WebSurvey by Textalk

1. The level of the course correlates with the description of the course
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	3	27.3%
5	3	27.3%
6	3	27.3%
Mean value	4.64
Median	5

2. The learning outcomes of the course were adequately explained
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	3	27.3%
5	4	36.4%
6	2	18.2%
Mean value	4.55
Median	5

3. There was a clear connection between the content of, the learning outcomes of as well as the examination of the course
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	2	18.2%
5	5	45.5%
6	2	18.2%
Mean value	4.64
Median	5

4. The course design facilitated achievement of the learning outcomes
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	3	27.3%
4	1	9.1%
5	6	54.5%
6	1	9.1%
Mean value	4.45
Median	5

5. The examination was focused on understanding and/or application of knowledge
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	1	9.1%
4	1	9.1%
5	3	27.3%
6	6	54.5%
Mean value	5.27
Median	6

6. I achieved the intended learning outcomes
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	1	9.1%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	3	27.3%
5	2	18.2%
6	3	27.3%
Mean value	4.27
Median	4

7. The teachers facilitated the achievement of the learning outcomes in an adequate way
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	4	36.4%
5	3	27.3%
6	2	18.2%
Mean value	4.45
Median	4

8. The course was sufficiently challenging for me
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	1	9.1%
4	1	9.1%
5	4	36.4%
6	5	45.5%
Mean value	5.18
Median	5

9. I have received relevant feedback during the course
(1 = strongly disagree; 6= strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	4	36.4%
4	1	9.1%
5	4	36.4%
6	2	18.2%
Mean value	4.36
Median	5

10. This course has fulfilled my expectations of a doctoral education course
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	1	9.1%
3	2	18.2%
4	1	9.1%
5	4	36.4%
6	3	27.3%
Mean value	4.55
Median	5

11. I was highly motivated in taking this course
(1= strongly disagree 6= strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	1	9.1%
3	1	9.1%
4	2	18.2%
5	0	0%
6	7	63.6%
Mean value	5.00
Median	6

12. I had sufficient prior knowledge to be able to fully participate in the course
(1= strongly disagree 6= strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	4	36.4%
4	0	0%
5	2	18.2%
6	5	45.5%
Mean value	4.73
Median	5

13. I have contributed to and engaged in the course
(1=strongly disagree 6= strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	1	9.1%
4	3	27.3%
5	3	27.3%
6	4	36.4%
Mean value	4.91
Median	5

14. The course has increased my knowledge of recent advances within my field, in related areas or in general science subjects
(1= strongly disagree 6= strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	1	9.1%
3	0	0%
4	5	45.5%
5	3	27.3%
6	2	18.2%
Mean value	4.45
Median	4

15. The course has increased my understanding of relevant research methologies and techniques and their appropriate application within my research field
(1=strongly disagree 6=strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	3	27.3%
2	4	36.4%
3	1	9.1%
4	1	9.1%
5	1	9.1%
6	1	9.1%
Mean value	2.64
Median	2

16. The course has increased my ability to critically analyse and evaluate research findings.
(1= strongly disagree 6= strongly agree)

Answers to this question:

11

1	1	9.1%
2	5	45.5%
3	1	9.1%
4	0	0%
5	3	27.3%
6	1	9.1%
Mean value	3.18
Median	2

17. Are there any parts of the course that have been excellent? Please describe in what way.

Answers to this question:

7

oragnisation was very good with 1 full day each second or third week. group exercises and lectures.

Thystrup´s and Larsson´s seminars were excellent

Examination task was very good. And how each student applied leadership theories ti his/her own research.

The mix of subjects and perspectives.

The seminars held by M. Tyrstrup, C. Sandahl and G. Larsson respectively. Very knowledgable and inspiring seminar leaders.

I think that the session with Mats Tyrstrup on Badaraccos book was excellent - there was a very good discussion between the participants and the participants and Mats. I also think that the last day where we presented papers were very interresting, and it gave more than I thouht.

Gerry Larssons lecture was very practical and interesting, but also most other seminars, such as Christers and Mats.

18. Are there any parts of the course that did not help you to achieve the intended learning outcomes? Please describe why not?

Answers to this question:

5

Bergsten´s seminar. He gave his personal view of group leadership and overall leadership. I missed the scientific (theoretical) connection. Not a phd level seminar.

I would have enjoyed a session devoted to different research methods when investigating leadership.

I would liked to have more feedback from the teachers on my examination paper.

The discussions in small groups were never very lively nor did they enable the learning. Maybe if everybody was required to prepare a 1-2 pages paper on some specific questions before every seminar session, these discussions might become more valuable.

No.

19. Did the course cover the areas that you expected? If not what was missing?

Answers to this question:

6

It did not contain any particular theory of leadership in sports and helth care and to little of military leadership theory that I thought the course would.

I wish that there had been more focus on the "frontiers" as opposed to the extant theories.

Absolutely

Yes. However, it would benefit from including one seminar session focusing on different theories within Critical Leadership research (context, feminist theory, substitue for leadership etc. ect.).

I think that we missed some of the frontiers is leadership reserach, e.g. leadership in "modern work" as knowledge intensive work as gaming companies. The gender perspective was abscent. I also missed discussion on methods on how to study leadership (but I were abscent at two days, so maybe I just missed that)

Do not know.

20. Do you have any recommendations as to how the course could be further improved?

Answers to this question:

8

There was a lot of literature maybe focus should be on articles instead of books?

Improve according to the above critics

Maybe include more acrticles in the course literature. Reading articles is an effective way to asses various theories and also a good way to discuss research methods.

Some of the lecturers and readings did not have an academic approach, making it difficult to see them as research fronts. Was it truly research? Some of the readings were mainly self-help books for managers, with unclear academic base.

I would suggest a short written feedback from the teachers on our papers. That's all really.

See 18, 19.

I recommend you to invite professor Anna Wahl from KTH to cover the gender perspective.

Perhaps something more and practical advice about practising leadership. Possibly a "field study" to meet successful leaders in different levels of the organization.

21. I would recommend this course to others enrolled in doctoral education

Answers to this question:

11

(1)	Yes	10	90.9%
(2)	No	1	9.1%
(3)	Not applicable	0	0%
	Mean value	1.09
	Median	1

1. The level of the course correlates with the description of the course
(1 = strongly disagree; 6 = strongly agree).

Answers to this question:

11

1	0	0%
2	0	0%
3	2	18.2%
4	3	27.3%
5	3	27.3%
6	3	27.3%
Mean value	4.64
Median	5

Number of participants:	15
Number of answers:	11