Slutrapport kursutvärdering, MMKN21

Basfakta

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 % 4 20 % 70-100 % 16 80 % Skalor & enskilda frågor Skala Poäng StdAvv God undervisning +29 45 Tydliga mål +21 44 Förståelseinriktad examination +45 23 Lämplig arbetsbelastning +13 42 Enskilda frågor Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning +85 24 Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen +63 43

Fördelning av svar på fråga 26: "Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen"        Antal Andel Missnöjda (<0) 1 5 % Neutrala (0) 2 10 % Nöjda (>0) 17 85 % Har ej besvarat frågan 0 0 % Medelpoäng +63 Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) 43 Män +67 Kvinnor +50

Fördelning av svar på fråga 17: "Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning"      Medelpoäng +85 Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) 24

Kommentarer

Kurslärarens kommenterer

First, I would like to thank the students for their active participation in the course and
for the course evaluation. With additional improvements the course could be further
developed.
The project work and creating real-life circumstances for product development in
plastics is the main feature and strength of the course. The plastic design projects
were given by industry partners who actively participate in the course. The evaluation
by the students was generally positive.
An important change in the course was that Anders Sjögren, a specialist in
composites and polymers, replaced Katarina Elner-Haglund for the lectures on
polymer materials. I think the change was made smoothly.
If we compare the assessment from 2024, several criteria were rated better. The
criteria “The course seems important for my education “ was assessed best (+85
CEQ-score with 24 StdDev).
Appropriate workload +13; CEQ score (17 satisfied, 2 neutral, 1 dissatisfied out of 16)
The Adequate Workload criterion received the lowest score (+13). The project teams
consisted of four or five students, allowing the workload to be shared among team
members. The projects were provided by industrial companies. Product development
is a complex activity, and we aim to simulate realistic circumstances in the course. As
a result, the workload is higher, and students compare this course with others.
I am concerned that a simpler and less demanding project could have other negative
consequences, such as distancing oneself from real-life circumstances and making it
more difficult to motivate companies to participate.
A few students in teams complained that some team members did not work hard
enough. In the future, students will have a chance to assess other students, giving
them a way to impact their team members.
Yes, I agree with the students; the projects from the three different companies were
distinct from each other. On one hand, the students saw that as unfair. On the other
hand, they can learn from other teams and see a wider range of applications. Yes,
one product was less complex; however, that does not mean there was much less
work. The team prepared several versions of prototypes and conducted advanced
numerical simulations.

It was often hard to discover what was expected of me in this course (-20).
The project work is the main activity and strength of the course. However, a real
project is not deterministic; it always involves some degree of uncertainty. Making the
project “perfect” and stress-free would move us away from real-life projects.
I agree that communicating expectations to students earlier would be helpful. I will try
to ask students more open-ended questions more frequently to ensure quicker
feedback. I was consistently available to students via email, not just during regular
meetings or consultations.
In general, I see positive feedback from students and participating companies. I do
not plan to make any significant changes. Focusing on only one criterion could
compromise others. However, I am trying to listen to students and improve several
details each year. I see course development as a continuous process.

CEQ-enkäten fylldes i