ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

Visa resultat

Här kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.

Nanotechnology for Sustainable Energy, TIF165/FIM640

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-03-18 - 2010-04-07
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 57%
Kontaktperson: Michael Zäch»

Student background

1. What is your educational background?

28 svarande

Physics»8 28%
Chemistry»3 10%
Materials Science»3 10%
Mechanical Engineering»10 35%
Electrical Engineering»4 14%

Genomsnitt: 2.96

- Industrial Ecology» (?)
- Chemical Engineering» (?)
- Electronic Engineering» (?)
- chemical engineering » (?)
- Process technology/Environmental technology» (?)
- Nuclear engineering » (?)
- /Industrial ecology» (Physics)
- Sustainable Energy Systems master» (Physics)
- Chemical engineering with engineering physics» (Chemistry)
- Process Engineering (between Chemical Engineering and Chemistry)» (Chemistry)
- both Chemisry and physics in batchelers. Now studying Material science.» (Materials Science)
- + Energy» (Mechanical Engineering)
- Master"s program: Industrial Ecology» (Electrical Engineering)

2. What is your nationality (optional)?

- China»
- German»
- Bangladeshi»
- Chinese»
- Canada»
- Sweden»
- Indonesian»
- Spanish»
- Srilankan»
- Indonesia»
- French»
- Ethiopian»
- INDIAN»
- Swedish»
- Turkish»
- Spanish»
- French»
- Swedish»
- Swedish»
- German»
- Swedish»
- Austria»
- Chinese»
- French»
- French»
- Pakistani»
- Ecuador»
- Bangladeshi»
- Finnish»

General impression and motivation to attend

3. What is your general impression of the course?

34 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»1 2%
Good»19 55%
Excellent»14 41%

Genomsnitt: 3.38

- A nice and inspiring course.» (Good)
- A good and thorough overview of current frontiers of N&N» (Excellent)
- involved a large area that N&N can contribute» (Excellent)
- Very interesting course, the range of topics is wide and really highlights how nanotechnology can contribute to enhance actual technologies.» (Excellent)

4. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- quiz & project»
- Everything»
- the application lectures and solar cells could held in 2 lectures »
- The personal project»
- Most of it.»
- Quizzes, project.»
- The project»
- -»
- Everything! The lecturers were really good and Michael was an excellent course responsible.»
- Course content»
- ZACH,GUEST LECTURES INSHORT EVERYTHING »
- Michael and guest lecturers and the assignments. Oral presentation is also very useful.»
- presentation and report»
- The diversity of the topics.»
- The structure of the course. Hydrogen production and storage, Fuel cells. Catalysts. Nanoethics and nanosecurity. Nuclear lecture. Keep the larger lecture halls" if the group is as big this year as last year.»
- many different lectors, wide variety of topics»
- the project »
- Lectures with different lecturers, quizz, individual project»
- The content and the rhythm of the course.»
- Presentations and investigation work»
- all the lecture »

5. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- lecture form...i felt the lectures were not systematic»
- Nothing»
- nanoethics and safety..... they can be describe in the introduction class in short and nuclear fission ... there are no nanotech application»
- There should be more lectures every week. Compared with other courses, 4 hours per week is not enough. The course can introduce more topics to the student.»
- -»
- Hum... nothing special, I"m really satisfied so far with this course. There is no calculation aspect or whatever, but I don"t think it"s the aim of the course.»
- NOTHING»
- No more classes in FL-rooms.»
- question to time ratio of quizes »
- Maybe more consultation between the teachers intervening in the lectures (mainly to avoid the repetition about what is catalysis, for example), otherwise pretty good»
- Time for project feedback during the course. As it is today you have no ide if you are on the right track.»
- Nuclear Power - please more advanced and related to nanotechnology»
- Put more weight on the project work and less on lectures/ fewer lectures.»
- maybe less focus on automotive catalysis»
- The safety of N&N part。, I think it should not cost 2 lectures on that topic. Maybe it should be contained to other part. Then we spare two other lectures that can add other topics»
- Nothing!»
- If there is a posibility of having any laboratory aplication where we can interact with nanoparticulates, maybe just watching the elements, like in the last lecture, so we can feel the teory we learn.»
- I thing every thing is ok.»

6. How did you get to know about this course?

34 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

By browsing the student portal»22 64%
Via my masters program»11 32%
Recommended by a colleague»6 17%
Flyer / advertisement»2 5%

- from one of my friend» ()
- by searching in the courses » ()

7. Why did you choose this course?

34 svarande

Mainly because I have an interest in nanotechnology.»5 14%
Mainly because I have an interest in sustainable energy.»13 38%
Mainly because I have an interest in the combination of both»16 47%

Genomsnitt: 2.32

- And because I need to take courses from the Physics institution to get a Civilingenjörsexamen.» (Mainly because I have an interest in the combination of both)
- I am reading a lot of sustainable energy courses already so I got that part, but was interested in N&N and wanted to know the potential of this area and how far the development has come. I believe I believe I got the positive side of the field and what it possible can do, which was expected since the teachers in the course naturally are in favor of N&N» (Mainly because I have an interest in the combination of both)

8. Will you recommend this course to other students?

34 svarande

Certainly not»0 0%
Probably not»0 0%
Yes, probably»10 29%
Yes, definitely»24 70%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- I know several who would be interested» (Yes, definitely)

Course goals

9. How understandable are the course goals?

34 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»12 37%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»20 62%
I have not seen/read the goals»2

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- We don"t really know how deeply we have to learn the lectures for the quizzes: the general background, some formulas, how the terms of the formula evolve ? Otherwise okay.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

(Answer this question and the succeeding one only if you do know the course goals.)

32 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»32 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- As a mechanical engineer I felt that it was a lot of chemistry and physics that I did not know so much about. But still I could follow the lectures and felt that the quizes was fair.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

11. Did the examination (i.e. quizzes) assess whether you have reached the goals?

33 svarande

No, not at all»1 3%
To some extent»19 57%
Yes, definitely»13 39%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- Generally, questions were about important points (good) but maybe a few of them were too much focused on some examples.» (To some extent)
- The quizzes might sometimes have been too much specific, but in the overall it was good.» (Yes, definitely)

Work load

12. How many hours per week did you spend on this course in total?

(Including time spent in class, time spent on your own work, and time spent on the project. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.)

34 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»12 35%
At most 20 hours/week»13 38%
At most 25 hours/week»7 20%
At most 30 hours/week»1 2%
At most 35 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2

- It was not a heavy work load.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- I took three courses this period and prioritiesed the other two» (At most 15 hours/week)
- The work load increased the two last weeks with the project and the last quiz running at the same time, but it was expected and not that hard.» (At most 20 hours/week)

13. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

33 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 3%
75%»16 48%
100%»16 48%

Genomsnitt: 4.45

- only the nuclear part i am not there. Because of an important meeting with a professor.» (?)
- Due to other activities I skipped some classes, but not because they were bad.» (50%)
- Conflict with job» (75%)
- It might be a good idea to put the lecture notes on the student portal, especially when one misses the last lecture before the quiz.» (75%)
- I missed one lecture» (100%)
- I liked the invited teachers. The woman from Germany taught quite new things. The lecture about nuclear energy was too basic.» (100%)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

34 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 2%
Adequate»25 73%
High»7 20%
Too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- The other course (Heat and Power systems engineering) was more work. Together, the work load was adequate.» (Adequate)
- The workload was high, but it was mostly because of my other courses.» (High)
- (high, but not because of nano)» (High)
- But it was my own fault» (Too high)

Administration

15. How well did the course administration work in general?

34 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 2%
Rather well»12 35%
Very well»21 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- No complaints.» (Very well)

16. The course homepage was updated regularly with news, etc.

34 svarande

I strongly disagree»3 8%
I disagree»1 2%
I agree»18 52%
I strongly agree»12 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.14

- no lecture slides?» (I strongly disagree)
- Presentations should be posted on the portal, it is difficult to carry all the reading material to study in different places.» (I strongly disagree)
- But all the lecture notes are not available in the PORTAL. (because for some lectures I looked for colour pictures of the slides)» (I agree)
- But it would be nice to have access to all the slides of the course in the student portal» (I agree)
- However I did not have access to a large part of the material since it was locked for not registered students.» (I agree)
- put out lecture notes on the homepage.» (I agree)
- It was a good idea to send e-mails&to upload the course homepage at the same time.» (I strongly agree)

Study climate and study aids

17. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

34 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»4 11%
Large extent»15 44%
Great extent»15 44%

Genomsnitt: 3.32

- Some tutors was really good (e.g. Fuel Cells, Nuclear, Lightweight and Michael)» (Great extent)

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

34 svarande

Small extent»4 11%
Some extent»6 17%
Large extent»20 58%
Great extent»4 11%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- too less literature was given» (Small extent)
- But the main help has been the lectures» (Some extent)
- To finish the assignment, additional literature was necessary.» (Large extent)
- Very good that the slides was handed out at each lecture» (Large extent)
- The additional article about nanotechnology was actually quite helpful.» (Great extent)
- The literature was definitely helpful. However it is pretty hard to learn by itself when one misses a lecture. It was a good idea of Uta and Rooney to put written notes under the printed slides.» (Great extent)

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

34 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»14 45%
Very good»17 54%
I did not seek help»3

Genomsnitt: 3.54

- Michael was always helpful.» (Rather good)
- Michael was really willing to help us, thanks a lot!» (Very good)

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

34 svarande

Very poorly»1 3%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»10 38%
Very well»15 57%
I did not seek cooperation»8

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- I studied together with an friend.» (Very well)

Lecture times and rooms

21. Lecture times and rooms

Matrisfråga

- not for the first 3 weeks»
- The lecture rooms that fist (FL) was used is not optimal, they quite long and since there are not any slope it is hard to see from the back. »
- I took a course at GU (15 HEC) so it"s unavoidable that some classes collided.»
- The two last weeks were appropiate.»
- The Friday lecture hours didn"t collide but it was the only lecture of Friday and so waking up for 8 was a bit hard... but I understand that everybody had its own schedules!»
- Changing rooms after half the course was a good choice.»
- The first lectures took place in a too small room»
- In the beginning, the rooms were too small. After the changes it was okay.»
- they were too small (except the last weeks)»
- The lecture rooms were not good in the begining but after the change it were good.»
- at least in the end was the room appropriate. the beginning was awful.»
- Maybe the lecture rooms were too small to receive all the students.»
- Disturbance from students arriving late. Large lecture halls as FB where you can enter quietly in the back would be good.»

The Tuesday lecture hours (10-12) were appropriate and did not collide with any other lectures I took in reading period 3.
33 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»2 6%
I agree»10 30%
I strongly agree»20 60%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

The Friday lecture hours (8-10) were appropriate and did not collide with any other lectures I took in reading period 3.
33 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 6%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»13 39%
I strongly agree»17 51%

Genomsnitt: 3.36

The lecture rooms were appropriate.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 6%
I disagree»7 22%
I agree»17 54%
I strongly agree»5 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

Overall course content

22. The course content corresponded to what I expected from the course description. (If not, please indicate in which respect(s) we failed to fulfill your expectations in the comments box below.)

32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»24 75%
I strongly agree»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- dont remember. but the course was good.» (I agree)

23. There was little overlap with the contents of other courses that I have been taking.

33 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»8 24%
I agree»20 60%
I strongly agree»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- What do you mean? If it was repetitive on certain points or if the course could be connected to other courses? For me it wasn"t repetitive and completes perfectly other energy courses.» (I disagree)
- Some overlap with other energy courses when discussing e.g. coal conversion.» (I agree)
- In my case there was overlap only with fuel cells because I took a course on fuel cells last term» (I agree)
- I"m not sure I get the question right. It was NO overlap.» (I agree)
- There was sometimes overlap between different lectures (especially the ones dealing with Catalysis) but it was okay, not too much.» (I strongly agree)

24. The course content was arranged in a logical and helpful way.

33 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»9 27%
I agree»18 54%
I strongly agree»6 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.9

- lectures are in an un ordered manner. may be due to the practical problems. but its good if we can have lectures somewhat ordered manner.» (I disagree)
- It looks like for some basic topics need to be present in the beginning of the course in order to be more systematic.» (I disagree)
- The content of the lectures was not in a logical order, but Michael explained that.» (I disagree)
- Jump between diffrent topics.» (I disagree)
- Presentation - Nanofabrication/characterization - Applications is definitely a good way! » (I strongly agree)

25. Are there any topics which were not treated in the course but which you think should be part of the course?

- nano fabrication methods. maybe some hand on lab work could be included»
- I cant find any»
- N&N for Fusion Energy»
- Convergence of nano/bio-- maybe a bit more speculative stuff. Legal frameworks for regulation?»
- I think it is enough to have many topics related with the nanotechnology. »
- Well, a lot of topics, to be honest. However, the topics treated in the course are really appropriated so changing one to another would be a good and bad idea at the same time... the current balance is good, maybe a bit less of Catalysis would be welcome»
- -»
- can"t think of any, the course is mainly for inspiration anyway.»
- no»
- energy efficient water purification, nanotechnology for efficient combustion, »
- i think the topics are really good»
- some lab should be added for better understanding. »

26. Additional comments regarding the course contents (optional):

- I think some lectures were too dense for only 2 hours of lecture.»
- ZACH WAS VERY HELPFUL IN CLEARING THE DOUBTS , WE HAD MANY A TIMES DEBATE ON THE CONCEPTS REGARDING QUESTIONS IN THE QUIZZES »

Lecture 1 - Course overview and global energy situation

27. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- There was a bit of overlapping with my other courses, but I think that not everyone has a background in chemical engineering/energy engineering so it is a good introduction to the lectures.»
- I think that the content of the firdt lecture is not important for the course because most of the studens have the same introductory lecture in most of their courses. Anyway is the most reasonable introduction for the course »

This lecture was an important part of the course.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»17 60%
I strongly agree»10 35%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.32

This lecture should be kept for next year.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»16 57%
I strongly agree»12 42%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.42

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 7%
I agree»18 66%
I strongly agree»7 25%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.18

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»16 59%
I strongly agree»10 37%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.33

28. Lecturer (Michael Zäch)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»6 22%
I strongly agree»21 77%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.77

The lecturer was well prepared.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»6 21%
I strongly agree»22 78%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.78

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»8 29%
I strongly agree»18 66%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.62

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»6 23%
I strongly agree»20 76%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.76

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»8 33%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.58

Lecture 2 - Nanofabrication and semiconductor short tutorials

29. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- Difficult, but made sense when treated also in other lectures.»
- Cant remember lecture..»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 35%
I strongly agree»12 60%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.5

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»11 55%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.45

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 10%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»10 50%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.3

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»1 5%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»10 50%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.35

30. Lecturer (Michael Zäch)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 35%
I strongly agree»13 65%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.65

Lecture 3 - Solar cells

31. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- Perhaps even more explanation regarding the physics of the photovoltaics.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.62

This lecture should be kept for next year.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.58

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.47

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 8%
I agree»9 39%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.43

32. Lecturer (Carl Hägglund)

Matrisfråga

- there could be 2 lectures on different kind of solar cells»
- Really nice lecture with nice animations to explain the semiconductor physics applied to solar cells!»

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 33%
I strongly agree»14 66%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.66

The lecturer was well prepared.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»7 31%
I strongly agree»14 63%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 9%
I agree»8 36%
I strongly agree»12 54%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.45

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 38%
I strongly agree»13 61%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.61

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»10 47%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.33

Lecture 4 - Hydrogen storage

33. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.58

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.62

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.52

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.47

34. Lecturer (Igor Zoric)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
26 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 41%
I strongly agree»10 58%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.58

The lecturer was well prepared.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 35%
I strongly agree»13 65%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.65

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 47%
I strongly agree»10 52%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.52

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»12 60%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
27 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 50%
I strongly agree»9 50%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Lecture 5 - Fuel cells

35. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

This lecture was an important part of the course.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.62

This lecture should be kept for next year.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.62

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»13 56%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.56

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»13 56%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.56

36. Lecturer (Björn Wickman)

Matrisfråga

- Really good lecture and competent lecturer!»

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.58

The lecturer was well prepared.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.58

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 40%
I strongly agree»15 60%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 39%
I strongly agree»14 60%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»13 56%
I strongly agree»10 43%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.43

Lecture 6 - Hydrogen production

37. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

This lecture was an important part of the course.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 40%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.59

This lecture should be kept for next year.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 40%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»12 57%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.57

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»12 57%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.57

38. Lecturer (Michael Zäch)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.58

Lecture 7 - Nanocatalysis

39. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- The topic was a bit difficult, it was hard to understand what is really nanocatalysis as an approach and it was pretty different from the other lectures we got.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»15 62%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.62

This lecture should be kept for next year.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»11 45%
I strongly agree»13 54%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.54

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»11 47%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.43

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
27 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 9%
I agree»12 54%
I strongly agree»8 36%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.27

40. Lecturer (Bengt Kasemo)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 39%
I strongly agree»14 60%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer was well prepared.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»13 56%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.56

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 8%
I agree»12 50%
I strongly agree»10 41%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.33

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 34%
I strongly agree»15 65%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.65

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.47

Lecture 8 - Nanomaterials

41. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- The level of the lecture was high for people with no background in materials engineering and it was quite a lot to know but it was one of the most interesting lectures!»
- Technically really dense: it was hard to know what can be required for the quizz.»
- Too high level, especially regaring magnetism.»
- More of a materials course than energy. Difficult concepts not fit for a single lecture.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»4 17%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»8 34%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.08

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»4 17%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»7 30%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.04

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
27 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»12 60%
I strongly agree»7 35%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.25

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
27 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»2 10%
I agree»9 45%
I strongly agree»8 40%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.2

42. Lecturer (Uta Klement)

Matrisfråga

- I like the comments & explanation below the ppt print-out. It helps a lot!»
- Notes under the slides were a really good idea for reading again afterwards!»

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 47%
I strongly agree»9 47%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.36

The lecturer was well prepared.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 36%
I strongly agree»11 57%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.47

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»3 15%
I agree»10 50%
I strongly agree»6 30%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.05

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 47%
I strongly agree»9 47%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.36

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 5%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 47%
I strongly agree»9 47%
No opinion»10

Genomsnitt: 3.36

Lecture 9 - Thermoelectric materials

43. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.47

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»11 47%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.43

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»11 50%
I strongly agree»10 45%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.4

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»12 52%
I strongly agree»10 43%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.39

44. Lecturer (Anders Palmqvist)

Matrisfråga

- Lecturer seemed a bit unengaged.»

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»12 57%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.57

The lecturer was well prepared.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 40%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»8 36%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.54

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 40%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»11 50%
I strongly agree»10 45%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.4

Lecture 10 - Nanosafety and Nanoethics

45. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- It could be a part of introduction»
- Difficult topic to present but necessary. The way Michael presented it was the best one I guess since there is no perfect truth in this field.»
- Good topic, it doesn"t have to be technology all the time, the relevance in society is important.»
- i really liked this lecture, and I think it is very interesting to have a lecture on nanotechnology as a technology that is evolving and its consequences. When it comes to sustainabilty to have this general view of the nanotech is as important as to know the technical aspects»
- Could this be included in all the other lectures instead? Maby would make you reflect more on this issue.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»2 8%
I agree»8 33%
I strongly agree»13 54%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.37

This lecture should be kept for next year.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»2 8%
I agree»7 30%
I strongly agree»13 56%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.39

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»11 47%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.39

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»12 52%
I strongly agree»10 43%
No opinion»6

Genomsnitt: 3.34

46. Lecturer (Michael Zäch)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»9 33%
I strongly agree»16 59%
No opinion»3

Genomsnitt: 3.48

Lecture 11 - Environmental catalysis

47. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- Really good lecture which was complementary to my other courses.»
- The lecturer should explain how catalysis is realted to nanotechnology.»
- Perhaps a bit too narrow. Interesting subject but perhaps shift focus to include more stuff than cars.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»11 52%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.47

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»9 42%
I strongly agree»10 47%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.33

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 50%
I strongly agree»10 50%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.5

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 50%
I strongly agree»10 50%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.5

48. Lecturer (Magnus Skoglundh)

Matrisfråga

- Magnus looked like he knew that we had lectures about catalysis before and did not spend too much time on it and so avoided overlapping, that was great! »

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 45%
I strongly agree»11 55%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.55

The lecturer was well prepared.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»12 60%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 5%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»11 55%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.5

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 40%
I strongly agree»12 60%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.6

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
28 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 5%
I agree»7 35%
I strongly agree»12 60%
No opinion»8

Genomsnitt: 3.55

Lecture 12 - Photocatalysis

49. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 39%
I strongly agree»14 60%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.6

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 43%
I strongly agree»12 52%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.47

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 40%
I strongly agree»13 59%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 45%
I strongly agree»12 54%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.54

50. Lecturer (Michael Zäch)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»12 48%
I strongly agree»13 52%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.52

Lecture 13 - Nuclear Fission

51. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- bit too much on fission, too little on N&N»
- Interesting lecture but there should be connection with nanotech.»
- Maybe a higher level would have been welcome»
- This course had not much to do with either nanotechnology or sustainable energy.»
- Maybe more focus on the nanoscale aspect, because the link with N&N was not really clear.»
- more focus on nanotechnology would have been good and less general stuff»
- "Populärvetenskapligt" This did not teach me anything new. I think the subject should be kept since its so important but not in this form.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»3 12%
I disagree»4 16%
I agree»10 40%
I strongly agree»8 32%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 2.92

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 7%
I disagree»4 15%
I agree»10 38%
I strongly agree»10 38%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.07

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»13 52%
I strongly agree»11 44%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.36

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 8%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»13 52%
I strongly agree»10 40%
No opinion»4

Genomsnitt: 3.24

52. Lecturer (Anders Nordlund)

Matrisfråga

- there"s no nanotech application in the lecture»
- Nice lecturer and nice presentation of the nuclear power»

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.5

The lecturer was well prepared.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»9 37%
I strongly agree»14 58%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.5

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 8%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»9 36%
I strongly agree»13 52%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.32

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»11 44%
I strongly agree»13 52%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.44

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 4%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 41%
I strongly agree»13 54%
No opinion»5

Genomsnitt: 3.45

Lecture 14 - Nanocomposites

53. Lecture content

Matrisfråga

- Also the last lecture should be included in a quizz. Now people were not paying so much attention.»

This lecture was an important part of the course.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»3 13%
I agree»9 39%
I strongly agree»11 47%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.34

This lecture should be kept for next year.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 8%
I agree»11 47%
I strongly agree»10 43%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.34

The lecture content was arranged in a logical way.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»12 54%
I strongly agree»9 40%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.36

The level and pace of the lecture was appropriate.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 9%
I agree»10 45%
I strongly agree»10 45%
No opinion»7

Genomsnitt: 3.36

54. Lecturer (Rodney Rychwalski)

Matrisfråga

The lecturer arrived in time and finished in time.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»8 38%
I strongly agree»12 57%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.52

The lecturer was well prepared.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»6 28%
I strongly agree»14 66%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.61

The lecturer has been able to trigger my interest in the respective subject.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»2 9%
I agree»8 38%
I strongly agree»11 52%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.42

The lecturer was willing and able to respond to questions.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»8 38%
I strongly agree»13 61%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.61

The lecturer was competent with regard to pedagogy.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 4%
I agree»10 47%
I strongly agree»10 47%
No opinion»9

Genomsnitt: 3.42

Lecture notes

55. Lecture notes

Matrisfråga

- Some notes are not that easy to follow.»
- More notes under the slides are very welcome :)»
- A nice service to get printed lecture notes, perhaps not so environmentally friendly though.»
- there is not author rights with lecture slides»
- Some colours were not clear when printed in black and white.»

Printed lecture notes were available in time.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 23%
I strongly agree»23 76%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

Printed lecture notes were helpful in following the lectures.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»10 33%
I strongly agree»20 66%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

The printed lecture notes were helpful in repeating the course content / preparing for the quizzes.
29 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»10 34%
I strongly agree»17 58%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

The lecture notes should also be available electronically on the course homepage.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»11 36%
I strongly agree»17 56%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

The lecture notes should include information not treated in the lectures.
30 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»5 16%
I agree»18 60%
I strongly agree»6 20%

Genomsnitt: 2.96

Lab tour

56. The cleanroom tour aided my understanding of the course content

33 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 6%
I disagree»2 13%
I agree»9 60%
I strongly agree»3 20%
I did not attend the cleanroom tour»18

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- But it was fun!» (I strongly disagree)
- Anyway I think that the tour is still interesting and should be kept for the next lecture» (I disagree)
- It will be better if there will be any lab session. » (I strongly agree)

57. The cleanroom tour should be offered also next year.

32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»7 33%
I strongly agree»14 66%
No opinion»11

Genomsnitt: 3.66

Quizzes

58. Quizzes

Matrisfråga

- 0.5h is not enough!»
- - Some of the short questions were ambiguous (and, therefore, it was difficult to know what exactly the teacher intended to ask) - Students were not controlled well enough to prohibit cheating (both among themselves and from small note papers)»
- The quizzes were a better alternative than a full written exam in this course.»
- I leart much more from my own project that from the quizzes»
- Quizzes should be hand out before the discussion. That would make the discussion easier to follow.»
- Far too easy. Spent at most an hour before each quiz. I would probably have learnt a lot more if I had been pushed.»

Quizzes were an appropriate way of testing my knowledge.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»3 9%
I agree»20 62%
I strongly agree»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.09

The level of the quiz questions was appropriate.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 6%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»22 68%
I strongly agree»7 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

The quiz results were available shortly after the quiz.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»15 46%
I strongly agree»16 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

The quiz results corresponded to my expectations.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»5 15%
I agree»17 53%
I strongly agree»9 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

The quizzes were discussed in an appropriate way.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»2 6%
I agree»23 71%
I strongly agree»6 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

The quizzes have added to my understanding of the course content.
31 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»5 16%
I agree»16 51%
I strongly agree»9 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

Projects and Symposia

59. Projects and Symposia

Matrisfråga

- Interesting topics and a good mix. Most of all, good to have the oral presentations.»
- Reviewing each others projects was good because that caused some discussions.»

The suggested project topics were interesting and balanced.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»17 53%
I strongly agree»15 46%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

The project supervision was appropriate.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»2 6%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»19 59%
I strongly agree»10 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

The project has contributed to my overall understanding of the course content.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»16 50%
I strongly agree»15 46%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

The project has contributed to a more detailed understanding of selected aspects related to the course.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»14 43%
I strongly agree»17 53%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

I consider a written report an appropriate way of assessing my project.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»11 34%
I strongly agree»21 65%

Genomsnitt: 3.65

I consider an oral presentation an appropriate way of assessing my project.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I agree»13 40%
I strongly agree»19 59%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

The presentations of my student colleagues’,,, have improved my own understanding.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»1 3%
I agree»20 62%
I strongly agree»11 34%

Genomsnitt: 3.31

Reviewing one of the symposia presentations has improved my own understanding.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»0 0%
I disagree»3 9%
I agree»19 59%
I strongly agree»10 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.21

The feedback I got from the reviewer(s) regarding my presentation was helpful.
32 svarande

I strongly disagree»1 3%
I disagree»5 15%
I agree»17 53%
I strongly agree»9 28%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

Additional comments

60. Any additional comments are most welcome and can be given here or communicated directly to Michael!

- I saw that room capacity was also a problem last year. It"s great that you finally solved it this year. Overall it"s a great and inspiring course.»
- Micheal zäch was very cooperative and very helpful»
- 59 questions are way too much!»
- Longer project work shorter lectures.»
- I have to say this is really a great course»

Kursutvärderingssystem från