|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär 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.
Six Sigma Black Belt Course Evaluation, TEK170Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2014-06-18 - 2014-07-18 Antal svar: 18 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 27% Kontaktperson: Vanajah Siva» Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Industriell ekonomi 300 hp Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Industriell ekonomi 300 hp
Your own effort1. 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
Genomsnitt: 2.94 - It was stated in the cource PM that approximatley 30% ought to be enough. Change this to 25 hours a week.For all participants, industrial and students.» (At most 15 hours/week) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 5 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.3. How understandable are the course goals?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.38 - More clear goals separately with the course and the six sigma method.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer) 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.17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.11 - The teaching was not reflected in the exam...» (No, not at all) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.66 - Poor statistical lectures with no exercises, too many guest lectures...» (Small extent) 7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.11 - Slides were not clear and understandable to answer all the questions in the exams. They should make more sense.» (Small extent) 8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.11 - Different information depending on who you ask...for instance max number of pages, who is should you direct the report to etc...» (Very badly) Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?17 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.82 - Peter was soooo good, he helped us alot. Without him nothing would have possible» (?) 10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.61 - In my group we had huge difference of ambition leading to that I wrote the entire report myself. It is a lottery who you end up with...this is never the scenario in reality. As a project leader you chose who to include.» (Very poorly) 11. How was the course workload?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.66 - However a bit unbalanced. It was low in the beginning but high-too high towards the end. » (Adequate) 12. How was the total workload this study period?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.77 - Since I planned 30% of FTE» (High) Summarizing questions13. What is your general impression of the course?18 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.88 - A big disappointment» (Poor) 14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- The days at Chalmers that ended with team time, i think that is an excellent way planning the time. I really appreciate that it has been so easy to get in contact with you teacher to ask questions, try to keep that high level next year also.»- the collaboration with the industry and the diversity of companies from different industries. » - Mrs Brantins leachture.» - DoE practice» - Teachers support» - Peter and Vanajahs lectures and the guest lectures with Bo Bergman» - The good mix of lectures and guest speakers» - Vanajah and her concrete and clear communication and feedback» - I liked the sturecture this year.» - the opposition to other projects» - Keep the woman from Arvika and the guest from SCA, they were both very skilled.» - First half of the course» - K Brandin and S Lifvergren"s guest lectures were top class and extremely inspiring. These two could for sure be given a broader stage. Volker Krafts case studies in JMP were very well thought through and gave an excellent insight in both theory and practice. The lectures would have been even better with a preparatory introduction to JMP, where basic handling of the structure of the user interface was explained. Bo Bergmans lectures had the tendencies of a distinguished professor’,s lectures only touching the higher skies and who-is-who to start with, but Bo is very inspiring to listen to and once he got deeper into some of the knowledge areas it got better and better. His lecture on SPC was great, and could have a part 1 earlier in the course. P Hammersberg gave for most of his lectures a great balance of intro, overview, examples, exercise and experience cases, and did a great job of gluing it together. I liked also A Öberg"s lectures and most of Hendry"s lectures because of the inspirational interest in the topic of numbers and statistics. It may very well be a few more articles picked out and recommended to the students, holding similarly high quality as those two compulsory. » 15. What should definitely be changed to next year?- More time with JMP software/DoE trainer and more deeply described regarding software»- The JMP sessions! Make a workshop in small groups and hand out some (voluntary) individual exercises » - The statistical teaching (difficult to follow when you"ve been out of school for many years)and the set-up with too many ppt-slides. Maybe also ask guest teachers to base their material on findings from their own organisation. Some seemed to have examples found on Internet (though Mrs Brantin was fantastic!)» - More training during exercises» - Boring guest lectures, more jump lectures, more practical work, better slides, better material for study, » - More training in JMP in the beginning of the course and maybe cut down on the number of guest lectures» - The teacher (to someone with pedagogical capabilities, more inspiring and with actual knowledge in the SW in the course), smaller groups, chose your teammates, less guest lectures, feedback on DoE exercises, statistical exercises, the exam (as it is now, it is more about interpreting tricky english linguistics than testing your skills and knowledge) » - Reviewing examples with explanations / guidance for jmp / DOE example. » - Run two BB project/student instead of one BB project/student.» - The structure of the lectures. Everything was very fuzzy and unclear and the different phases were not covered in the right order. Several jumps back and forth, everything was very confusing.» - The structure how you tech using JMP is bad. The workshop does little for the students because since it is early on and we have never done any practical excersises, the lecture does not stick in our minds. And when we finally need to recall that knowledge it"s lost. What you should do, is creating video lectures from that workshop. So when we finally have to solve problems in JMP related to our project, we can recall that knowledge on our own, and learn better how to use JMP. » - the multiple choice test» - Do not take for granted that all participants studied statistics one year ago - it could have been 10 or even 20 years ago. And when there is an exercise, please use some time to show how it is solved.» - After the test resualts, the students should be able to review and discuss the grading with the teacher, i was one point from a higher grade and would much have appriciated if this possibilities existed. Especially since the test were so subjective» - Some of the case-study lectures could be dropped. Either because they were not great examples of problem solving or presenting good examples of projects, or because the lecturer did not have the ability to communicate well. Hendry has the ability to inspire and his sections are very important for the data-crunching parts but often get stuck on explaining trivial or basic parts of his topics and never seem to have enough time left for the more interesting parts of his lecture. A little more preparation in structuring, and a little less sketching with his red pen would probably help a lot. A not very inspirational lecture on P-FMEA right after the mid-term exam was a surprising low for PH. I have also been unsuccessful in finding Svante L"s notes from his lectures.... The DOE section is important but could probably be worked on and better structured to not take so much time. There should be some literature picked out for self studying, as well as more examples including answers for DOE. For instance some tailor made case-studies in JMP, other than those already included in the tutorial. The DOE trainer should not require administrator to install (for those not having private computers). Vanajah"s lecture on sustainability was very interesting and passionate, but still seemed a little off-topic with how it was aimed (political?)!? Although I didn"t dissagree on most of the oppinions, there was not a clear link between the topic and the examples. Perhaps some more research data on historic reduction of "waste", vs further optimization potentials within the industry or consumer branches would bring it back and inspire to fix the problems of the world? There could be an early section explaining that the approach to DMAIC could be more iterative for to not so well experienced BB"s, using the tools to gather more information and learning of the problem. A very "structured" sequential approach as a recipie does not reflect my view of actual problem solving, but was taught early in the course. The philosophy of applying the tools in the process of approaching the problem (-learning) came only later and only per PH"s advice. My impression is also that there is an overwight on qualitative (for ranking and voting) tools, whereas there may be more room for describing/mapping and structuring complex relations of scientific nature. » 16. Additional comments- Many thanks for a fantastic time at Chalmers!!»- The feedback and grade reporting is slow! the feedback could also bee more ongoing. » - I don"t think you should be allowed to certificate black belts when the group size is this big. Some people just pass through without their leadership and project leader skills being tested at all. You can basically sit quite for six month and then become a black belt. It disolves the whole idea with a certificate because it doesn"t mean anything anymore....I also donät think you should receive the certifacte without completing all phases of the DMAIC cycle.» - Reduce the number of "company presentations". If they should be preserved, the focus MUST be on the process and general problems/learnings and not details about that specific project.» - You should relly implement the video lectures, they did it in my univeristy for softwares like AutoCad and Inventor, and the learning curve for the students becomes much greater. » - If a student is one point from a higher grade, it should be better possibilities to review and question the tests resualts, like the possibilities in other courses, but now one point resualted in higher grades for all the others in the group but lower for one single student, as a consequens of one single point at the test!, the test review should be in close contact in time with the test/grading.. Not some time in the autumn when some of the knowledge might be forgotten.» - Great job of gathering a great variety of guest lecturers, some of which clearly were at a very distinguished level. It really gave a wide and deep representation of all the topics within Six Sigma, and presented a rainbow of flavors for different tastes among the participants. It ispires for more studying. »
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5%