and what to do if the data is non-normally distributed etc. More how the taught statistics and theories are applicable to the specific project.» (More statistics, More tool applications)

7. As for lecture division, did you find it fair and sufficient?*

16 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

Very fair and sufficient»		1		6%
Fair and sufficient»		8		50%
Could be improved»		7		43%
Unfair and insufficient»		0		0%

- More time for practical exercises, some of the easier ones (for example dropping paper dots to learn about adjusting for variance) took to long. Also need more time for project, since the industry participants can"t set aside more time than the hours they are at Chalmers.» (Could be improved)
- Even more practicals could be beneficial!» (Fair and sufficient)
- The DOE Minitab part could be inproved, difficult to understand if the tasks was compleated and if the solution was correct» (Could be improved)
- Here I think a lot can be improved. Starting with making the slides pedagogical would be highly appreciated and the lectures shorter and more efficient, so that there instead could be time for a weekly meeting between the project group and Peter & Hendry. Because the need become more customized the longer the projects elapse. Anna´,s lectures were really good, they had a clear message and were well thought through and included only relevant info.» (Could be improved)
- I would prefer less theory on the tools, and more application. FOr the statistics I more theory would be good. More team time would have been helpful in our project as one of the members were located in France.» (Could be improved)

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

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		3		18%
Large extent»		12		75%
Great extent»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.87

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

Small extent»		1		6%
Some extent»		5		31%
Large extent»		9		56%
Great extent»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- The course literature has been to a grate help.» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		2		12%
Rather well»		3		18%
Very well»		11		68%

Genomsnitt: 3.56

- could be more folders, ex D, M, A, I, C, statistics, examples for easier search of the right lecture... instead of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. Or 1 D. 2 d, 3 M, 3 Statistic, 4 A, etc...» (Rather well)
- Excellent!» (Very well)

Study climate

11. Regarding team work and relationship within project group members, how would you rate it?*

Very good»		8		50%
Good»		5		31%
Not good»		0		0%
There were some tension»		1		6%
There were major problems working in the project group»		2		12%

Genomsnitt: 2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Worked quite well between everyone, though receiving response via mail from the company representative could be hard sometimes.» (There were some tension)
- We had some major scheduling issues in the beginning of the project since all three team members were on different schedules. One team member both worked and took other courses and missed a lot of meetings. He did not contribute much to the project even though we tried to involve him. Furthermore, the other two members were not used to do presentations and write reports so I did that by myself. This was a consensus decision within the group. I wrote the report and asked for feedback, although I didnät get much of it...» (There were major problems working in the project group)

12. How was the total workload in the first half (period 3)?

Too low»		2		12%
Low»		3		18%
Adequate»		7		43%
High»		4		25%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- It could have been increased, the Operation Strategy course had a good way of ensuring this by having deadlines even before Christmas even if the course didn"t begin until January. » (Too low)
- Not because of the course, but because we had trouble getting started with our project, which mission statement was way too broad in the beginning.» (Low)

13. How was the total workload in the second half (period 4)?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		6%
Adequate»		3		18%
High»		9		56%
Too high»		3		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

- This course clashed a lot with Research Methodology. You often had to chose if you wanted to work on the project in this course or go to the lectures in RM.» (High)
- Since I wrote the report and made the presentation at the same time as we worked on the project, the work load was pretty high for me.» (High)

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		5		31%
Very good»		11		68%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- There was opportunity to get help, but would be useful to have some kind of list where you can sign up so you don"t have to spend a lot of time waiting in the class room (perhaps it is possible to set aside a couple of hours for this?).» (Very good)
- I think we were always comfortable with asking Peter, Vanajah and Henry for help if we needed to, although we didn"t do it very often.» (Very good)
- I would have liked to have standing review meetings with Peter like we had in the Research Methodology course.» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		8		50%
Very well»		8		50%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- The cooperation has been good, although the work load has been unevenly distributed (by agreement) within the group.» (Rather well)
- There could have been more interaction between the different projects, fore example instead of sitting on your own working with Minitab there could have been Minitab Café opportunities where perhaps also the teachers were present during the middle of the course.» (Rather well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2

Summarizing questions

16. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		6%
Adequate»		0		0%
Good»		10		62%
Excellent»		5		31%

Genomsnitt: 4.18

- I think it is distracting to have a project at the same time as lectures when they don"t keep the same phase, then I think it is better to have theory first and then supported practice. Perhaps have just lectures in Lp3 and then the practical project during Lp4, with tutoring sessions and Minitab workshops. So that the resources during Lp4 can be more customized to the specific project at hand. With other words have everything that everyone will need to do or go throw in Lp.3 (project charter, process mapping...), also mentioning of different tools (and when&why they are good)like MSA, DOE... but then in Lp4 have more in depth tools and practical stuff like an MSA workshop, DOE workshop, Statistical analysis in Minitab and so forth (not mandatory), so you can go if you need and spend more time at the companies.» (Fair)
- It"s just too bad that so much depends on what project you get and what team you have to work in, but I guess that"s hard to do anything about.» (Good)
- Sometimes hard to know how to move forward in the project, but learned a lot from this.» (Excellent)
- For me as an industrial participant I have enjoyed the student atmosphere and good spirit of the class. It has also been an opportunity too see your regular job with different eyes and get some new perspectivies. All in all a valuable experience for me.» (Excellent)
- It surpassed my expectations! Very instructive and interesting.» (Excellent)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

19. Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor