Slutrapport kursutvärdering, MTTN50
Basfakta
Kursnamn | Livsmedels- och förpackningsinnovation, projekt |
Kurskod | MTTN50
Kursplan |
Högskolepoäng | 7.5 |
Läsår | 202021 |
Kursen slutade i läsperiod | HT_LP1 |
Program | samtliga (MFIP) |
Antal registrerade på kursen | 9 |
Antal godkända/andel av registrerade | 9 / 100 % |
Antal enkätsvar/svarsfrekvens | 9 / 100 % |
Antal män som svarat | 1 |
Antal kvinnor som svarat | 7 |
|
Arbetstid enligt läro- och timplaner
Föreläsningar | 20 h |
Övningar | 60 h |
Laborationer | 0 h |
Handledd tid | 0 h |
Självstudietid | 120 h |
| |
Sammanfattning av enkätsvar
På alla frågor utom den om närvaro kan poängen variera mellan -100 och +100, där -100 innebär att man "tar helt avstånd från påståendet" och +100 att man "instämmer helt i påståendet".
Närvaro vid undervisningen
Andel av undervisningen | Antal | Andel |
0-30 % | 0 | 0 % |
30-70 % | 0 | 0 % |
70-100 % | 9 | 100 % |
Skalor & enskilda frågor
Skala | Poäng | StdAvv |
God undervisning | +58 | 33 |
Tydliga mål | -16 | 27 |
Förståelseinriktad examination | +68 | 34 |
Lämplig arbetsbelastning | +44 | 25 |
Enskilda frågor | | |
Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning | +83 | 25 |
Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen | +56 | 30 |
|
|
Fördelning av svar på fråga 26: "Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen"
| Antal | Andel |
|
Missnöjda (<0) | 0 | 0 % |
Neutrala (0) | 1 | 11 % |
Nöjda (>0) | 8 | 89 % |
Har ej besvarat frågan | 0 | 0 % |
|
Medelpoäng | +56 |
Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) | 30 |
|
|
|
Fördelning av svar på fråga 17: "Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning"
|
Medelpoäng | +83 |
Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) | 25 |
|
|
Kommentarer
Studierådets kommentarer
Overall happiness with the course. Participants enjoyed the lectures and feel the project and knowledge is relevant to their studies. A better balance of the development process is requested, to put in more time on problem solving and not too much on identifying issues. Some request more structure and clearer instructions as well.
Kurslärarens kommenterer
A general feedback from students of this course is that it is often tricky to find a balance in the design thinking process – i.e., letting students feel a certain amount of freedom and responsibility for their innovation projects, and at the same time feeling secure enough that they are not “going into it blindly.” While the design thinking innovation process is inherently experimental and iterative, it is our challenge as teachers to ensure that there is still a balance between freedom with structure, without us becoming overly prescriptive and restrictive. One change that we could take forward is to make the internal mini-deadlines clearer, through a project roadmap (or similar), where we make the project milestones clearer, e.g., when they should be ending with inspiration and problem-framing, when they should start with data collection, and so on. However it should still be communicated that the students are allowed to iterate, depending on how their own group projects progress. Regarding the project brief, the students like the freedom of being able to choose from the UN SDGs. What needs to be limited is not the problem sphere through the goals, but to perhaps limit or clarify the time that they should spend on investigating the problem. If they know when “time is up” (more or less) for problem framing, then the inspiration phase in itself will not be too fuzzy or will not feel too extended.
One thing that the MTTN50 students would like to be maintained in the next iteration of the course is that the division of the points in the examination (the project reports and individual reports). It was suggested that the teachers might consider splitting the points equally between these two but the students believe that the current setup works best, since it is a FIPDes “senior project” course after all. Therefore it makes sense to put more weight into the project work than the individual paper. Another practice that we will continue is that we will still show sample reports from previous years, as well as the guidelines for what reflective writing is. It helps the students understand better the quality of the reports that is expected from them.
Programledarens kommentarer
Kommentarer har ej inkommet före utsatt tid
CEQ-enkäten fylldes i
Denna uppgift har ej fyllts i.