Course evaluation Global Project Management Spring 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How to do a PowerPoint Presentation!! Science Teachers All Blocks Jan
Advertisements

Primary MCQ Course Evaluation September 2010 Mean score, maximum being 5.
Final FRCA SOE Course Evaluation Nov 25 th -26 th 2013.
The UK’s Number 1 Key Stage 3 Science course is back! Why we created KS3 Exploring Science: Working Scientifically The research behind the development.
ENG 101 MOCK EXAM ANSWERS. PART ONE – LISTENING & NOTE-TAKING Listening Task 1 - (5 x 3pts = 15pts) 1. What do people say about test scores? (part A)
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation May Mean score represented as bar charts. 1= poor 5= excellent Mean score for each subject is presented as bar graphs.
 Evidence of the relationship between approaches to learning and experiences of the teaching-learning environment at the group level › Quantitative studies.
1 Welcome Jeff Edmonds York University Lecture 0 COSC 4111 Jeff Edmonds CSB 3044, ext
POGIL vs Traditional Lecture in Organic I Gary D. Anderson Department of Chemistry Marshall University Huntington, WV.
Why do we use clickers?. Much educational research shows clickers produce: Better learning More active, engaged learning More spirited class discussion.
Humboldt University Berlin, University of Novi Sad, University of Plovdiv, University of Skopje, University of Belgrade, University of Niš, University.
It og Sundhed Thomas Nordahl Petersen, Associate Professor Center for Biological Sequence Analysis, DTU
Improving Students’ understanding of Feedback
Creating Effective Classroom Tests by Christine Coombe and Nancy Hubley 1.
CSE 491 – HCI Midterm feedback October 16, 2007 E. Kraemer.
Classroom Dynamics.
LSSU Faculty Center for Teaching Friday, October 3, 2014 Classroom Visits for Peer Evaluation.
How the Social Studies Interns are Viewed by their Mentors Going Public Presentation Mike Broda, Mark Helmsing, Chris Kaiser, and Claire Yates.
6 th semester Course Instructor: Kia Karavas.  What is educational evaluation? Why, what and how can we evaluate? How do we evaluate student learning?
Mixed-level English classrooms What my paper is about: Basically my paper is about confirming with my research that the use of technology in the classroom.
Teresa K. King, Ph.D. Bridgewater State College Bridgewater, MA USA ICTP July 2008 SERVICE LEARNING IN HONORS INTRODUCTORY PSYCHOLOGY.
Service Learning By: Markevis G. Timothy P. Josh S.
CHAPTER 10 – VOCABULARY: STUDENTS IN CHARGE Presenter: 1.
Colin Pritchard Driving School Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Last Updated 1 st January 2014.
Delphi Evaluation Results PBA Front-End development, Spring 2013.
ESB Students’ attitudes. Methodology and Research Research was conducted in June, current and 6 graduated ESB students took part in the research.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: April 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:22 1: very poor 2:
DEVELOPMENT OF MODULES FOR TEACHING Oslo, 20th May 2006 Elena Sánchez Jordán University of La Laguna Canary Islands, Spain.
Closing the Assessment Loop Andong He Oct 20 th, 2009 Confusius (551 B.C - 479 B.C) Be insatiable in learning; be tireless in teaching. Be insatiable in.
QUESTONNAIRE Purpose of the questionnaire: How does training work for you? Socrates – Grundtvig project: Education Landscapes.
10 th Harris Teaching Workshop May 24 th, 2012 Misconceptions in the Chemistry Laboratory 1 Erika Smith Norman Gee Amira Elyazbe Frances Sutherland Ross.
Final FRCA SOE Course Evaluation Course 1 : June 1 st – 2 nd 2015.
CS 345 – Software Engineering Nancy Harris ISAT/CS 217
Patrik Hultberg Kalamazoo College
Final FRCA SAQ/MCQ Course Evaluation Feb Mean score represented on bar charts 1= poor 5= excellent Mean score for each subject is presented as bar.
UNDERSTANDING 2012 NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT (NSSE) RESULTS Nicholls State University October 17, 2012.
Delphi Evaluation Results PBA Back-End development, Autumn 2012.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: April 2010 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates: 36 1: very poor 2:
1/6/20161 Enhancing PowerPoint Lectures with Content-Based Questions William Zachry Dept. of Psychology University of Memphis.
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation September Mean score represented as bar charts. 1= poor 5= excellent Mean score for each subject is presented as bar.
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation May 2010 Mean score, maximum being 5.
Mr C Johnston ICT Teacher G041: How Organisations Use ICT Introduction To The Unit.
Graduate Student Teacher Training and Support at Clemson Meredith Burr Department of Mathematical Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation November 2009.
How to Create Effective PowerPoint Presentations David Young.
MM2422 Managing Business Information Systems & Applications — Before we start…
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation 25 th and 26 th November 2009.
Final FRCA VIVA Course Evaluation June 2012.
Final FRCA SOE Course Evaluation 17 th & 18 th June 2013.
Homework Homology Modelling It is really easy. Just start and take some time.
Y axis represents number of candidates OSCE/VIVA course: December 2009 course evaluation and candidate feed back Total candidates:30 1: very poor.
Do you feel there should be a prerequisite for this module concerning the knowledge level? The result of evaluation forms.
FINAL PRESENTATION 25% of Your Total Grade. PRESENTATION INSTRUCTIONS Give a short presentation based on one of the main topics from the text (the topics.
Module name & code Evaluation survey. How to use Zappers A 60-second training course. You will be using the handsets to give your feedback on the module.
Mock Interview Project 15 Fall Goal  Opportunity to practice skills acquired in interview projects  May be used for grad school prospects, too.
2016 Fall OpenStax class ABAC : EUNKYUNG YOU.
Connecting to Distance Education Students
Course Evaluation Title of the Course Code of the Course
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation
Primary MCQ Course Evaluation
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
7 Day Study Plan Begin studying 7 days prior to exam.
Suggestions for Preparation
Midterm Evaluations Results from CELT
Academic Development Survey By School Spring 2007
Welcome Lessons 8th Grade ELA and Credit Retrieval Ms. Byrd
EECE.2160 ECE Application Programming
Behavioral Finance Economics 437.
Preparing to Teach and Overview of Teaching Assignments
CS a-spring-midterm2-survey
Presentation transcript:

Course evaluation Global Project Management Spring 2013

The good “The course has many relation to real life businesses, and not just how it works out in theory” “Teacher and guest lecture” “Guest lecturer was really good and it's nice to have guest lecturers”

The Bad “Preparation for the exam requirements and expectations, should be emphasized at an earlier point” “Too much discussion with students. Slows the lectures down too much at times” “I starten var gruppearbejdet varieret og interessant, men det er efterhånden faldet lidt i kvalitet”

The good “There is a good inclusion of the students in the lectures which makes you listen more actively” “Anders has a good pace when reading through the slides, which almost makes it easy to make good notes of what is being said” “He can relate this theory to his prior work and explain/answer questions”

The Bad “What is written on the slides is identical to what was covered in the texts, and what Anders says is exactly what is written on the slides. That makes me feel like going through everything three times” “More academic approach” “Better at teaching, more interesting slides”

The final score The classes by Jan Pries-Heje were the most popular

Observation 1 - academic content gives satisfaction Luckily there is a positive linear correlation between academic content and over all satisfaction

Observation 2 - good presentation increases satisfaction There is also a positive correlation between the quality of the presentation and the overall satisfaction

Observation 3 - No relation between academic content and preparation There is no relation between the amount of preparation and the academic content and likewise no clear relation between this set and the overall rating.