0x010088F6312065A70A44B630A6848498EAD80093CFEAFE161DC94D83C7C5C9A5A748B8

New course coordinator allocated since AY 2023/24. Consulted with the last year's course coordinator and study programme coordinator on the structure and goals of the course. The course this year included more external contributors to cover topics in the seminar series - most contributors were external, several of them international as the seminar series was organised online- this structure worked well as it provided more flexibility to delivery high quality content in the programme. The research methods stream was delivered in the same way as last year- by an external collaborator- and this took place as a series of classroom sessions. A final debrief and discussion on the methods stream is yet to take place between the course coordinator and the instructor of the methods stream so that it can inform the design of the course for next academic year. There was a final session with group presentations of projects, which was successful and engaged. Both the group projects and the individual assignments showed student engagement and learning.

Students achieved the learning objectives, but the main challenge is the level of engagement of students with the course, particularly the research skills and literature review skills. We are considering to strengthen the requirements on those working on the research methods element of the specialisation course. In particular we are working to introduce a more significant dissertation skills element (with mandatory formative assessment milestones thoughout the semester) linking with the master thesis course. This is expected to increase student engagement and learning on academic skills of reading, writing, literature review and research methods.

One of the issues associated with low student engagement was the failure of the course coordinator to recruit a reference group for 2023/24 despite several attempts to advertise the opportunity. The importance of the reference group will be emphasised more at the beginning of the next academic year. The other point is that this is part of PROMAN that has two other specialisations (production and quality engineering and civil engineering). To make sure that the academic requirerements are consistent across the various programme specialisations, the study programme leader wiill investigate whether other specialisations are delivered with comparable learning goals delivery and assessment methods.

NTNU:TIA:REST

Institutt for industriell økonomi og teknologiledelse

Department of Industrial Economics and Technology Management

Engelsk

Mer om vurdering

Emnet har en mappeevaluering. Porteføljen består av to rapporter. Den første rapporten er knyttet til metodedelen av kurset. Denne rapporten kan gjøres i grupper på inntil tre personer, og teller 40 % av karakteren. Det er mulighet for at gruppen frivillig kan levere en foreløpig rapport for tilbakemelding fra faglærer. Den andre rapporten er relatert til delen for avanserte emner i kurset. Denne rapporten er individuell og teller 60 % av karakteren. Begge rapportene må leveres inn og få tilstrekkelig poeng for å være lik E-karakter eller høyere. Informasjon om frister for rapporten finnes i emneplanen ved semesterstart, men vanligvis leveres metodikkrapporten omtrent halvveis i kurset, og videregående rapporter leveres ved semesterslutt. Ved gjentak av eksamen må alle deler i emnet tas på nytt.

Prosjektledelse, fordypningsemne

Teknologiske fag

Industriell økonomi og teknologiledelse - masterstudium (5-årig)

Project Management (Master's Programme)

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(26682)/FieldValuesAsText

Emnet ble gjennomført av innleid foreleser etter plan fra forrige semester. Innleid forelesers vurdering er gjengitt nedenfor.

Emnerapport – TIØ5225Project Management, Specialization Course – fall 2022Summary of the course:Following the structure of the course from previous years, the course consisted of 5 research seminars and 9 methodology seminars. Regarding the research seminars, with some changes 5 advanced themes from the project management theory were chosen and taught by different lecturers.1. Vedran Zerjav focused on the temporary organizations as agent for strategy and policy. The major projects and programs were discussed and a case was given to be worked on in the session.2. Wenche Aarseth focused on project leadership and relationship management.3. Tim Torvatn took the theme of inter-organizational view on projects and covered the debate on the need to consider and position the temporary organization in its wider environments when managing such endeavors.4. Torgeir Dingsøyr introduced and discussed the agile methodologies, covering agile in different settings and sizes of projects.5. Parinaz Farid presented the debate on change within and in relation to the temporary organizations and associated management issues.Regarding the methodology seminars, Synne Bendal covered most of the themes. One seminar was taken by Liv Inger Lamøy (from the library) where she talked about finding literature and optimizing literature search. Another seminar was held by Trond Kongsvik where he talked about how to write the literature review and academic papers. Highlights/issues/recommendations:1. Regarding the methodology assignment, in the round of giving feedback to the students after receiving their drafts, it became clear that the students were challenged to recognize the differences between research strategy, research design and methodologies. This might be an area that we can work a bit more on next year. It became also evident that there is a tendency to suggest a combination of qualitative-oriented and quantitative-oriented data collection methods when a qualitative research strategy is taken.2. There might be also space to discuss if Bryman’s book is the optimal book for our students? What might be good alternatives, or perhaps supplements? I noticed that we do not use the Yin’s book on case study anymore which we might consider and discuss. We might want to hear Poul Andersen’s point of view on the matter.3. Following a conversation I had with Liv Inger Lamøy from the library, it might be beneficial to have a meeting with her in good time before her seminar so that we can discuss what is most relevant and useful for our students from her expertise areas. It might be a good idea to have a meeting in the beginning of the next fall-semester where the course coordinator and Liv Inger (and maybe methodology lecturer) can attend.4. Regarding the research seminars, all of the themes we introduced to the students were well received. Especially, the debates on managing projects from a relational, change and contextual perspectives triggered high interest.5. The participation of the students were somewhat low in the research seminars. Although it was clarified that the attendance in 80% of both streams are mandatory, still, the attendance was not optimal. It might be an idea to discuss how we can encourage a higher attendance as the course is uniquely designed to offer students some of the hot and practice-oriented project management topics in more depth. Explaining the second assignment (seminar paper) a bit later during the semester can be an idea because the low attendance might because students decide on which seminar is most interesting to them and their paper, already in the beginning of the semester. The deadline for the paper is late November, so the mentioned suggestion might work without creating problems for students. Anyways, this can be a topic for us to discuss.6. The structure and content of the seminar paper seemed a bit difficult to understand for the students. Especially, considering the stage that they are in, writing a mini paper with almost all parts of an academic paper seemed to be somewhat confusing. It might be an idea to discuss and adjust the structure of the assignment a bit. Or agree on some extra consideration or guiding explanations/rules for the students

Web/Lists(guid'8b698a2d-6ad0-4f7d-b3be-219cc1979f02')/Items(21185)/FieldValuesAsText

Prosjektledelse, fordypningsemne - TIØ5225