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.
Environmental management, MPECO Vt10, VMI035
Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-06-17 - 2010-06-25
Antal svar: 21
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 23%
Kontaktperson: Kathrine Jahnberg»
Course Evaluation, Environmental ManagementPut a cross in the box that you consider the most appropriate with your perception of the statement. Read carefully! Give a spontaneous reaction, do not think too long! Thank you!1. The teachers motivated me to do my very best during the course and made an effort to make the subject interesting.21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 3 | |  14% |
| Agree-partely» | | 7 | | 33% |
| Neither or» | | 1 | | 4% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 5 | | 23% |
Genomsnitt: 3.09 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (6 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 16% |
| Agree-partely | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 33% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 3 | | 50% |
Genomsnitt: 4 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partely | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 Erasmus: (9 st)
| Agree-fully | | 2 | | 22% |
| Agree-partely | | 2 | | 22% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 11% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 22% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 22% |
Genomsnitt: 3 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partely | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partely | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partely | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (4 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partely | | 4 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 2. I thought that it was an interesting course and I was inspired.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-partly» | | 7 | | 33% |
| Neither or» | | 2 | | 9% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 4 | | 19% |
Genomsnitt: 2.85 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-hardly | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 3.5 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-partly | | 3 | | 37% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 3 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (3 st)
| Agree-fully | | 2 | | 66% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 33% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 1.33 3. In the examination I was expected to show if I could generalise my knowledge and apply my knowledge in new situations.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly» | | 9 | | 42% |
| Neither or» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 3 | | 14% |
Genomsnitt: 3.04 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (9 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 2 | | 22% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 33% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 22% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 22% |
Genomsnitt: 3.44 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 Erasmus: (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 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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 4. I had enough time to learn the subject.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-partly» | | 6 | | 28% |
| Neither or» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 1 | | 4% |
Genomsnitt: 2.52 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (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 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 1 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-partly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Neither or | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2.12 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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 5. The course strengthened my ability to reason with others in a credible and analytical way.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly» | | 10 | | 47% |
| Neither or» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 3 | | 14% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 3 | | 14% |
Genomsnitt: 2.95 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-hardly | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 3.75 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 4 | | 50% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 12% |
Genomsnitt: 2.75 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (3 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 3 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 6. The teachers gave useful comments on my work during the course.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 2 | | 9% |
| Agree-partly» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Neither or» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 5 | | 23% |
Genomsnitt: 3.33 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-partly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 3.25 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 3.37 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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 7. The course developed my analytical skills.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 2 | | 9% |
| Agree-partly» | | 6 | | 28% |
| Neither or» | | 7 | | 33% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 2 | | 9% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 4 | | 19% |
Genomsnitt: 3 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (9 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 11% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 33% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 22% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 3 | | 33% |
Genomsnitt: 3.77 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3 Erasmus: (7 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 14% |
| Agree-partly | | 3 | | 42% |
| Neither or | | 2 | | 28% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 14% |
Genomsnitt: 2.57 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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 8. The teachers encouraged us to use and try our own ideas.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-partly» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Neither or» | | 6 | | 28% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 1 | | 4% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 6 | | 28% |
Genomsnitt: 3.04 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 4 | | 50% |
Genomsnitt: 3.87 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 12% |
Genomsnitt: 2.5 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (3 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 33% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 33% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 33% |
Genomsnitt: 3 9. The examination made me understand the subject in a deeper way.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly» | | 2 | | 9% |
| Neither or» | | 1 | | 4% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 7 | | 33% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 11 | | 52% |
Genomsnitt: 4.28 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-hardly | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 4 | | 50% |
Genomsnitt: 4.37 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 100% |
Genomsnitt: 5 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 4 | | 50% |
Genomsnitt: 4 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (3 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 33% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 66% |
Genomsnitt: 4.66 10. The workload during the course was too heavy and we didn’,t have enough time to really understand the subject.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 1 | | 4% |
| Agree-partly» | | 7 | | 33% |
| Neither or» | | 6 | | 28% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 6 | | 28% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 1 | | 4% |
Genomsnitt: 2.95 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-hardly | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 1 | | 12% |
Genomsnitt: 3.25 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 Erasmus: (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 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 2 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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 11. The teachers were good at explaining issues connected to the subject.*21 svarandeTotalt:
| Agree-fully» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-partly» | | 5 | | 23% |
| Neither or» | | 4 | | 19% |
| Agree-hardly» | | 3 | | 14% |
| Agree-Not at all» | | 5 | | 23% |
Genomsnitt: 3 Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Neither or | | 3 | | 37% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 3 | | 37% |
Genomsnitt: 3.75 DCPM: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 1 Erasmus: (8 st)
| Agree-fully | | 2 | | 25% |
| Agree-partly | | 3 | | 37% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 12% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 2 | | 25% |
Genomsnitt: 2.75 SMIL: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MEI: (0 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 0 MPSES: (1 st)
| Agree-fully | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-partly | | 0 | | 0% |
| Neither or | | 0 | | 0% |
| Agree-hardly | | 1 | | 100% |
| Agree-Not at all | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 4 MPSYS, EMA, Geo, IPM and others: (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
FinallyUse the space to share your views! 12. My expectations on this course were to …,.*Totalt:Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- learn something.»
- learn how to implement Environmental Management in a company. How to use different tools to organize environmental work in a company.»
- få en grundinsikt i miljöfrågor i allmänhet då jag saknar sådana kurser sen tidigare. Med lite bredvidläsning anser jag att kursen fungerade väl till detta trots sin skenbara specialinriktning mot företagande.»
- a bigining high but during time they decreased since the course was just diffuse and did not followed a red thread.»
- learn about actual environmental management, and how to implement environmental management in a company. how to work with environment in companies»
- learn something.»
- Learn more about management and how it should be applied to Environmental work.»
- learn something on a master level!»
DCPM: (0 st)
- ...»
Erasmus: (0 st)
- attend lessons with general issues»
- I was extremly dissapointed by this course....»
- Understand how companies deal with environment»
- how environmental strategies are implemented in companies,
learn more about tools that are being used (not that simple/useless one that where presented in the course)»
- have a view about the place of the industry in the environment problem»
- improve my knowledge about environmental management.»
- have a better connection to environment and not to economy. This is not stated in the course syllabus, the title of the lecture is missleading! To have a good structured and well organized course.»
- 90% fulfilled»
SMIL: (0 st)
V: (0 st)
E, M, K, I: (0 st)
MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- learn abuot the subject environmental management, and what a career in that field would mean.»
- learn how to manage a company, etc with regard to the environment..»
- discover how companies deal with environment»
- Analyze and discuss the company"s perspectives in a new way.»
13. The most important I have learned during the course were…,*Totalt:Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- to analyze a company"s actions with respect to stakeholders.»
- that there are different interpretations on environmental management.»
- .»
- Perhaps about the different analytical tools that were mentioned some time like RDAP as an example.»
- seriously no idea..»
- not to trust business. »
- I got a fresher upper on how to write an essay. I also enjoyed some of the articles.»
- that just because it is master level it doesn"t imply that the teachers can handle the course as such»
- discussion techniques, working in a group»
DCPM: (0 st)
- ...»
Erasmus: (0 st)
- to try to communicate my points of view in a clear way»
- analytical skills»
- EM strategies»
- I understood very well why many people start smiling when they are talking about environmental managers.»
- all the concepts. Put a name on them.»
- how to analyze the environmental reports.
the notions (vocabulary).»
- which standards are in power, getting the basic knowledge, »
SMIL: (0 st)
V: (0 st)
E, M, K, I: (0 st)
MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- the content of the subject environmental management.»
- the challenges of Env Man»
- We are far from a real environmental consciousness and from a formal environmental management»
- The analytical tools»
14. Particulary good were…,*Totalt:Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- nothing comes to mind really, sorry.»
- Some of the guest lectures»
- .»
- The project.»
- nothing. but the projects were a little bit interesting»
- Axel Wenblad.»
- Some of the articles»
- nothing»
DCPM: (0 st)
- most of the seminars were good but that was only if people started talking, too many sat idle but the ones who did had a great sharing of ideas»
Erasmus: (0 st)
- the way the courses were conducted»
- some guest lectures»
- The seminars »
- -»
- different ways to teach (videos, lectures, etc)»
- guest lectures, worshops, movies...»
- maybe the literature later on...»
- Project work, guest lectures, seminars»
SMIL: (0 st)
V: (0 st)
E, M, K, I: (0 st)
MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- the idea of discussion seminars. Sadly, I don"t think that the idea were carried out during these seminars, but rather discussed other things than the intended.»
- nothing special.»
- Case studies, study visits...
The projects were very interesting too, we learned a lot with them.»
- the mix between seminars, lectures, documentaries etc.»
15. Less good were…,*Totalt:Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- The course book, which was meaningless to a great extent as it didn"t include much of anything. The lectures, which where very unstructured and messy with seemingly no red thread running through them. Lectures had no clear introduction to the subjects at hand and no real ends. Also, there was often no clear connection between lectures and litterature, leaving you with only Henrikkes notes on the blackboard wich where often messy and unclear.»
- The organization was totally chaotic. We did not have a clear aim what to learn. The presentation skills of the professor was really bad. She could not make something intresting also when the topic was really good. But she really needs to learn how to present because that destroys really the course.»
- .»
- The rest of the course.»
- ...everything. during my 4 years in chalmers, this is the worst course i have ever taken. it"s funny to see how such an interesting topic can be made so boring and uninteresting. to start with the lectures: this is year 2010, right? and this is a university of technology, right? ever heard of powerpoint presentations? the lectures have been embarassingly bad. the use of the black board made all lecture notes impossible to look back at since it is just a mess and henrikke is just writing extremely messy and add words and phrases in random order where there are to limited space. impossible to follow the lectures and the notes. STRUCTURE please...! always spending our time, going of schedule and using our pauses to say unnecessairy things. since we are in need of brakes it would be good if we actually could use them to catch some fresh air since the air in the lecture rooms are extremely bad. stick to the schedule and don"t add mandatory activities to the schedule after the course started, you should know this by know since you work att chalmers. why have mandatory seminars? we are adults, let us decide how we want to learn. and why can you just not lend us some old exams? post some on the course hoempage. they are official information and if we want them we should have them. you can"t say that "there are scientists the says that studying old exams makes you learn less"... we have studied here at chalmers for so long now that i think WE know better how to study and learn, not you!
and about the litterature. some of the articles were pretty good, others worse, but what about "Landmarks"?????!!!!! That is the worst piece of crap to ever be called course litterature. how could you even make it course litterature. almost 250 kr for a pointless colorfull brochure. that thing didn"t add anything to the course. just colorfull pictures, some staples and diagrams and lost of bullet lists. wikipedia contains better information than that thing. add some proper litterature, not a expensive brochure. »
- the lack of substance! The compendium, the lack of lectures, the lack of tools for analysis. The enourmous amount of rules and tips for conducting the project, it was complete information overload and made it much harder to do the project.
The project was very time consuming, but good info was really hard to find. After hearing the presentations I was not impressed by the work of our or the other groups. I do not believe this poor quality was just because of the students. We didn"t have an idea about what we were doing.»
- The aggressiveness of the teachers in some of the discussions. I think that they did not listen to the students. Also, I think that the teachers were too ambitious. The exam was insane. It was NOT possible to analyze and answer all those questions in a good way in that amount of time. There should have been less questions and a normal four hours exam. After all, we also had a project and several seminars in the course. Also compulsive lectures and excursions must be told at the start of the course. Even though the syllabus was incredibly extensive it still did not contain all needed information.»
- course administration, course PM, information, teaching in lectures were confusing, supervision, "mandatory" stuff»
DCPM: (0 st)
- the heavily structured format of the paper/industry report, mid-reports and such should not me manditory for masters students (optional not mandatory) it made the course seem remedial»
Erasmus: (0 st)
- the timetable concerning the project»
- the main lectures»
- The projects»
- 1. course book is absolutely useless
2. absolutely no structure in the course (e.g. report workshop/stakeholder workshop at a point where everybody has done that already, only useful in first week, tools too late)
3. standard lectures (except Anna´,s) completely unstructured and I got always the feeling Henrikke is totally unprepared
4. absolutely no feedback to our reports/presentations (what was good/bad), without feedback that is just senseless!
5. too many things for our projects already fixed, more or less just finding the answers to the guiding questions, no own thinking required
6. visit to Ekocentrum has nothing to do with environmental management, just general things presented that everybody knows already in high-school»
- Pay the book, a lot to read and not always very interresting. »
- how the course of H.Baumann is given: not enough informtion on the board.»
- the organisation, the timing of lecutures, the presentation of the contents, no logic structure in the course»
- presentation of projects could be extended»
SMIL: (0 st)
V: (0 st)
E, M, K, I: (0 st)
MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- the form of examination. I don"t think that the idea should be to learn things by heart. But more to apply knowledge learned during course. I would rather see a oral exam in this subject, or a home exam where time is not a limitation during writing your answers. I felt realy constricted on the exam by the time limitation. Quite stressful. Further, Landmarks was to expensive. I will not recommend anyone to spend 250 SEK on a book that is as shallow as that.»
- the # of seminars (too many), the info about the course (messy introduction, etc) and the exam (seemed like you could write forever and wrong references - impossible to do it right)..»
- Lectures. For me a teacher coming just with pieces of paper and a course not really prepared is a lack of respect for students. I"d like real prepared courses, with a power point, a structure and a real content.
The exam was also not so good: we didn"t know at all what kind of exam it would be before the end, we didn"t have access to old exams, and I still don"t really see the link between the exam and the course.
The time for the project was not so good either : the half time report is much less than half regarding the content, but arrives at more than half of the time, which means that we had to do everything at the end.
Finally, the course was very badly organised. Best example is the second part of the project"s presentation, that we were told two days before! »
- The examination did test the course objectives but was far to extensive on that time.»
16. To the staff planning next years the course, I would like to suggest…,.*Totalt:Fördelat på olika grupper: Industrial Ecology: (0 st)
- that they change the coursebook, that the lecture quality is improved, that the lectures match up with some form of litterature, that mandatory parts of the course are clearly stated in the course syllabus.»
- Get another professor to make the course more interesting»
- Framförallt kan ni börja lyssna på studenternas åsikter och undvika att skapa konflikter vid första diskussion. Främst inom frågan om gamla tentor. Även vid direkt förfrågan förhalar lärarna utdelning av tentor. När en elev i klassrummet ber om att få tentan väljer Anna att undvika frågan genom att smickra studenten (härskarteknik). Se till att göra nya tentor varje år, dessa är ett inlärningsmedium kraftigare än hur många lästimmar som helst. Ignoransen för olika personers inlärningsstilar blir speciellt tydlig iochmed motiveringen till att man får anteckna i artikelkompendiet "Vi (lärarna) måste göra detta nät vi läser artiklarna", varför inte visa samma hänsyn till det som vissa av oss andra vill/behöver göra? Det är tråkigt att saker som dessa ska förstöra en i övrigt genomarbetad kurs.»
- To have better course material, read clearly on the black board and perhaps spend less weight on the seminars since they did not gave that much.»
- rethink and redo the whole course. for being at chalmers, this was embarassingly bad. what would be interesting to know is how to actually implement environmental management into a company, not look at how many other companies work now, but information on how to work with this topic. better lectures with powerpoints that is easy to follow. some proper course litterature. stick to the schedule and let ut take brakes. we have other classes to go to as well. »
- Don"t force more people to do this project. Replace it with a roleplaying game or whatever.
Do not treat us like five-year-olds, emabarrasing us in front of guest lecturers.
Unless the quality is improved, do not force us to take this course.»
- Don"t try too hard, it makes the course more confusing instead of richer.»
- make sure that the PM is finished when course starts, follow the rules for conducting courses at chalmers, treat the students as responsible adults and not as small children, if you take away the theoretical text book - make sure to teach the theory properly on the lectures!»
- The book "landmarks" was not very useful, compared to the article compendium. The purchase was a waste of money. it could be skipped in the next course.»
DCPM: (0 st)
- smaller class sizes with more discussion and reading, there are many points in environmental management that are subjective or viewed as such. Open discussion seemed to provide the best learning environment as many portions are not black and white but shades of grey that need to be examined from multiple opinions.»
Erasmus: (0 st)
- To reorganize a bit the timetable concerning the project and add some more material in the literature book in relation with the lessons»
- the examination was awful!
also the seminars were not really helpful....»
- New arrangement for the articles»
- 1. change book
2. update articles (e.g. replace Hallin, Georg, Füssel)
3. change course structure (some workshops earlier)
4. would be preferable when Anna presents the lectures»
- #lend the book at the beginning of the quarter and the students have to give it back at the end (made in another course)
#Less texts to read»
- to have more theory at the beginning of the course in order to to be ready for the projects.»
- to rethink the order of the topics, so that you are not "thrown into the cold water" with the project, some useful tool were presented far to late, so a lot of useless was done during the project, don"t present missleading guiding questions for the project, if they are not to use in it...»
SMIL: (0 st)
V: (0 st)
E, M, K, I: (0 st)
MPSES, EMA, Geo: (0 st)
- to change litteratur back to the previous book, that had a logical structure (instead of the compendium we had). Also maby to examine the possibility to have oral exam, or in other way allow more time for a written exam. It is alwas difficult to answer discussion questions within a given time-frame.»
- less seminars, a clearer introduction to the course, a bigger base of pure knowledge for the course and a more worked-through exam.»
- Better organised courses, with a clearer content, a better organisation, saying from the beginning what students will have to do and how the examination will be. Also give exams from previous years, on the portal!! The same for lectures (that shuold be power point, available the day of the lecture on the portal)»
- Remove at least two questions from the exam and stop having the exact points when you"re supposed to suggest new ideas and strategies related to the case.»
* obligatoriska frågor
Kursutvärderingssystem från 
|
