1. To what extent do you think you have achieved the stated course goals?

Transcription

1 Enkätresultat Enkät: Course evaluation - Business Development Status: öppen Datum: :50:27 Grupp: Deltagare (Business Development (Fall 2014)) Besvarad av: 15(21) (71%) 1. To what extent do you think you have achieved the stated course goals? fördelning 0% 0% 13,3% 66,7% 20% antal (0) (0) (2) (10) (3) 2. To what extent do you feel that the course developed your previous skills and knowledge? fördelning 0% 6,7% 6,7% 40% 46,7% antal (0) (1) (1) (6) (7) 3. To what extent do you feel that the design of the course was appropriate to the goals set? Page 1 of 7

2 fördelning 0% 20% 13,3% 40% 26,7% antal (0) (3) (2) (6) (4) 4. To what extent do you feel that the teachers were able to support your learning during the course? fördelning 0% 6,7% 26,7% 40% 26,7% antal (0) (1) (4) (6) (4) 5. To what extent do you feel that you have acquired applicable and relevant practical skills? fördelning 0% 6,7% 6,7% 53,3% 33,3% antal (0) (1) (1) (8) (5) Page 2 of 7

3 6. To what extent do you feel that the tests/exams were appropriately designed with respect to the goals? fördelning 0% 7,1% 21,4% 50% 21,4% antal (0) (1) (3) (7) (3) 14 har svarat av 21 (66%) 7. To what extent do you feel that the workload during the course was reasonable in relation to the extent of the course/number of credits awarded? fördelning 0% 0% 33,3% 53,3% 13,3% antal (0) (0) (5) (8) (2) 8. To what extent do you feel that you have acquired applicable and relevant theoretical knowledge? fördelning 0% 13,3% 20% 26,7% 40% Page 3 of 7

4 antal (0) (2) (3) (4) (6) 9. To what extent do you feel that the course has helped you to develop your critical thinking? fördelning 0% 0% 20% 33,3% 46,7% antal (0) (0) (3) (5) (7) 10. To what extent do you feel that the course has helped you develop a professional attitude? fördelning 0% 6,7% 20% 33,3% 40% antal (0) (1) (3) (5) (6) 11. What were the strengths of the course? (Give the three most important) 13 har svarat av 21 (61%) Kommentar: -The knowledge of Fariba & Brian The book: 7 principles of wealth creation Guest lecturers -Good teacher, Astra Zeneca lecture and Dealeus lecture were helpful! -1) the course helps you develop critical thinking through case studies and the due diligence project. 2) Due diligence project was very helpful and we learned a lot of aspects of it. 3) Lectures covered a big variety of topics within Business Development. 4) Overall good balance between theory and practice, room for improvement in both sides. Page 4 of 7

5 -1. all the case studies are very useful. 2. the teachers and guests are excellent, they have good experience and know how to teach us in a efficient way 3. the design of the course is good, including group work and written examination, which are good methods to help us to learn and bear the knowledge in mind. -The project task was very good, I learned alot. The guest lectures were very interesting and educational. -Group Project Course in charge- Fariba Hashami Written Exam -interesting lectures interaction a key component storytelling -Very relevant and practical skills were taught. Really enjoyed learning from industry personnel. Great selection of speakers and topics. -- Real world cases (workshops) - Lectures held by external ppl (ppl from the life science industry) - Interesting project -I really liked to work with the cases and the practical parts as simulating negotiations and acquisition discussions. I also feel that the Valuation course by Gustaf Vahlne was very good and helpful. -Very good teachers and lectures Very well planned in terms of chronology Very good and applicable literature -the cases -1. The due diligence project 2. Fariba with her way of teaching and her great knowledge 3. The many guest lecturers with an impressive background which were very inspiring 12. What were the weaknesses of the course? (Give the three most important) 13 har svarat av 21 (61%) Kommentar: -Continuous changes in the schedule created confusion and stess, sometimes I was at the wrong place, the wrong time expecting another teacher or all three at once. It made it hard to plan the group work and made me (and the program) look unprofessional showing up late when guest lecturers where present. For the group work I felt that we had not been given all tools to solve the assignment. More info on how to evaluate private companies should have been included in the course. Changing the exam, my study plan was destroyed by the change. I start early to be able to learn everything, not only to know it during the exam. I fear that I now might forget some things since I did not have the time for my normal studyroutine. This can not happen again. It does not reflect well on the program. -No coherence of the course material: the different lectures were never properly connected to a unifying theme. The course book also didn't live up to its promises: it didn't unify the the lectures nor was it an overview of product development. It was actually a rather specific book about investment strategies. I don't like to be rude, but it was absolutely unacceptable how the course managed its schedule. There are always excuses to be made, but in the end of the day we often didn't know where to go and what time the lecture would start. -1) Theoretical knowledge was not extensively given. However this is not a theoretical course. 2) There were not many applicable tools (The book is not designed to be a coursebook and in the lectures there was more practice than theory) -1. the organisation of the course should be improved, e.x.the schedule. 2. there are still lots of knowledge we can learn from this course, if the study period of it can be extended to 8 weeks might be better. -Fariba was not used to work with Ping Pong which made the organization very difficult -Late updates on ping pong Frequent changes in lecture schedule prepondment of exam date -long schedule in one day some monotonous tasks scheduling conflicts such as exam time which should have been checked earlier -Somewhat crammed and rushed. Lot of information covered in a short period of time which often led to memorization and not much learning. -- Bad communication with students (no real course leader that took the overall responsibility) E.g. many changes in schedule and other misunderstandings - One week prior to exam - change of time (should not be ok) Page 5 of 7

6 - Too little of theoretical framework, hard to see the red line between the different lectures. -I felt it was a problem that Fariba did not have many lectures herself. This way the course was a little bit unorganized (daily changes in schedule, micro and macro economics could have been introduced much earlier). It would be nice to have more lectures with her since she is a good teacher for negotiations and the overall understanding of acquisition. -The due diligence could use more detailed criteria and instructions The schedule was a problem, changes should be exceptions and announced properly and timely. The essey questions on the exam should be more about the course book, most seemed to be about different types of collaborations -the exam, some questions where hard to understand -1. It was a little bit unfortunate that Fariba wasn't able to be here during the whole course. 2. Some lectures had similar elements what was no problem at all. However, in the exam it was a little bit confusing since it wasn't clear where the question is coming from and therefore it wasn't easy to know what answer is expected. 3. The valuation could be extended since it is a very critical part, 13. Any suggestions for how to improve the course? (Give the three most important) 13 har svarat av 21 (61%) Kommentar: -I have stated some suggestion in the weakness part. My number one suggestion is to have 1 person that is responsible for the course in terms of schedule, providing info for the students etc. Fariba did a great job with the content. But there must be some structure as well. -The schedule -1) A little more emphasis on the economical evaluations, more exercises with numbers. 2) Some case exercises could have been given more time (eg. With Otto Skolling) as they had valuable practical skills. 3) Could be included some more exercise points-like Excel sheets and applicable knowledge (this is connected to the valuation lectures). -1. be careful when setting the schedule. 2. may be extend the course and teach us more about how does the real world work. -Better organization in working with Ping Pong -schedule should follow schedule should uploaded on pingpong in advance -more of a structure for th exam such as sample questions within the class, and grammatically the exam was quite poor. It was difficult to understand what was being asked as it could have been a multitude of similar areas, quite like the product development exam. This needs to be assessed, perhaps a native speaker can be utilised? -Keep the course material the way it is. Maybe spread out the work load and schedule? -- Have a better communication, if using ping pong the course leader needs to know how to use it. - Have one course leader with the overall responsibility. - More tools used in BD on an early stage in the course (useful throughout the project) -I would have wished to get even more case studies and also with a focus on analysing numbers and the financial parts - more practising the valuation with an actual problem (public and private companies). This would help to get a better understanding and a quicker view on what numbers and values are important. This would also help to convey the theoretical knowledge to our project. In the actual project work I felt a bit helpless how to do valuation and making assumptions even though the lecture of Gustaf was very good, but just too short. It would be nice if he could come more often and do that kind of case analysis with us. -Se nr 12 -More a clear structure in the exam. E.g. having questions in deal structures maybe first then questions regarding strategic alliances etc. -See What was your overall impression of the course? Page 6 of 7

7 alternativ Poor Fairly poor Fairly good Good Very good fördelning 0% 0% 13,3% 40% 46,7% antal (0) (0) (2) (6) (7) 15. Have you during the course been subjected to negative discrimination or insults because of your gender, ethnic origin, religion, disability or sexual orientation? If the answer is yes, the programme advises you to contact the study advisor or the student ombudsman; see KI webpage for Contact information. alternativ No of sex of ethnicity of religion of disability of sexual orientation fördelning 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% antal (15) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) Max antal val: 5 Page 7 of 7