Visa resultat

Technical Change and the Environment 2009, ENM015

Your background

1. What program do you follow?*

Industrial Ecology»		21		51%
Other Chalmers Master Program»		12		29%
Erasmus student»		8		19%
Other»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.68

- MPSYS» (Other Chalmers Master Program)
- Supply Chin Management» (Other Chalmers Master Program)
- Sustainable energy systems» (Other Chalmers Master Program)
- Intelligent system design» (Other Chalmers Master Program)
- Automotive engineering» (Erasmus student)
- exchange student from a master program in sustainability (specialization: industrial ecology)» (Erasmus student)

General impression

2. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		2%
Adequate»		7		17%
Very good»		23		56%
Excellent»		10		24%

Genomsnitt: 4.02

- interesting topics and theories» (Very good)
- New enviroment vision » (Very good)
- inspiring leactures» (Very good)
- By far the best course I"ve ever been» (Excellent)
- This course is fabulous! It provides a great foundation for understanding the role of technology, the time it takes and interplays with society and the socio-technical systems. Björn is an amazing lecturer.» (Excellent)
- Onw of the best courses I have taken. Björn is a fantastic lecturer!!!» (Excellent)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		2		4%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		7		17%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		32		78%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- As the course progresses the course goal becomes very tanglible.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
- strange options on this question, the one I picked suits me best but not perfect. The goals were good and quite clear but as a student you rarely think about the goals when you are taking a course that is in your program. So i don"t really remember all the goals well enough to say if they are clear enough or not. » (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

40 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		38		95%
No, the goals are set too high»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.05

- the goals are fine but the lectures are a bit slow. The content of every lecture was normally very very good (not every course you learn how to see the world in new perspectives) but I think that in almost all of them the content could still be the same with half of the lecture time. So good work but speed it up! » (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

No, not at all»		1		2%
To some extent»		11		27%
Yes, definitely»		25		62%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		3		7%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- I think is always difficult to write this kind of imaginative answers, it can be misleading for the teacher. On the other hand, I think is the only way to really know if we have understood. The mix with the multiple choice exam and the home exam is good.» (To some extent)
- It was also a lot about creativity, which is nice to practice.» (To some extent)
- Homeexam was a bit tricky, but included evertyting wa have talked about. The last question was great!» (Yes, definitely)
- It was really good I think and I think most of the learning occurs during the home exam. Not that I was lazy before but when you have a real question to seek answer to you read the articles in a totally different way.» (Yes, definitely)
- im my opinion the exam is that help you to reach the goals by making you think beyond the theory to apply it to specific examples » (Yes, definitely)
- the home exame yes but the oral not. Then he just asked what I thought about the course» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

6. To what extent has the lectures been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		6		14%
Large extent»		24		58%
Great extent»		11		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- They were a bit long for their content so I felt that I didn"t have time to go to everyone.» (Some extent)
- very entertaining and informative» (Large extent)
- Sometimes alittle bit slow in the starting» (Large extent)
- The lecture are engaging, and create a great foundation of knowledge, as well as curiosity to delve deeper. » (Great extent)
- It is a lot to read, so the lectures are kind of compulsory if you want to know the most important things.» (Great extent)

7. How do you value the quality and relevance of the lecture(s) given by...?

- Björn is one of the greatest lecturers I"ve ever had. He creates engagement, concentration and interest. The fact that he is so relaxed and really focusing on communicating with us is a great aid in understanding. Martin Edlund made fun of those daring enough to say anything, he ridiculed justified questions regarding the possible negative effects of his investment. He shouldn"t be allowed to lecture.»
- Björn is a good teacher. The guest lectures were also very interesting.»
- I don"t remember who is who...»
- Even though hanna Jönsson was pregnant and had a hard time to breath it was boring because many of the things said we already had gone through»

Björn Sandén
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		0		0%
Adequate»		1		2%
Very good»		14		34%
Excellent»		26		63%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.6

Martin Edlund
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		6%
Adequate»		4		13%
Very good»		16		55%
Excellent»		7		24%
No opinion»		12

Genomsnitt: 3.96

Hanna Jönsson
41 svarande

Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		3		8%
Adequate»		12		35%
Very good»		14		41%
Excellent»		4		11%
No opinion»		7

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Staffan Jacobsson
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		6		19%
Adequate»		5		16%
Very good»		14		45%
Excellent»		6		19%
No opinion»		10

Genomsnitt: 3.64

8. To what extent has the assignments been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		20		48%
Large extent»		16		39%
Great extent»		5		12%

Genomsnitt: 2.63

- » (Some extent)
- Its hard to take them seriously when your efforts doesn"t count. It is of course nice to do a good job but when you have other things to do and at the same time know that you will get away with almost everything on these assignments it tends to be less work done. more like swedish gymnasium standard on these.» (Some extent)
- Could have utilised them more. Now no grading on them which lead to that less effort is being put into them and less knowledge is gained» (Some extent)
- all assignments except for D was good. assignment D was kind of pointless. there might be better alternatives to learn about diffusion and such.» (Large extent)

9. How do you value the quality and relevance of the different assignments?

- see above text about D. more background info and knowledge could be useful to assignment C, and a better walkthrough afterwards so you know if you did the calculations correctly.»
- I really like all of them and i found them usefull. I don"t put excellent because I"m sure they can be improved (even if for me they were very good)»
- Assignment A was so early in the course so I"m not sure if was really as effective as it would have been a little later - but then again something needs to get you started.»
- The relevance of them are all very good and important but the quality lowers the grading. See comments before.»
- i think the effort for the assignments was to high»
- Too low requirements for passing assignment D.»
- Assignment C was to some extent unclear and bit mal placé in the course. Assignment B and D was good in theory but the discussion and presentations didn"t penetrate the subjects deep enough in my opinion.»

Assignment A
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		2		4%
Adequate»		14		34%
Very good»		22		53%
Excellent»		3		7%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Assignment B
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		3		7%
Adequate»		14		34%
Very good»		20		48%
Excellent»		4		9%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

Assignment C
41 svarande

Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		5		12%
Adequate»		13		31%
Very good»		16		39%
Excellent»		6		14%

Genomsnitt: 3.51

Assignment D
41 svarande

Poor»		3		7%
Fair»		2		4%
Adequate»		14		34%
Very good»		16		39%
Excellent»		6		14%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

10. How do you grade the relevance and quality of Discussion A?

41 svarande

Totalt:

Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		5		13%
Adequate»		10		27%
Very good»		20		54%
Excellent»		1		2%
No opinion»		4

Genomsnitt: 3.4

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Discussion leader Rickard Arvidsson: (26 st)

Poor		1		4%
Fair		3		13%
Adequate		7		31%
Very good		10		45%
Excellent		1		4%
No opinion		4

Genomsnitt: 3.31

- The group was so big that the discussion was not very effective.» (Poor)
- I missed this disscussion» (No opinion)
- Couldn"t attend the discussion» (No opinion)

Discussion leader Ulrika Palme: (15 st)

Poor		0		0%
Fair		2		13%
Adequate		3		20%
Very good		10		66%
Excellent		0		0%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 3.53

- See other peoples"s point of view and that noone is right or wrong is always very interesting. Ulrika lead the discussion very good.» (Very good)

11. How do you grade the relevance and quality of Discussion B?

39 svarande

Totalt:

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		3		8%
Adequate»		9		24%
Very good»		21		56%
Excellent»		4		10%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.7

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Discussion leader Rickard Arvidsson: (12 st)

Poor		0		0%
Fair		1		10%
Adequate		1		10%
Very good		7		70%
Excellent		1		10%
No opinion		2

Genomsnitt: 3.8

Discussion leader Ulrika Palme: (7 st)

Poor		0		0%
Fair		0		0%
Adequate		1		14%
Very good		5		71%
Excellent		1		14%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 4

Discussion leader Duncan Kushnir: (20 st)

Poor		0		0%
Fair		2		10%
Adequate		7		35%
Very good		9		45%
Excellent		2		10%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- This was very interesting! well lead. The discussion developed towards the copenhagen meeting and whether the worlds leaders are and have been dedicated enough and if responsibility of the industrialized countries was addressed and if it really was possible to believe what will be agreed on... So I became curious to also test and reveal the difference between how ppl vote for drastic changes and dissions publicly and then in a secret voting :) could be fun to try » (Very good)
- Everybody participated and Duncan coments were very inspiring.» (Excellent)

12. How do you grade the relevance and quality of Discussion C?

40 svarande

Totalt:

Poor»		7		18%
Fair»		4		10%
Adequate»		17		44%
Very good»		8		21%
Excellent»		2		5%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.84

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Discussion leader Rickard Arvidsson: (20 st)

Poor		2		11%
Fair		1		5%
Adequate		9		50%
Very good		5		27%
Excellent		1		5%
No opinion		2

Genomsnitt: 3.11

- The calculations were good but simple but when discussing assignment C the only thing that was done was to go through the exercises that everybody already had finished. that didn"t give us anything. » (Fair)
- C was more about math than technical change. It should be a real example, but with the same math.» (Very good)

Discussion leader Duncan Kushnir: (20 st)

Poor		5		25%
Fair		3		15%
Adequate		8		40%
Very good		3		15%
Excellent		1		5%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- a more informative walkthrough of the calculations would have helped a lot afterwards. i still don"t have a clue whether i did the calculations right or wrong» (Poor)
- He talked and went through them very fast ! » (Poor)
- I think the discussion was very good, but individual feedback would help probably.» (Adequate)
- Would have been better to get the assignments back to compare in the discussion... » (Adequate)
- this assignment was not really prepared in the course and therefore a lot of effort..» (Adequate)

13. How do you grade the relevance and quality of Discussion D?

40 svarande

Totalt:

Poor»		3		7%
Fair»		1		2%
Adequate»		16		42%
Very good»		14		36%
Excellent»		4		10%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.39

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Discussion leader Rickard Arvidsson: (16 st)

Poor		2		14%
Fair		0		0%
Adequate		8		57%
Very good		3		21%
Excellent		1		7%
No opinion		2

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- All the presentations were interesting and help to see different situations that technologies can face.» (Very good)

Discussion leader Ulrika Palme: (15 st)

Poor		1		6%
Fair		1		6%
Adequate		6		40%
Very good		5		33%
Excellent		2		13%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 3.4

- the assignment was fun but i feel i didn"t really learn much doing it. might be better ways to learn about diffusion» (Poor)
- to little time to discuss» (Adequate)
- Finding info was hard, hence the 9th grade level of the discussion.» (Adequate)

Discussion leader Duncan Kushnir: (9 st)

Poor		0		0%
Fair		0		0%
Adequate		2		22%
Very good		6		66%
Excellent		1		11%
No opinion		0

Genomsnitt: 3.88

- The instructions was clear in that the presentation only should be 10 min. But never the less almost all the groups over exceeded this, some talked for 25 min!!!!! I think this is not ok on a master level! Preparing a presentation for 10min is a skill and should in that case be evaluated and timed! Instructions could have been made before that the teachers will time them and break them of after 10min. Seriously ... we are master students but being treated as high school kids! In one or two years we are working as engineers, then there will be no fussing around. » (Adequate)

14. To what extent has the the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		10		24%
Large extent»		23		56%
Great extent»		8		19%

Genomsnitt: 2.95

- the compendium is pretty good and some chapters in Ponting, put the Grubler book way awful. very much to read even if it is necessairy. » (Some extent)
- I haven"t read as much of the course litterature as I"d like to or should have.» (Some extent)
- Far to much.» (Some extent)
- I did not read so much, but what I read was good» (Some extent)
- Most of the articles were very relevant, as well as the book. however, I think that sometimes to have that much to read at the same time can be a little bit confusing... :)» (Large extent)
- Especially the articles» (Large extent)

15. How do you value the quality and relevance of the different books?

- The only coment is that Grübler is very expensive, and the library only have 3 copies...»
- Grûbled is not the moste xiting book I ahve ever red, but I"ll read ponting again.»
- it is really good that the articles in the compendium are commented by the teacher. They were of great help when trying to put the articles in the right context.»
- Its was a variety in different opinions. »

Ponting: A (new) green history of the world
40 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		2%
Adequate»		10		28%
Very good»		16		45%
Excellent»		8		22%
No opinion/ have not read»		5

Genomsnitt: 3.88

Grübler: Technology and global change
40 svarande

Poor»		1		3%
Fair»		3		10%
Adequate»		7		24%
Very good»		18		62%
Excellent»		0		0%
No opinion/ have not read»		11

Genomsnitt: 3.44

Collection of articles
41 svarande

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		1		2%
Adequate»		6		14%
Very good»		25		60%
Excellent»		9		21%
No opinion/ have not read»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.02

16. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		0		0%
Rather well»		12		29%
Very well»		29		70%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Nice to have the handouts before the lessons.» (Very well)

Your own effort

17. How was the course workload?

Too low»		1		2%
Low»		1		2%
Adequate»		20		48%
High»		19		46%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

- See comments above with the hand ins.» (Too low)
- workload was comparable of preparing for a normal exam during the home exam, but other parts of the course was not very much to do.» (Low)
- Too less to do in assignment D.» (Adequate)
- Lots of things to do all the time but not impossible to handle.» (High)
- I think it was a lot to read, but it was not imposible to do it.» (High)
- I did not manage to read all the material, though I did start right away - but I don"t know how the others managed. » (High)

18. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

41 svarande

At most 10 hours/week»		2		4%
Around 15 hours/week»		14		34%
Around 20 hours/week»		13		31%
Around 25 hours/week»		11		26%
At least 30 hours/week»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.87

- this course could be a 4.5 points course» (At most 10 hours/week)
- I gues...» (Around 20 hours/week)
- A lot to read!!! » (Around 20 hours/week)
- I"m not good at this kind of estimation...» (Around 20 hours/week)

19. How large percentage of the lectures did you attend?

41 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		2		4%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		23		56%
100%»		16		39%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

- I was not in Sweden the first week, but I think the lectures were very importnat to follow the course» (75%)
- I had lots of overlaps, so less than 75% but more than 50%. » (75%)
- some overlaps with other courses» (75%)
- Sometimes compulsory laborations in other courses.» (75%)
- Almost» (100%)
- Stefan Jacobsens wa th only time I wasn"t there. Great lectures, escpecialy Björns» (100%)
- or not 100% bc. I skipped two. » (100%)
- Missed one or two» (100%)

Study climate within the course

20. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		8		19%
Very good»		28		68%
I did not seek help»		5		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.92

21. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		11		26%
Very well»		30		73%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- had som problems with one group member during assignment D but it worked out in the end.» (Rather well)
- Diificult to work in group in assignment D.» (Rather well)

Summarizing questions about the course

22. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

23. What should definitely be changed to next year?

24. Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor