1. Course evaluation Global Project Management Spring 2013

3. 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”

4. 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”

7. 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”

8. 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”

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

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

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

12. 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.