Report Course Evaluation, MTTN40

Basic facts

Summary of questionnaires

The CEQ-score span between -100 och +100, there -100 means that "I fully disagree to the statement" and +100 "I fully agree to the statement".

Presence at teaching Part of teaching Number Share 0-30 % 0 0 % 30-70 % 6 14 % 70-100 % 34 81 % Scales and questions Scale Score StdDev Good Teaching +43 35 Clear Goals and Standards +52 38 Appropriate Assessment +46 27 Appropriate Workload +24 34 Special questions The course seems important for my education +45 57 Overall, I am satisfied with this course +52 44

Distribution of the answers from question 26: "Overall, I am satisfied with this course"        Number Share Dissatisfied (<0) 2 5 % Neutral (0) 6 14 % Satisfied (>0) 34 81 % No answer 0 0 % Mean of CEQ-score +52 Standard deviation (StdDev) 44 Males +57 Females +45

Distribution of the answers from question 17: "The course seems important for my education"      Mean of CEQ-score +45 Standard deviation (StdDev) 57

Comments

Comments by the students' representatives

Det verkar som att arbetsrapporten försvunnit för denna kurs? Studierådet lämnade in de censurerade pappersenkäterna men erhöll aldrig någon arbetsrapport.

Comments by the course leader

Based on the CEQ results and the meeting with student representatives (2019-01-16), we conclude the following:
1. Best parts of the course:
• Project work with companies (packaging development project)
• Lectures
• Individual assignments
• Study visit
• Feedback sessions
• Organization and structure of the course
• Sustainability workshop
• Working in diverse/mixed groups
Comment by teachers: Since these parts of the course are appreciated by many students, we will keep them: packaging development project, mixture of guest lectures and other lectures, individual assignments, the study visit and the feedback sessions. We will also keep the overall structure of the course, but evaluate whether we can move the sustainability workshop earlier.

2. Weakest parts of the course:
• Individual assignments (Some students think there are too many individual assignments and too high word requirements on the assignments.)
• Lectures (With regard to the alignment between lectures and report deadlines and also the alignment between literature and lectures.)
Comment by teachers to individual assignments: Part of the students appreciate the individual assignments while others perceive it mainly as a burden. During the meeting with the student representatives, we discussed whether we should change the system of collecting extra points for the exam through the individual assignments. The students at the meeting did not think that was necessary.
To address the identified weaknesses of the course, we have planned to:
• Evaluate the order of the lectures and when to set the report deadlines
• Evaluate alignment between lectures and course literature (replace course literature where appropriate)
• Evaluate system of extra point collection from individual assignments (maybe reduce number of points from individual assignments)

Comments by the programme director

How the questionnaires were filled in

At the final project results presentation (prototype exhibition)