Visa resultat

Environmental Management, VMI035

Course Evaluation, Environmental Management

1. The teachers motivated me to do my very best during the course and made an effort to make the subject interesting.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		4		7%
Agree-partly»		22		41%
Neither or»		12		22%
Agree-hardly»		5		9%
Agree-Not at all»		10		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (21 st)

Agree-fully		1		4%
Agree-partly		5		23%
Neither or		3		14%
Agree-hardly		3		14%
Agree-Not at all		9		42%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- The quality of the performance of the teaching staff was very uneven, but in general ok.» (Agree-partly)
- Annas patronising attempts to motivate us had almost the opposite effect, we are not 10 years old.» (Agree-partly)
- Henrikke was okay, but Anna was really bad since she considered us to be 10-years old.» (Agree-hardly)
- The teachers were all but motivating» (Agree-Not at all)
- The lectures were very poorly structured and the seminars did not give anything.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Nyström Claesson made an effort to humiliate the students and put herself above the students in a very unprofessional way. Few other participants in the course made good contact with the students except for Rex. Take good care of her.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Many of the guest lecturers where inspiring, but when it comes to the regular teachers the climate was too much of them telling us what"s right, and nothing that motivated the students to think for themselves (since it felt like we were told that we were wrong all the time), which doesn"t really make a course interesting.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Unfortunately, the attitudes of the teacher made me very negative towards the course. I wish to be treated as an adult and not as a a child during my last year of master"s studies.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		5		71%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- You made this course to heavy, the workload was more like a course for 10-15 points worth» (Agree-hardly)

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- It depends on the part of the course» (Neither or)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		1		12%
Agree-partly		4		50%
Neither or		3		37%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.25

- Min handledare var fruktansvärt dålig, kunde inte klara av att komunisera medan föreläsarna däremot uppfyllde alla förväntningar.» (Neither or)

E, M, K, I: (4 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		50%
Neither or		2		50%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- Some teachers have been better then others.» (Agree-partly)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- I hardly went to any lectures because Anna"s way of treating the class as if we were all 5 years old was extremely annoying to me. This was my very last course at Chalmers: it"s not acceptable for a teacher to stand up and say that I should forget everthing I"ve learned before because this time I _really_ need to study. I know how to study and learn things, otherwise I would not have gotten this far. Please respect that. This course is no more difficult than most other courses at Chalmers, so don"t say that.» (Agree-Not at all)

2. I thought that it was an interesting course and I was inspired.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		6		11%
Agree-partly»		30		56%
Neither or»		7		13%
Agree-hardly»		6		11%
Agree-Not at all»		4		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (23 st)

Agree-fully		1		4%
Agree-partly		10		43%
Neither or		3		13%
Agree-hardly		6		26%
Agree-Not at all		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Some topics were interesting, but most of the litterature was a bit boring and some of it felt outdated. The guest lectures were good.» (Neither or)
- A very interesting subject, but I was not inspired by the teachers.» (Neither or)
- It felt like it would have been more relevant to study regular management and only consider what differs between regular and environmental. It was to much "captain obvious to the rescue"» (Agree-hardly)
- The choice of movie for the movie lectures was good, but it still feels like this so called science is trying to make something small very very big, and to separate environmental management from regular management instead of teaching us regular management and show the differences to environmental ditto.» (Agree-hardly)
- The subject is interesting but the organisation of the course was bad and the teaching was on a too basic level. » (Agree-hardly)
- most of the course material was interesting but the assignment and the lectures killed the interest» (Agree-hardly)
- One of the worst courses of my full 4 years here at Chalmers.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		5		71%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- It was an intressting subject but the work load and some not so relevante lectures made it not that inspiring.» (Agree-partly)

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		5		71%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

- It also depends on the part of the course» (Neither or)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

V: (7 st)

Agree-fully		2		28%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Kursen skulle ha kunnat vara intressant men kursen var sjukt rörig och oorganiserad, tyvärr. Projektet gav mig ingenting och föreläsningarna var i regel dåliga (dvs. ointressanta).» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

- I studied by myself and learned alot, the content was different from the other courses I"ve taken and it felt like useful knowledge. Good book (though expensive) and articles.» (Agree-fully)

3. I was helped by the course goals in studying the subject*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		8		15%
Agree-partly»		13		24%
Neither or»		17		32%
Agree-hardly»		4		7%
Agree-Not at all»		11		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		2		9%
Agree-partly		5		22%
Neither or		6		27%
Agree-hardly		1		4%
Agree-Not at all		8		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.36

- They are a bit too broad and wide.» (Neither or)
- Very vague and unclear goals» (Agree-Not at all)
- There was no good communication on how to study for the exam, what"s important to know for the future.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Far too fuzzy to be a guide in the studies.» (Agree-Not at all)
- the course goals where very vague and poorly comunicated. until the exam I did not really know what we were supposed to learn» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		2		28%
Neither or		4		57%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		3		42%
Agree-partly		1		14%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Good definition of the aim of this courses:which kind of notion we will focus on» (Agree-fully)
- The course goals were too hard to understand and not practical at all. » (Agree-Not at all)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		2		66%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		1		12%
Agree-partly		2		25%
Neither or		3		37%
Agree-hardly		2		25%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- Men kurs-PM var till stor hjälp.» (Neither or)
- det tog lång tid innan jag verkligen förstod kursmålen» (Agree-hardly)
- Too much focus on value oriented discussions and not enough on management systems.» (Agree-hardly)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- Som jag nämnde tidigare så var kursen, samt dess mål, väldigt röriga så jag var inte direkt hjälpt av detta även om jag läste in mig på dessa...» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3

4. In the examination I was expected to show if I could generalise my knowledge and apply my knowledge in new situations.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		4		7%
Agree-partly»		18		33%
Neither or»		7		13%
Agree-hardly»		12		22%
Agree-Not at all»		12		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (23 st)

Agree-fully		2		8%
Agree-partly		9		39%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		3		13%
Agree-Not at all		9		39%

Genomsnitt: 3.34

- It should be a home-exam!! Ridiculus to have it in 4hours. It became more of how much one had time to write than what one knew. Not everyone can formulate themselves in a second.» (Agree-fully)
- It would have been good to have the exam as a home exam instead I think. You could have a maximum amount of words allowed so the answears could be short anyway. I think the time pressure at the exam was to though. I understand that it was a point with this but I still think a home exam would be something you should consider.» (Agree-partly)
- Some of the questions were quite good, even though it felt like a lot of the information requested was simply to look up something in the litterature and copy it to the exam paper. Also, the exam was too much a test in speed writing, there was no time to think whatsoever and far too many extensive questions to answer in 4 hours.» (Agree-partly)
- The exame was to much connected to the texts and the boo and was far to time consuming which took away parts of the chance to show that one could generaise knowlwdge etc. » (Agree-partly)
- Lack of time during the exam» (Agree-partly)
- The exam did not focus on what felt relevant, and the scope was by far to large. The exam required a work load comparable to an entire home exam. Too much instructions, tasks and writing in too little time.» (Agree-hardly)
- It is not possible to show what you know when you have 6 questions demanding one or two work days each for a proper analysis and then only 4 hours to answer. And the last one. Analyse a company by reading a text no more than 100 words long. That is to make fun of your own profession. You would surely need more information than that. Why not give an exam to take home and answer properly. Or only two questions, so there is time to actually answer the questions. To generealise and show the knowledge. » (Agree-hardly)
- It was interesting questions that would have made sense for a home-written exam. But doing this exam in-class was WAY too much to do. All questions had to be analysed and thought through before answering, and there simply wasn"t enough time to do this.» (Agree-hardly)
- It was an open book exam were one partly should look things up and write them down, completely worthless.» (Agree-Not at all)
- The examination was a 10 hour take-home exam taken in 4 hours in a room. It was about summarizing and utilize articles rather than to generalize knowledge. » (Agree-Not at all)
- My oppinion is that there were to many question at the exam and to detailed, like always describe, explain, analyze, use example from the book etc. I do not think that the exam reflect what you acctually learn during the course. I would prefer an exam without books and with a less detail question and about 4 analysing question so that you have time to build up a reasoning. » (Agree-Not at all)
- the exam tested a lot of detailed knowledge from course literature. severeal questions where of the type where you had to know the techers intepretation of the course material rather than the course material itself.» (Agree-Not at all)
- It was way too little time to really apply any knowledge in new situations, for that you need more time to think through the question and your answer. » (Agree-Not at all)
- The examination examined my skills to write as fast as possible to 90% and assessed my knowledge to 10%. It must be shortened or be done as a home exam. » (Agree-Not at all)
- The exam was just about writing quickly. The differences in grades shows only who is quicker in formulating answers and write them down, not who is better in applying the knowledge in new situations. The advice to formulate things and not just write done what came to my mind made me lose a lot of points since this made it impossible for me to answer as much as I would have needed to. Other students that didn"t follow this advice got much higher grades since they had time to answer more questions.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		1		14%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		2		28%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- The examn was too long!» (Agree-partly)
- The exam was too big or if you want there was too little time. To try to analys and answer the questions good in that short time is some what impossible!» (Neither or)
- That must have been the worst exam in my whole chalmers education. Analysing question with thorough motivation and NO TIME TO DO IT. Why would anyone do that kind of exam. And the first question only made you loose moore time because that was a competition in looking up words, Terrible!!!! Two major anylising questions would have been enough with that kind of projects, seminars and workshops. Maybe a small homeexam could be a better option when good resoning is what you want to achive.» (Agree-Not at all)

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		2		28%
Neither or		3		42%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

V: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		2		28%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Hade hard finisching the exam in time, it was to time consuming questions.» (Agree-partly)
- Några av frågorna gjorde att man fick visa sådana färdigheter, medan andra (som uppgift 1) mer var av "slå så snabbt du kan i boken" karaktär.» (Agree-partly)
- jag tyckte att tentan motsvarade mina förväntningar men den första frågan var riktigt, riktigt dålig. tidsbrist gjorde att det var jobbigt att hinna analysera sina svar ordentligt» (Agree-hardly)
- The exam was either not long enough or contained to many elements considering the time given. I though Chalmers wanted to generate thinkers and not speed-writers.» (Agree-hardly)
- The exam was a joke! There was no time to analyse and reflect upon the subject and frankly I"m very disappointed!» (Agree-Not at all)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- There where to many qestions on the exam I did not have time to answer all qestions which is not a good thing, then it is impossible to show what you have learnd or not» (Agree-partly)
- The examination was too long to be able to answer all the questions thuroughly and focused to much on just finding the right information in the course litterature. » (Agree-hardly)
- Den enda tentan på Chalmers någonsin som jag fått tidsnöd. Varför ha ett sådant upplägg? Det måste ju vara bättre att ha hemtenta både för er och för studenten då 20 sidors ostrukturerad text på salstenta skulle resultera i 2-3 sidors välstrukturerad text på hemtenta! Tyckte tentan var katastrofalt (!!!) dålig!» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		2		66%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- In the examination I was expected to show that I could produce extreme amounts of text in a very limited amount of time. Limit questions, limit the number of questions, or make it a home exam. This examination is not very useful - I think I did well but mainly because I realised from the beginning I had to plan my time carefully.» (Agree-hardly)

5. I had enough time to learn the subject.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		11		20%
Agree-partly»		21		39%
Neither or»		8		15%
Agree-hardly»		8		15%
Agree-Not at all»		5		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		7		31%
Agree-partly		9		40%
Neither or		3		13%
Agree-hardly		2		9%
Agree-Not at all		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

- There was not that much to read and the book was rather basic. And too expensive. I would not recommend next comming student to buy it. » (Agree-fully)
- Very vague what we were supposed to learn. » (Agree-partly)
- I kind of got the idea that companies are bad, you cannot trust a company, but you can trust their environmental reports. Also there was some similar vocabulary with vaguely different meanings to learn.» (Agree-partly)
- I thought I had learnt it, but this was not what was assessed on the exam (if you are a slow reader and want to analyse your answer well before answering, you are in trouble...)» (Neither or)
- The original schedule was probably pretty good, but our chosen project was too extensive. We felt like the supervisors should be a lot more critical when it comes to what project ideas were approved from the start. In fact, time wasn"t a problem until we realized that we had a word restriction, so we had to spend a week trying to cut the text shorter but keep the readability. It was obvious from the start that our project would require an extensive information section, so since there was no flexibility in the restriction, the teachers should have been a lot clearer about it when the project idea was approved.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		28%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		3		42%
Agree-Not at all		2		28%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		3		42%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Some subject (for exemple reading some of the article) needs really more time in order to be at ease with it and to understand what they really want to mean.» (Agree-hardly)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		2		25%
Agree-partly		4		50%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		2		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- projektet tog för lång tid för att jag skulle kunna koncentrera mig på något annat. jag skyller det delvis på vår handledare som fick oss att skriva om projektet två gånger.» (Agree-Not at all)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		3		100%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- The project took to much time for me to be able to study the course litterature the way I wanted to.» (Neither or)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

6. The course strengthened my ability to reason with others in a credible and analytical way.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		3		5%
Agree-partly»		28		52%
Neither or»		11		20%
Agree-hardly»		7		13%
Agree-Not at all»		4		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.64

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		2		9%
Agree-partly		10		45%
Neither or		6		27%
Agree-hardly		1		4%
Agree-Not at all		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- I don"t believe the course has strengthened those abilities, but our common dislike of the course really brought us closer together. » (Agree-partly)
- The project was a pretty good way to strenghten the ability to work in a team and discuss solutions and analyses.» (Agree-partly)
- this is knowledge I had since before and it was not improved by this course» (Agree-Not at all)
- I don"t think this was part of the course.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		2		28%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.71

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		3		42%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.71

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		6		75%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		2		25%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- jag ängnade mest tid åt att irritera mig på vår handledare i stället för att verkligen fundera över vad det var vi skulle göra» (Agree-hardly)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- Eftersom kursen inte var särskilt analytisk så känns det inte som den här frågan borde vara med här!» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- I knew how to do that before» (Agree-hardly)

7. The teachers gave useful comments on my work during the course.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		8		15%
Agree-partly»		19		35%
Neither or»		8		15%
Agree-hardly»		7		13%
Agree-Not at all»		11		20%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		2		9%
Agree-partly		7		31%
Neither or		1		4%
Agree-hardly		4		18%
Agree-Not at all		8		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.4

- Georgia was a great help in the work with the project.» (Agree-fully)
- Giorgia was my supervisor at the project and I think she was very helpful.» (Agree-fully)
- We got some comments on our project that could be valuable.» (Agree-partly)
- I agree fully about Henrikke, but the rest of the teachers mostly made me confused by giving different kinds of answers on different occasions.» (Neither or)
- Supervisor was okay but nothing else.» (Agree-hardly)
- Some interesting discussions in class, however it was too clear when teachers agreed and when they didn"t agree with the students. We are not here to learn the right answers (there are none!), so please don"t tell us which are the right answers.» (Agree-hardly)
- Very strange feedback. Not helpful. » (Agree-Not at all)
- Very bad feedback on the project» (Agree-Not at all)
- The comments were just common sense and I felt that the supervisor on the project was to close in educational background. Our supervisor had not finished her master yet and I do expect a supervisor with a lot more experience than I have myself.» (Agree-Not at all)
- We didn"t get any useful comments at all.» (Agree-Not at all)
- our supervision gave the impression that our supevisor hadn"t even read the report.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Our supervisor didn"t comment on our work at all. The only kind of advice we got was things like "do not plagiarise". She didn"t read our report to be able to give more feedback than that.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.71

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		2		28%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

- Project supervision was very good.» (Agree-fully)
- Good review of the project» (Agree-partly)
- The evaluations were differing very much between the groups when doing the group assignment, and different groups were evaluated in very different ways for the same work.» (Agree-Not at all)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		2		25%
Agree-partly		2		25%
Neither or		3		37%
Agree-hardly		1		12%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- föreläsarna gav goda råd medan vår handledare snarare stjälpte än hjälpte» (Neither or)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		2		66%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- The supervisor for the project gave good feedback on the form of the report but not so much on the actual content.» (Agree-partly)
- Some teachers gave allot of useful info for exampel Anna but not our prodject supervisor.» (Neither or)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Good with tutoring on the project, but tutors should try to be more coherent with eachother and with the task-text. (Ex. Giorgia said it is not important how many words are in the report, but the task text says a clear limit. How to know how the report will be graded?)» (Agree-partly)

8. The course developed my analytical skills.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		3		5%
Agree-partly»		22		41%
Neither or»		18		33%
Agree-hardly»		5		9%
Agree-Not at all»		5		9%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		2		9%
Agree-partly		7		31%
Neither or		7		31%
Agree-hardly		3		13%
Agree-Not at all		3		13%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- The course made me read a lot of interesting articles and books. However, none of these were course literature, sadly.» (Agree-fully)
- Most of the analytical work was built on previous knowledge, although group projects is always a good way to practice acknowledging other points of view.» (Neither or)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		5		71%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		3		42%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 3

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		4		50%
Neither or		4		50%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- Se svar på fråga 6.» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		2		66%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

9. The teachers encouraged us to use and try our own ideas.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		7		13%
Agree-partly»		18		33%
Neither or»		16		30%
Agree-hardly»		6		11%
Agree-Not at all»		6		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (22 st)

Agree-fully		2		9%
Agree-partly		4		18%
Neither or		8		36%
Agree-hardly		3		13%
Agree-Not at all		5		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

- During this programme I have been used to teachers that encourage us to use own ideas to a larger extent. I agree concerning Henrikke, but not with the rest.» (Neither or)
- only the guestlecturers, Anna hade her mind set before asking» (Agree-hardly)
- The teachers encouraged us to tell us our ideas, then tell us we were wrong.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Most of the times when a student tried to express a point of view that was different from that expressed by Anna, they were pretty much told that they were wrong. NOT encouraging.» (Agree-Not at all)
- Own ideas and initative were only welcome if they matched the ideas of the teachers otherwise they weren"t considered at all» (Agree-Not at all)
- See comment Q7: What was encouraged was to agree with teacher.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		2		28%
Agree-partly		2		28%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.28

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		2		28%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.14

- The theoretical framework and the applications we wanted to use as a base for our project were dismissed and we had to redo our project based on the personal views of our evaluator.» (Agree-Not at all)

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		4		50%
Neither or		3		37%
Agree-hardly		1		12%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Seminars were more of lectures to tell us what the articles meant than a forum for ideas.» (Agree-hardly)

10. The examination made me understand the subject in a deeper way.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		3		5%
Agree-partly»		15		28%
Neither or»		6		11%
Agree-hardly»		10		18%
Agree-Not at all»		19		35%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (24 st)

Agree-fully		1		4%
Agree-partly		3		12%
Neither or		2		8%
Agree-hardly		3		12%
Agree-Not at all		15		62%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

- What we learned, we probalbly learned the most at some guest lectures and when worling with the project.» (Neither or)
- The timelimit was to short for the amount of questions on the exam.» (Agree-hardly)
- perhaps in some strange way, if we had been close to learning what was tested in the exam it would have been a better course» (Agree-hardly)
- The examination made my hand ache from writing too much. » (Agree-Not at all)
- The exam was really bad. There was no time at all to think or analyze since one had to refer to the book and the articles in almost every question. 24 essey questions in 4 hrs, what were you thinking? It said "motivate well" on a 2 point question, do you seriousely think that there was time for that?» (Agree-Not at all)
- The examination made it even fuzzier and more unclear. There were no clear connection between the exam and the lectures as well as the projects.» (Agree-Not at all)
- When arriving at the process of writing the exam, most of my reading and thinking was done. The examination form is not a very pedagogic tool and promotes short term memorizing. The home assignments I had 2 years ago has stuck better in memory than the written exams. Suggestion to Chalmers management: minimize the amount of written exams.» (Agree-Not at all)
- aboslutly not.» (Agree-Not at all)
- There were no time to think during the exam, and therefore no time to develop a deeper knowledge for anything.» (Agree-Not at all)
- To many questions in too little time. No time for thinking, and without thinking no learning.» (Agree-Not at all)
- There was no time for thinking.» (Agree-Not at all)
- I didn"t learn anything new during the exam.» (Agree-Not at all)
- There was no time to understand anything on the exam!» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		14%
Neither or		2		28%
Agree-hardly		2		28%
Agree-Not at all		2		28%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

Erasmus: (7 st)

Agree-fully		1		14%
Agree-partly		2		28%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		3		42%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.85

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

- The repport did» (Agree-partly)

V: (7 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		1		14%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.85

- om man bortser från första frågan så gjorde den det» (Agree-partly)
- Ingen tid för reflektion gavs på tentan, det var bara att skriva så snabbt man kunde ...» (Agree-hardly)
- See comment above» (Agree-Not at all)

E, M, K, I: (2 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		50%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		50%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Verkligen inte.» (Agree-Not at all)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- Again - too little time» (Agree-hardly)

11. The workload during the course was too heavy and we didn’,t have enough time to really understand the subject.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		9		16%
Agree-partly»		12		22%
Neither or»		13		24%
Agree-hardly»		10		18%
Agree-Not at all»		9		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.96

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (25 st)

Agree-fully		2		8%
Agree-partly		4		16%
Neither or		7		28%
Agree-hardly		5		20%
Agree-Not at all		7		28%

Genomsnitt: 3.44

- The problems we had with the project meant that I almost didn"t have any time to read the litterature until the last week.» (Agree-fully)
- Both, the workshops should be given more time to get the relevant reflections. The fish banks basically only showed that in a free market, all fish will die and there was no time for reflection neither during or after.» (Neither or)
- Work load was ok. » (Neither or)
- It was OK.» (Neither or)
- It was unclear how much effort was needed to be put into the projects. We were supposed to do a deep study of several companies with a very limited amount of words.» (Agree-hardly)
- It was a very easy course. » (Agree-Not at all)
- is not a matter of lack of time but lack of study, lack of effort putted into it (for whatever reason). besides that it takes indeed a certain time untill students (or me...) get the feeling, i.e. reading kolk in the first weeks of course was hard, before the exam it was joyful as a novel.» (Agree-Not at all)
- I had sufficient with time (except during the exam...)» (Agree-Not at all)
- The time was no problem. The problem was to get clear definitions of expressions and terminology used during the course.» (Agree-Not at all)
- I don"t think the workload was too heavy at all, there was plenty of time for discussions during group project. But I don"t think the exam matched the workload of the rest of the course.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		4		57%
Agree-partly		1		14%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		1		14%

Genomsnitt: 2

Erasmus: (5 st)

Agree-fully		1		20%
Agree-partly		2		40%
Neither or		1		20%
Agree-hardly		1		20%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		1		12%
Agree-partly		4		50%
Neither or		1		12%
Agree-hardly		2		25%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- The report and a smaller exam would have been sufficient or the other way around.» (Agree-partly)
- den stora arbetsbördan kom av att projektet tog så otroligt mycket tid och kraft» (Agree-partly)
- It was ok.» (Neither or)
- Arbetsbelstningen var okej, även om projektet tog väldigt mycket tid.» (Agree-hardly)

E, M, K, I: (2 st)

Agree-fully		1		50%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		1		50%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- the project took to much time for us, that could bee because the supervission did not go that good and maby our subject was a bit difficult to choose which path to take to prodject.» (Agree-fully)
- Den var lagom även om jag tycker att projektet var alltför omfattande för poängen.» (Neither or)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		0		0%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		1		33%

Genomsnitt: 4

- The project was really helpful for understanding» (Agree-Not at all)

12. The teachers were good at explaining issues connected to the subject.*

Totalt:

Agree-fully»		9		16%
Agree-partly»		23		43%
Neither or»		12		22%
Agree-hardly»		5		9%
Agree-Not at all»		4		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (25 st)

Agree-fully		3		12%
Agree-partly		9		36%
Neither or		5		20%
Agree-hardly		4		16%
Agree-Not at all		4		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.88

- Henrikke was interesting and explained well, though a bit confused and sometimes hard to follow. Lecture notes on the home page would be a great help. Anna seemed to be unsure of her subject.» (Agree-partly)
- I have never before studied a course at Chalmers where I have questioned the knowledge of certain teachers. I don"t know wether or not it is true or if it is due to the nature of the subject.» (Agree-partly)
- Some issues could be explained, but the connections to the reality was very fuzzy. It felt a bit like this people were in their own sphere hoping to save the world.» (Neither or)
- the largest problems where that to often, especially during Nyström Claessons lecctures, personal views colored the lecture to much which made the information less convincing and questions or coments following this were taken far to personal by the lecturer - relevant questions were therefor not treated in a relevant and objective manner. » (Neither or)
- unclear question. if the teachers are not explaing issues connected to the subject what would they be explaing? is this question related to theaches communication skill? or if they foucussed on subject? I assume they all explained they part of the subject.» (Neither or)
- Anna was good at summarising the articles. "Kicki" was inconsistent and never really said anything. The lectures were poorly structured.» (Agree-hardly)
- The teachers were hysterical and not focused on teaching us. It should have been made clear from the beginning that the exam was to be one where litterature was allowed so the study technique could have been adopted to that.» (Agree-hardly)
- A lot of connections were explained very fuzzy and hard to get a grip on. Some of them not at all.» (Agree-hardly)
- Really unstructured lectures, unclear concepts and notes. Poor use of the homepage makes it difficult for the student to stay updated.» (Agree-Not at all)
- The more than once gave false information and treated the student as they were kids from the kindergarten. » (Agree-Not at all)
- a lot of te concepts felt inveted by techers and could not be found in litterature, e.g. green logics. the issues had often been better explained in earlier courses and felt like they where over simplyfied in this» (Agree-Not at all)
- I still don"t know what you mean by "green logics" since the explanations were vague and contradictory. The impression was that this concept wasn"t even clear for the teachers trying to teach it.» (Agree-Not at all)

DCPM: (7 st)

Agree-fully		2		28%
Agree-partly		4		57%
Neither or		1		14%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

Erasmus: (5 st)

Agree-fully		2		40%
Agree-partly		2		40%
Neither or		1		20%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

SMIL: (3 st)

Agree-fully		1		33%
Agree-partly		2		66%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.66

V: (8 st)

Agree-fully		1		12%
Agree-partly		3		37%
Neither or		4		50%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- föreläsarna var bra när man frågade dom medan handledaren inte klarade av att komunicera» (Agree-partly)
- Teachers was ok, but some of the external lecturers language skills should have been closer examined.» (Neither or)

E, M, K, I: (3 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		1		33%
Neither or		1		33%
Agree-hardly		1		33%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3

- The level of knowledge and interest from the lecturers was very varying.» (Agree-hardly)

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (2 st)

Agree-fully		0		0%
Agree-partly		2		100%
Neither or		0		0%
Agree-hardly		0		0%
Agree-Not at all		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

Finally

13. My expectations on this course were to …,.*

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- learn some practical environmental management»
- gain increased understanding of how organizations work with env. issues in the "real" world»
- See how you can implement environmental issues into business thinking.»
- Learn far more about management. How it is done.»
- ...learn about EM. »
- get an introduction to Environmental Management and I think I got one. The course made me definitly more interested in the subject.»
- get a deeper understanding of how environmental issues could be handled by management.»
- had non»
- understand how environmental problems are to be solved from the managemental level besides technology.»
- analyze goodness and badness of companies and how to make them take better care of our common planet.»
- understand better how management works in a company and what is its role aside from decision-making (i thought management was more or less only concerning CEO before the course)»
- Had no expectations.»
- to get a deeper understanding of environmental mgt. »
- Evolve when it comes to analytic thinking and management strategies»
- Sorry, cannot remember...»
- learn how to deal with environmental issues in a more strategic way on management level»
- have a more theoretical approach than this. A lot of time wasted on the assignment.»
- not much»
- Didn"t know much about the subject so didn"t really have any expactations.»
- Learn more about organisational tools and ways to organise environmental work in companies.»
- learn more about the environmental issues from the companies" perspective.»
- learn a lot about a subject I find very interesting. However, I was very disappointed.»

DCPM: (0 st)
- Understand the application, use and improvement opportunities generated by Environmental Management.»
- ?»
- achieve a wholistic knowlewdge about environmental concerns in building industry.»
- get more knowledge in the subject because every industry needs to focus on the environmental issues.»
- increase my practical knowledege in invironmental subjects»
- To get a good view of how evironmental work is handled in companies»
- get the most important isssues for managing the environment, I got the whole idea in this field.»

Erasmus: (0 st)
- deal with environmental issues from company`s view.»
- discover the genreal ideas of environmental management»
- low»
- get an insight into how firms handle environmental issues.»
- understand the main caracteristics of environmental mannagement.»
- learn and be able to implement my skills»
- more speak about renewable energy, i don"t really understand the meaning of the course when i read the title. It is my fault.»

SMIL: (0 st)
- Had no expectations»
- learn more about environmental management.»
- ?»

V: (0 st)
- Learn more about environmental management, how to integrate it into everyday business.»
- find out what environmental management is all about»
- Understand how businesses handel and manage env.al issues»
- jag hade höga förväntningar rent allmänt men känner mig så otroligt besviken på att få en handledare som inte klarar av att komunicera. det tog bort hela focus från det som betydde något.»
- få en introduktion till ämnet och se hur miljöarbete fungerar i företag idag»
- Develop my management skills within an env. perspective.»
- Get a better knowledge for the interaction between corporate management and environmental management and I think I got it.»
- Had not really any particular expectations»

E, M, K, I: (0 st)
- get an idea of what environmental mangement was, and that i got»
- I think it was a good course!»
- få djupare förståelse för miljömanagement.»

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- not so high»
- get new insights»
- learn the economic aspects of environment and control those in real project.»

14. The most important I have learned during the course were…,*

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- that some people in the academic world has no idea of whats going on in the real world»
- a more holistic view of environmental work, more related to actual activities in companies.»
- That environmental management both in practice but perhaps most in theory seems to lag behind other business management areas considerably.»
- How not to conduct education.»
- ...that EM is complex.»
- that environmental management are complicated and important.»
- How it can be to work as an environmental manager »
- something about corporation environmental management, and the mechanism of how environmental management is connected to other managemental works of a company.»
- to be even more critical to all opinions and facts.»
- the influence of individuals in the company"s activities, the importance of consumers" way of thinking and how to convince them that the product is "better" than others»
- That the management of environmental issues in a company is as important as the actual environmental issues, and sometimes even more important.»
- the green marketing lecture was good, but nothing new....»
- teamwork»
- to not judge the companies straight away as many seem to be eager to do. W live in a reality that one has to consider before making up ones mind of how they are acting or should do. To look for market opportunities, but this one had an idea of before. »
- the many different wievs of managemtnt and the fact that environmental management should not be an own subject »
- mm... the importance of ecolabels. I buy more and more eco-labels now. »
- ?»
- sit and read,is not because someone wrote something that it is "correct"- read critically, ignore bad authors focus on the good ones, text maybe demotivating at first but later it can be great and usuful»
- The overall view of environmental work within organizations.»
- Investigate environmental work and reports in companies.»
- ...»
- environmental work in business world is not as extensive as I thought.»

DCPM: (0 st)
- The integration of environmental management into business strategies. Several environmental strategies and the benefits they provide. »
- Connection between busniess and environmental strategies.»
- the common environmental management systems.»
- feels like a learned little about many things..»
- the subject is more coplicated than what I eepected before.»
- That it a lot of talk on no so much work and people have pretty bad knowledge in general.»
- persuading of firms to protect the environment is not such a easy way. It is needed to vast the researches to reach a good standardisation for all kind of industries in a way both small and large industries follow the rules.»

Erasmus: (0 st)
- to see that environmental issues and economical profitability are different to handle, but it"s not impossible.»
- the general ideas»
- start studying more early.»
- through the project work and the litterature seminars.»
- the fact that environmental work can be profitable »
- that environment involves also social concerns»
- about the government way on environment»

SMIL: (0 st)
- ?»
- analytical tools. And also to see through environmental reports»

V: (0 st)
- The articles provided very good views on the subject.»
- it is possible to make the world better.»
- The analytical expansion of my thinking.»
- kommer inte på ngt nu. måste låta kursen sjunka in»
- att kritiskt granska det företag säger att de gör»
- A changed view on CSR.»
- Why companies have to be envronmental friendly its often in their own interest not often that they want a cleaner planet.»
- .»

E, M, K, I: (0 st)
- that there is different views of whether environmental issues should be handled the same way as other management issues or not.»
- That you should not dived manangement and the envirnment»
- geting an overview of env. work in diffrent copanys»
- inget tyvärr»

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- to understand and analyze environmental work in industry - got alot more from it than I expected»
- companies attitudes towards environmental issues»
- about stakeholders and the role of them in environmental projects.»

15. Particulary good were…,*

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- Emma Rex guest lecture»
- project, which led to a lot of discussions and interaction with other students.»
- Sorry...»
- -»
- Some of the guest lectures, Mats and DEM.»
- The project.»
- see above»
- The project»
- the project and the guest lectures»
- the first movie, the corporation. Yet to balance it out a video showing how a corporations can actually do good things as well would have been appreciated.»
- the guest lecturers, particularly Annika Axelsson, Mats Williander, Emma Rex and i also really liked Henrikke lectures which were very clear and thus easy to remember»
- The discussion seminars and the lectures/guest lectures.»
- do not know»
- guest lectures»
- The case. Keep this, but make sure that the students get the same information regarding examination, who will read it in the end etc. The seminars were not bad either. It is more fruitful to discuss articles and not only read them through .»
- perhaps not particaly good but better than the rest was the course material.»
- Nothing.»
- the form of the exam allthough it was too long and the seminars»
- kolk was good, the marketing teacher was the best! »
- The guest lecturs.»
- the project.»
- the knowledge of the problems in introducing environmental issues in the traditional work in a company.»
- Good with discussion seminars.»

DCPM: (0 st)
- green supply chain management (more info on this subject might have been interesting), the costs generated by environmental works in a company, different environmental performance measurements»
- The Kolk book»
- how to obviate the impediments to achieve the green goals.»
- ...»
- the usage of variuos methoda to learn,like movies and guest lecturers »
- The teachers are realy in to the subject.»
- the project. I personally learnt a lot by considering the real example and compare them whit the knowledge I got by the course.»

Erasmus: (0 st)
- some guest lectures. It"s not really imformation you can learn, like you are used to. But to see the topic from people already working brings it from the theoretical point closer to reality.»
- the movies»
- techers have been evertime availible for questions!!!»
- the role game and the seminatory»
- the lectures, the guest lectures, the movies, the visit of the ecocentrum, the workshop»
- ecolabel»

SMIL: (0 st)
- The guest lecteurs»
- the teachers. Especially Anna´,s commitment. The teachers were very good at explaning and made the lectures interesting. It was a good variety with lectures, guest lectures and movies.»

V: (0 st)
- The articles»
- the guest lectures (Dem collective and the volvo guy in particular) and the movie sessions.»
- The economic wiev of env.al management were you can see how you can use green tech. to make money.»
- diskussionsövningarna»
- Några av gästföreläsningarna, som t.ex DEM-collective och finanskillen»
- The seminars.»
- The seminaries.»
- the guestlectures, they were all very intresting»

E, M, K, I: (0 st)
- -»
- The lectuer aboout Volvo and their environemntal issues.»
- DEM colectiv was a really good lechture »
- gästföreläsningar.»

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- the project. The articles.»
- some guest lectures and movies»
- the course and the apply of that in real project and doing the project with our knowledge about environmental management.»

16. Less good were…,*

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- Anna. Please work on your manners»
- that no respect, what so ever, was paid to the the set out time for lectures and seminars. Why not start on time and take regular breaks, and finish on time?! Some of us had other classes to attend besides Env.Mgt.»
- The lessons were unstructered and sometimes we were treated like 12-year olds by the teachers. We are (at least a considerable part of the group) studying our fourth or fifth year at Chalmers, we do not need to be cuddled with or "encouraged", we know how to study ourselves, just do your lessons and make sure that the content of the lessons are good instead (which it sometimes rally was not).»
- Anna Nyström Claesson! She constantly talked to us as if we were 10 year old children. We are grownups and not children. It is not appropriate to speak down to students like that. Taking our last course at a technical university it is a little late to start trying to teach how to study. We would not be there if we did not know. If a student does not want to participate in discussions during lectures he/she doesn"t have to. Using names on all the students is very uncomfortable. For both the ones she knew the names on and the ones she didn"t. The way Anna interrupted other lecturers was very unprofessional and disturbing. Maybe she did not see it but the entire room started turning due to the uncomfortable feeling. Always asking students for reflections after a guest lecturer - again this is not primary school!!! We can reflect and discuss with each other on our own, and we do. Giorgia yawned openly and answered her mobile when she was supposed to grade a presentation. That is not ok. Last and finally: The different teachers/lecturers should not call and refer to each other by nick-names. Does not sound good for the Swedish students and even worse for the international ones. »
- The fact that the teachers tried to be friend with the student, calling some of them by name etc. The relation in the classroom should be strictly proffessional and some students should not be "favored" over others. The exam was a catastrophy! »
- The discussion seminars. Mabey to many people in the groups?»
- the teachers.»
- To many and to wide and describing questions on the exam, it was impossible to finnish it on 4 hours»
- the seminars, and the book too expensive...»
- The total disruption of the Chalmers schedule standard. The complete inability of lecturers to keep scheduled time. The humiliation of students by calling them by name.»
- the workshops: i don"t feel that i learned that much even though it was taking many hours»
- The supervision and help with the project work.»
- The attitude from the teacher, especially Anna Nystrøm Claesson. I had the feeling that I was treated as a pubil at primary school and it was not comfortable. The organisation of the course was not good enough. It took to long before the homepage was set up and it was not used regulary. Also the time schedule was not followed. The lectures often took longer time than in the schedule. I think it is nonchalant to do so. The student have other meetings planned. »
- teachers" unability to encourage instead of commanding, and the unability to give clear instructions and constructive critisism when discussing project ideas (alternatively being a bit more flexible when it comes to the restrictions that obviously will lead to a bad job).»
- Many of the lectures were not great but it might be my personaly oppinion. It have a feeling that I manage to miss the best guest lectures as well. »
- Fish banks. total waste of time. perhaps if it wsa to run over 50 years or so then it could make sense but 10 years is too short. then it just shows the benefits of short sighted kapitalism»
- The exam. You cannot expect the students to analyse 6 very long and detailed questions in 4 hours and connect articles and the book all the time. It doesn"t make sense. Also not interesting was the assignment: totally waste of time due to the fact that we did"nt have a scientific approach nor was it a real research. It was simply gathering some material from the net and story-telling it.»
- the writen exam was to much, too long»
- terrible feed back, the teacher said "we are not going to correct the exam we are going to grade it" I dont think that is the point since most people usually passes, if we take 4 what means "I could do something better" -but what?! maybe is somthing silly or maybe is something that I really could and should do better. »
- Too little time during the exam. And we as students should have more responsibility, sometimes it felt like we were treated like in kindergarden. That lecturers over and over again did not finish in time was also not good. We do have other classes to plan our days according to.»
- the schedule and not sticking to it. Annas attitude in some cases. It is not OK to personally attack students in front of the entire class. If we want to talk, we talk. There are other ways to stimulate interaction and discussions. Furthermore, Anna needs to consider the audience in the lecture. I have not had a teacher like Anna since primary school. »
- the teachers preconceptions about students at Chalmers, for example their way to work and their thoughts ablut female teachers.»
- The attitudes of the teachers The extremely time-consuming and analytical exam The too expensive book»

DCPM: (0 st)
- few attention was given to the issue of how environmental works affect the culture of an organization (just one article) and what can be done to create good integration between both issues»
- The last article. and that "some" teachers didnt had slides, so there were hard to reflect after the class. MORE SLIDES, LESS OLD FASHION»
- the practical workshops. »
- the workload, and the exam where absurd.»
- the teachers high expectation to understand the whole concept in a short time.»
- The exam, to many questions to short time. Workload was to high some things have to go or the project have to be smaller.»
- the difficult Exam.»

Erasmus: (0 st)
- Guest lecture about the moped. It was not uninteresting, but of no real use.»
- the quantity of work to do for the project»
- i haven"t really known what i should learn for the exam.»
- some lecture not really structured »
- the seminar, the articles were hard to read but enough interesting»
- i don"t know»

SMIL: (0 st)
- We had to little time on the exam, it wasn"t possible to finis the exam within thous four hour we got, do the exam smaler, or ad som time! »
- the workload was to much, with the report also. Too many guest lectures.»

V: (0 st)
- Some lectures and the exam which did not reflect what knowledge I"ve gained. »
- some of the teachers" supervision, both in the stakeholder analysis workshop and during the writing of the report.»
- Some of the lectures.»
- handledaren, som var riktigt dålig.»
- Att det inte var tillräckligt med tid att skriva tentan.»
- Some of the idealistic lectures.»
- Some of the guest speakers such as financial management didnt give anything at all even tough I study business at Handels.»
- .»

E, M, K, I: (0 st)
- the workshops.»
- The examniation, i would like a project only.»
- too many questions on the exam!!!»
- examen»

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- the seminars where we were told how to interpret the articles, not allowed to discuss them.»
- some other lectures»
- in some class and some lecturer, their lecture was very boring.»

17. To the staff planning next years the course, I would like to suggest…,.*

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- change the project to one where you get a fictional (or real) simplified company and make the task out to be construction of an environmental management system»
- -Stay with scheduled time -Reconsider the formate of the exam, what do you really want to achieve with it, besides stress and hand-cramps? -Perhaps limit the numbers of guest speakers, that could lead to better show of heads and more interest...»
- Longer lessons containing more theory, less trying to shape the students.»
- Not conduct the course or really fundamentally rethink what you want to achieve and how. This just does not work. In all of my time as a student I have never heard of a course where every single student had such a negative perception of the course and the staff. »
- Learn how to use the homepage, put lecture notes from your own lectures there.»
- »
- less guest lectures, most of them did not provide any value to the course.»
- Perhaps make ha homeexame instead since we was allowed to bring th book any way.»
- main lecture and guest lecture should be given one by one(one main, on guest, and then another main), otherwise, there will not be so much students who attend the guest lecture»
- that you don"t treat us like kindergarten children, but as grown ups.»
- more project meetings with the supervisor, and we also need a more critical review of our work (we had Karin and we did not really know what was good or not after our meeting)»
- More possibilities for consulting with the supervisors on the project.»
- Change attitude and organisational work. Change book. Raise the cource content to a higher level. »
- actually listen to the students, let them think for themselves, and try to put some effort into the discussion on project ideas.»
- The exam must me smaller/shorter. Even the lady watching us at the exame had never seen so many students writing util the very end (that was all about 2 in a full class room). I did not speak to a single person that as able to answeralla the questions, and still all said that they had been writing all the time, had hardly time to think at all... As well...I know that it is good will but a remark to Anna N Claesson. Do not start the first lecture telling engineer students doing their very last courses that they do not know how to study and that they cannot study and do not know how to do things. As well, let us be the grown-ups that we are...skip the elementary schol treatment, attacking specific students if they understand etc. If we have questions, we are big enough to ask them ourselves. I know that this becomes very personal but I would not say this if I did not think it of interrest and that it can be helpful to keep in mind. Once more, the intentions was of couse the best, but grown-up individuals at the end of their studies wants to be treated just like that, not like students in elementary school. »
- skip the course! if there is one thing we learned on this course it is that environmental management should be dealt with as other management. since we already have the environmental part, offer som kind of management course down at the buissnies school where they actually know this stuff.»
- Try to make some changes in the overall policy of the examination. It was not an interesting course att all and if somebody asks me "was it a good course, should I take it?" I will definitely say "NO! don"t think about it". (I spoke to many of my friends and this will be their aresponse too!) And the sad point is that the overall Chalmers policy is to integrate environmental education into all programs, but at the moment the responsible people of this course are not successful along those policies att all.»
- -»
- kolks price is more then absurd, we are students, there are students from abroad that dont get scholarship. Since I liked kolk and think I will use it vey much in the future, something should be done to reduce the price (something effective like making agreements with the retailers, author etc, expecting former students to sell their books will never supply the new students). about organization of the groups, too much intervention from the teacher trying to organize and control every single person in the groups is not that necessary, in all the courses no teacher does that and everything always works. »
- To either have fewer questions on the exam or more time»
- See question 16.»
- Try to make guest lecturers talk less about their companies and more about environmental management in the companies. »
- that when having the first group meetings with the supervisors, please make a schedule so that every group knows when to meet. This year we had to spend almost 2 hours in a classroom just to wait. This kind of planning is very disrespectful towards the students, and creates a bad climate in the course. If we had had a fixed time, we could have done something good during this time and than been back when it was time to meet.»
- Home written exam Adapt to the rest of the education at Chalmers (use Study portal, take breaks every 45 mins, ...)»

DCPM: (0 st)
- Some guest lectures where difficult to connect with the literature, perhaps more lectures by course staff. Provide examples about environmental accidents or issues that where harmful to an organization and what could have been done to avoid them and analyse what went wrong. Shorthen the examn, take one question away and add more weight to the others or if it would have been 5 definitions in question 1 instead of 10, that would have been great. »
- see 16. and maybe change the methodolgy for the information gathering in the report. only annual reports is not good enough for information»
- if you compare this course (as a 7.5 credits)with other courses,one must do twice the others to pass it. therefore,students become reluctant to pick it.the exam was terrible!we even didn"t have time to think about anything and most of the students were in the shortage of time.I can"t understand the reasons behind that exam and honestly it was a nightmare to all of us.»
- to think about that this is only a 7,5 p course and it was to much to do, the group work and report and the exam where to much, the workload for this course is to big. Either make the report smaller or the exam. I would suggest the exam because we have already analysed enviromental challenges in the report and to analyse when you are under time pressure feels unnecessary. »
- to decrease their expectation of students" previous knowledge in this field. I also suggest to decrease the contents of the course, it is too much to learn in a couple of weeks.»
- The project is good maybe it could be made smaller, littseminars and workshops as well but the exam you can either skip make less questions. But the main thing give the students time to reason and anylse if you want an exam otherwise i see no point!! Some of the lectures was filling out lectures like the guy with his moped.»
- althoght most of the guest lecturer were quit good and they had very informative lecture but a few of them were not quite good. I personaly liked the movie sessions. »

Erasmus: (0 st)
- to motivate other professors to prepare a syllabus too - it"s helps a lot. »
- nothing»
- ---»
- to structure more each lectures (why not having powerpoint presentation and a paper with most of the relevant guidelines)»
- more workshops, seminar with hand-written»
- more questions like the exam during the course»

SMIL: (0 st)
- do the exam smaler, or ad som time!»
- Have less guest lectures and maybe not seminars as well as an exam and a report.»

V: (0 st)
- Either more time for the exam or less number of questions, you want us to reflect and discuss the questions so give more time!!!»
- making the exam an home exam because discussing and analyzing takes time, at least if you really want to be able to develop your analyze and discuss it thoroughly. i don"t see a reason to analyze, if it is only on the surface. in addition to this, my opinion is that the time it took writing the report really interfered with reading the literature, of course they should be connected to each other, otherwise either the literature is irrelevant or the chosen subject of the report doesn"t fit into the course goals, however the time needed to read all the literature wasn"t there. this due to the fact that this is not the only course that people take in semester 4, at least that is my reality. so, trying to be constructive, make the exam an home exam and maybe have the submission of the report earlier so there is time to concentrate on reading and thinking in the end of the course.»
- More structured lectures were basic consepts are presented.»
- ta bort projektet. lägg till fler diskussionsövningar (ta hellre bort någon gästföreläsning). gör tydligare kopplingar till litteraturen»
- Tre seminarier istället för två, så man kan gå djupare i artiklarna.»
- Replace the written exam with an individual essay/paper assignment.»
- I had Bruunklaus in a environmental course before. And I think her attitude and her performance could be much better. She didnt learn from the critic before and I know that more course mates share my opinion»

E, M, K, I: (0 st)
- that they don"t suggest that all lectures are mandatory.»
- Use project only, instead of project and exam»
- Have less question on the exam so the students have the chanse to show what they have learnd»
- gör om projekt (mer fokuserat) samt tentamen (hemtenta eller nytt upplägg) eller lägg ner kursen (alternativt ta bort från obligatoriska kurser) »

MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- to take the students and their abilities seriously. To look through the text describing the project - it contradicts itself at some places (eg discussion - should we discuss the work in the group or the future of the companies?)»
- relax and enjoy holidays»
- dividing groups by teachers.»

* obligatoriska frågor