Report Course Evaluation, MTTN50

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 % 0 0 % 70-100 % 8 100 % Scales and questions Scale Score StdDev Good Teaching +59 32 Clear Goals and Standards +39 27 Appropriate Assessment +44 38 Appropriate Workload +28 28 Special questions The course seems important for my education +75 27 Overall, I am satisfied with this course +56 18

Distribution of the answers from question 26: "Overall, I am satisfied with this course"        Number Share Dissatisfied (<0) 0 0 % Neutral (0) 0 0 % Satisfied (>0) 8 100 % No answer 0 0 % Mean of CEQ-score +56 Standard deviation (StdDev) 18

Distribution of the answers from question 17: "The course seems important for my education"      Mean of CEQ-score +75 Standard deviation (StdDev) 27

Comments

Comments by the students' representatives

En väl strukturerad kurs med lagom mängd frihet. Under kursens gång var det en bra blandning mellan teoretisk och praktisk applikation med intressanta case och bra exempel under lektionstid. Kursens moment var bra upplagda och med mycket konstruktiv feedback under tiden. Den ansåg vara värdefull inför resten av utbildningen.

Eleverna ansåg att det skulle vara positivt om kursen innehöll fler klassdiskussioner om deras upplevelser för att få ett annat perspektiv. Tydligare riktlinjer på vilken sektor som skulle behandlas under projektet och mer fokus på verktygen som ska användas under idéfasen. Det skulle vara uppskattat att ha med fler gästföreläsningar, fler case eller exempel på innovationer gällande matförpackningar samt påbörja projektet med en föreläsning om hållbarhet gällande förpackningar då det behövs.

Comments by the course leader

We are glad to hear that in general there is positive feedback regarding the entire course. Although we know that it is always a challenge to work with more open and unbounded projects, we will continue the innovation approach we have been using, the tools and diverse activities including the relevant case examples given in the course. The students have demonstrated well that they managed to go through the iterative and creative innovation process that was expected of them, and have produced good results. We always remind the students that in this course they are given a considerable degree of freedom, but consequently the course also demands a lot of responsibility when it comes to shaping their innovation projects and going through immersive hands-on project work. In this year’s class, we have witnessed that all the groups have succeeded in their project work, which were all inspired by the UN SDGs.
We are also thankful for their comments. We will continue the in-class discussion, and the mix of theory and practical application of the lessons. From their feedback, and after a discussion with some student representatives from the course, we have some suggested changes for the next term. We will have a better introduction and framing of the project to the students, by explaining how the UN SDGs can be connected to food and packaging innovation projects. We will clarify that the projects should be anchored to the domains of food and packaging. And as the students suggested, we will try to have a feedback session with other students (e.g., non-FIPDes students) who are doing similar innovation project courses but have different backgrounds or are from other programs. We have tried it for the first time this year and our students have reflected on the value that this gave to their project work.

Comments by the programme director

How the questionnaires were filled in