Visa resultat

Sustainable development, MPECO, Ht10, FFR160

Your own effort

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

66 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		17		25%
Around 20 hours/week»		30		45%
Around 25 hours/week»		14		21%
Around 30 hours/week»		4		6%
At least 35 hours/week»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.12

- I have almost not read the compendium, nor taken the exam as this was my third course this period. So this is not really representative.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- mostly reading articles etc.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Including lectures, seminar prep, reading literature etc. (approx)» (Around 20 hours/week)
- The weeks with seminar exercises were a lot busier than the others. In my opinion I did not read the course materials often enough.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- I found the course material very interesting and it was a pleasure for me enriching my acknowledges in this field.» (At least 35 hours/week)

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

67 svarande

0%»		2		2%
25%»		3		4%
50%»		4		5%
75%»		27		40%
100%»		31		46%

Genomsnitt: 4.22

- Had another course with exactly the same schedule with important excersices so i had to prioritize that.» (25%)
- problems with overlapping courses» (25%)
- Schedule collision» (25%)
- 50%, but I had continuosly interfering lectures from another course, the lectures in the course are generellay good.» (50%)
- There was some schedule conflicts with another course» (75%)
- Initial lectures were missed due to my late arrival » (75%)
- I missed a few lectures because of some student activities.» (75%)
- I missed the last guest lecture» (100%)
- Really interesting choice of lectures and lecturers. » (100%)
- Nearly 100%. » (100%)
- I missed 1 lecture and 1 seminar.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		5		7%
The goals are difficult to understand»		3		4%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		22		32%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		37		55%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- I feel the goals are irrelevant and have not tried to look them up.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- meh.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Some of the goals are unexaminable (they are based on "understanding" which does not follow the rules from Högskoleverket) change!» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- Every lecture should comport the end-slide telling "what we should be able to do after this lecture..."» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- It is always difficult when the student are supposed to "develop their insights". What does it mean? How do you now they had?» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

63 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		2		3%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		60		95%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 1.98

- For me, the course was too easy.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- Since they deal with very broad concepts, the expected quality of understanding could be higher. There were cases in which discussions tended to be overly simplified and a higher expectation in students to be able to think about problems on many levels and make nuanced arguments would make the course better.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- They can be considered to be quite demanding if you do not understand that in this kind of course you will not have time for details.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

No, not at all»		1		1%
To some extent»		31		48%
Yes, definitely»		31		48%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- It was mostly from previous exams.There should be some questions to check our analyzing and technical abilities development for the course. » (To some extent)
- A bit too much specific knowledge is tested, not the more general understanding» (To some extent)
- There were some very precise questions which did not really assess whether we reached the goals or not (a lot about forests!)» (To some extent)
- An oral examination could have been much more better to see if we"ve reached the goal. » (To some extent)
- Some parts of the course (use land for food, agriculture, water were not evaluated..)» (To some extent)
- If it were me giving the exam, I would structure it less to deal with individual concepts directly. Rather than simply asking the student to list the sustainability principles or different strategies for sustainable materials management, real life examples could be introduced with an open-ended prompt asking the student to discuss the related sustainability issues. This seems like a better way to gauge whether the student really understands the material and to what degree they are able to apply it.» (To some extent)
- If I understood the questions.» (Yes, definitely)
- I think the exam had questions about every large theme taught in the course. However, I think there was too many question which had already been seen in the previous exams.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		4		6%
Some extent»		8		12%
Large extent»		42		63%
Great extent»		12		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

- Not a lot added-value with respect to the slides» (Some extent)
- Because of many different lecturers it differs a bit.» (Some extent)
- good lectures, could have had more seminars and some more smaller tasks in groups.» (Large extent)
- Some really great lectures, most were good» (Large extent)
- Big differences between the lecturers. » (Large extent)
- There were some spectacular lectures and most of the others were pretty good, too.» (Large extent)
- The teaching method was the best. Very interactive and full of discussion. » (Great extent)
- Great lectures and well planned seminars!» (Great extent)

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

Small extent»		7		10%
Some extent»		32		47%
Large extent»		27		40%
Great extent»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.32

- Too long, didn"t read. The lectures condensize the information in a better way.» (Small extent)
- Instead of using the compendium Sustainable Development, it would be better to use more of the same series as Man and Materials Flows.» (Small extent)
- Have not read much of the course material» (Some extent)
- sometimes the literature was not really related to the main concepts, that were not described clearly in the slides (eg: discounting or environmental ethics), and sometimes too many articles were more or less dealing with the same subject.» (Some extent)
- I read it because I found it interesting. Nearly all the articles. But the lectures and the lecture notes was all I remembered and all what was asked for in the exam.» (Some extent)
- Teaching and the slides of the lectures were way more important for the understanding than the literature.» (Some extent)
- A lot of the texts were difficult to read, and not so good.» (Some extent)
- There was quite a lot course material compared to the amount of lectures. Old exams and lecture slides were more efficient learning materials.» (Some extent)
- most of the articles are good, but some are too simple (present not so much new information) and some are too diffucult too read (language is hard in some)» (Some extent)
- materials and man flow was help, but the sustainable developemnt compendium was not very help full. One could easily pass the course without reading that compendium.» (Some extent)
- I think that some more reading on the issues related to economics would be good, i.e. some more basic stuff about discounting. » (Some extent)
- Not enough time to read the whole course litterature» (Some extent)
- Especially "man and materials flows"» (Large extent)
- Man and Materials Flows is very good.» (Large extent)

8. To what extent have the seminars been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		4		6%
Some extent»		27		40%
Large extent»		25		37%
Great extent»		10		15%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

- I really do not like being forced to speak in front of people against my will. Generally I avoid courses where this unreasonable demand are put on the students.» (Small extent)
- smaller groups would be better.» (Some extent)
- I think some of the seminars did not answer to the many new questions that were formed during them but of course they gave some insights to specific themes in the course.» (Some extent)
- I think it would help to make them a bit more structured or ask for some sort of deliverable from the small work groups at the end of the session. It would encourage more participation and I think would also lead to better use of the time allotted.» (Some extent)
- Perfect concept in this type of course» (Large extent)
- Too large assignment for the second seminar, the calculations wasn´,t useful at all.» (Large extent)
- Seminars were helpful and fun» (Large extent)
- Really important for understanding the concepts deeply. Plus we got to hear different perspectives.» (Great extent)
- It was really fun and good to have a possibility to discuss and use the terms learned in "reality".» (Great extent)
- Great teachers and structure» (Great extent)

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

Very badly»		1		1%
Rather badly»		2		2%
Rather well»		36		53%
Very well»		28		41%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- ping pong fungerar mycket dåligt det gamla systemet fungerar fortfarande ypperligt (student.chalmers.se). Varför byta från något som fungerar???» (Very badly)
- Especially conserning the time table !! We had two different schedules and it happened none of them was correct !» (Rather badly)
- The new student portal is entirely to blame for this, and I didn"t discover that there was an old student portal with most of the same information until the course was over. There were many times, including in the study period leading up to the exam, when I was unable to access the lecture slides.» (Rather badly)
- The new student portal has been working very badly, but luckily the old one still works. However, I know perfectly that it isn"t your fault and the course personnel has been really helpful.» (Rather well)
- Great information from Andreas every time something was updated» (Very well)
- Andreas work was really good, course assistants like him are needed in many other courses » (Very well)

Seminar 1 - Perspectives on sustainable development

10. What did you think of the amount of discussions during the seminar?

There should have been more discussion»		13		19%
There should have been less discussion»		2		3%
The amount of discussion was sufficient»		51		77%

Genomsnitt: 2.57

- To large groups in seminars made discussion slow.» (There should have been more discussion)
- There could have been more discussion, and more critical towards the case studies. I was furious when I walked out of a full classroom that ate up the worldbanks reports like they were true facts and not possibly subjective or even bias assessments. » (There should have been more discussion)
- We should be given a typical correction of this seminar so that we have ideas of what was expected» (The amount of discussion was sufficient)

11. . What did you think of the teacher involvement in the seminar?

The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar»		5		7%
The teacher should have been less involved in the seminar»		5		7%
The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin»		55		84%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- The teacher should have been more prepared to offer counter-arguments to generate some sort of debate and discussion. This was one of those times in which a more nuanced discussion could have happened and some of the conclusions reached seemed grossly oversimplified.» (The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar)
- But he could have led the debates better» (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)
- The teacher didn"t do much but it was so fun discussing with each other that we didn"t need the teacher more. » (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)
- Maybe the teacher could have been able to give some more answers to the many questions which arose in the discussions between the students.» (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)

12. What did you think of the preparatory task?

It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year»		4		6%
It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year»		25		38%
It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year»		33		50%
It was too easy and should be more challenging the next year»		3		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.53

- Mabey not difficult but took very long time to do.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- It was difficult to know how much we were supposed to work with it. Still I don´,t know if I did enough.The last part, where you were supposed to collect data about Uganda, had someway a tendency to expand a lot. Would perhaps be good to point out whether the main cause is to find the "right" answer, the "right" data etc or whether the important thing is to argue for your chosen answer. It might be a cultural thing or something, but we didn"t agree on that in my group.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Good, but the preparatory task was not always discussed» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Since we didn"t get any feedback it was hard to see if our calculations/arguments were correct for the exam. I would like to have some kind of feedback on the hand-ins. » (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Most of us had misunderstood the concept of discounting initially but later on it went well.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Maybe because Discounting was a new definition and not learned in my previous studies. But once done with this seminar it is totally clear to me.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- It was easy but necessary to fix concepts (dihotomies)and, in my case, to apply them for the first time in the sustainability context ( discount rate)» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Students put down a very different effort in the seminar preparations, I put down a lot of time, and some others hadn"t done anything.» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- It was easy. But the lecture about discounting should of course hade been held before the date when the task was about to be handed in!» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- We had too spend too much time to explain basic economics in the seminar, as it was already really familiar to me. Maybe there could be some more thorough explaining of the concepts already in the prepatory task.» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Though the material on discounting in the course literature wasn"t really helpful. -More clear literature on discounting would be good.» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Made you think the subjects through. Good that you were able yo choose your own ambition level.» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Easy meaning - I managed to get through it with out any or too much complications and it was sufficiently challenging :) » (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Give more prompts to guide the student to really think about the implications of the dam and its alternatives. I think holding their hands a bit more would be alright, given that it would lead to a better discussion in the seminar itself.» (It was too easy and should be more challenging the next year)

Seminar 2 - Food and bioenergy

13. What did you think of the amount of discussions during the seminar?

There should have been more discussion»		9		14%
There should have been less discussion»		3		4%
The amount of discussion was sufficient»		52		81%

Genomsnitt: 2.67

- Some extra background information to put the exercises in the context of the real world would have been nice for part of the time.» (There should have been less discussion)
- I think is very convinient to have discussion in small groups and then to have it with the whole call» (The amount of discussion was sufficient)
- again, smaller groups.» (The amount of discussion was sufficient)

14. What did you think of the teacher involvement in the seminar?

The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar»		3		4%
The teacher should have been less involved in the seminar»		6		9%
The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin»		56		86%

Genomsnitt: 2.81

- I had quite many unanswered questions also after the seminar as we did not have enough time to ask things from the teacher.» (The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar)
- See above comment. Otherwise, involvement level was good.» (The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar)
- Perhaps, if possible, divide into even smaller groups and have less students per teacher to get the best discussions» (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)
- did not know what question we had discussed in the preperation. Did someone read them???» (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)
- Very good guidance of the teacher» (The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin)

15. What did you think of the preparatory task?

It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year»		33		50%
It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year»		25		38%
It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year»		7		10%
It was too easy and should be made challenging the next year»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.6

- > The calculation part (much too large) was not the aim of the discussion but accounted for 99% of the task...» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Too much time was spent on the assignment without any useful learning.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Since we didn"t get any feedback it was hard to see if our calculations/arguments were correct for the exam. I would like to have some kind of feedback on the hand-ins. » (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- For seminar 2, an enourmous amount of time (maybe 30 hours in total) was required for the calculations which turned to not be of any importance at all.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Calculation took very long time and were difficult. mabey the matlab code can be given and then the students just should change some values and discusse the result. » (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- We wasn"t able to calculate everything. I don"t see how a lot of calculation gives any deeper understanding for the problem discussed. » (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Too difficult because the tasks asked ( claculations ) were not explained in the lecture and we did not where to referee, instead we based all our calculations in A seminar done prevous year and it was done totally by heart.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- It is hard to come up with a equation.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- The preparatory task was quite difficult and we didn"t go through it properly during the seminar. Either change the task slightly or have the seminar deal with the preparatory task a bit more.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Without looking at the archived solutions from a previous year, the assignment was too difficult. More guidance should have been provided to know which equations to use before starting the exercise.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- The calculation part was too extensive. We spent many, many hours on it. I think the focus should be moved to discussion, instead of calculations (which weren"t even relevant for the course)» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- More support for calculations» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- Most of the difficulty was actually in the time spent writing the assignment up. Maybe don"t ask for a submitted document, but give some other incentive so students still go through the calculations (one course I"m in now threatens that you may be asked to go to the board to show your work).» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- All calculations just seemed unneccessary. Did not learn anything from combining units.» (It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year)
- the calculations were very usefull but too long» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- difficult is the wrong term here, it was easy.. but it took long time.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Not discussed at all» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- despite what is said in the course mid term evaluation, I think it is a good thing to have anwsers while preparing the task: it helps to understand what is expected, and to correct our work without searching too long for nothing. It helps not to waste to much time looking for a calculation mistake.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Just took a long time to do it.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Fun calculations but extremely time-consuming. Think we spent more or less two whole days to complete it all.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Not so educating to just discuss ways to get formulas. Maybe start in the other way and get the formula and describe its content.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- It was hard to get the calculations right, so we spent too much time on calculations and less on understanding. » (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- This was the only challenging task in the seminars.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- it was very boring» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)

Seminar 3 –, Life cycle assessment

16. What did you think of the amount of discussions during the seminar?

There should have been more discussion»		7		10%
There should have been less discussion»		3		4%
The amount of discussion was sufficient»		54		84%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

- I would prefer a more general discussion. Maybe everyone should have had the same case to discuss upon. » (There should have been more discussion)
- Perhaps more time was needed, maby some time from lectures can be used.» (There should have been more discussion)
- Start with going over the "answers" for the various studies (or some of the possible answers), then break out into small groups to discuss why those answers make sense. This way you avoid having groups talk about the wrong things.» (There should have been more discussion)
- The discussions just created more questions, maybe because all the people hadn"t understood the texts so well.» (There should have been less discussion)
- We should be given a typical correction of this seminar so that we have ideas of what was expected» (The amount of discussion was sufficient)
- Smaller group discussion => better discussions» (The amount of discussion was sufficient)

17. What did you think of the teacher involvement in the seminar?

The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar»		6		9%
The teacher should have been less involved in the seminar»		2		3%
The teacher was involved to a sufficient degree in the semin»		56		87%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- more as in: more relevant discussion from the teacher, too much loose end discussion.» (The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar)
- There was too much questions which I really did not get an answer just among the students or at least I did not completely understand what they meant.» (The teacher should have been more involved in the seminar)
- Couldn´,t we discuss by ourselves without the teacher as a part of the group, taking the lead in the discussion? As I understood the instuctions before the seminars, one part of it was that we were supposed to moderate the discussions ourselves.» (The teacher should have been less involved in the seminar)

18. What did you think of the preparatory task?

It was too difficult and should be made easier the next year»		2		3%
It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year»		29		45%
It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year»		32		50%
It was too easy and should be more challenging the next year»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I thought the task was very good. It was not to easy or to difficult. » (?)
- there should be more practical guidance regarding the LCA and its analysis.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Very different difficult levels etween the reports. » (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- Difficult since I"m not used to read that kind of reports. Good practice though.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- The text was not so interesting, and it was difficult to understand everything because it was only a part of a whole report.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- It was not easy to get into the LCA and it needed some time, but after that it went quite well. Some people had maybe problems because their background was really different.» (It was difficult, but it should remain unchanged next year)
- It was rather easy but maybe change it so that everyone has the same case. That way it"s easier to discuss. » (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Good that you were able yo choose your own ambition level.» (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- Easy meaning - I managed to get through it with out any or too much complications and it was sufficiently challenging :) » (It was easy, but it should remain unchanged the next year)
- I think the format should change. Maybe the groups could present on their respective articles so the information has to be distilled to a much simpler level. Or maybe offer fewer studies but ask all the students to read all of them, but still only write about one. It was hard without having looked at the other studies to be able to understand the issues that were sometimes brought up.» (It was too easy and should be more challenging the next year)

Guest lectures

19. What is your general impression of the guest lectures?

- I found it very interesting to get the personal experiences of people working in the field. I quite often find it very motivational. »
- I found very interesting the guest lectures 1 and 3 and I think they should be kept for next year»
- 1. Great! very inspiring! 2. very interesting, but it was hard to follow at times. 3. very glad I attended this. a great lecture! 4. interesting.»
- 1. Very good, inspiring guy 2. Good presentation, good facts. 3. Wasnt there! but I heard it was decent. 4. Really bad, I think I fell asleep somewhere in the middle.»
- good»
- Good mix of people and subjects!»
- Interesting to listen to people working with sustainable development and the environment.»
- Most of them were mostly here to present their association rather than really speak about some issues... My general impression is negative, although one of them was interesting.»
- I did only attend on Jakob Lagercrantz lecture and it was good. »
- Guest lectures were really inspiring. Specially Jakob and Bo. Eva"s lecture was good but was less interesting than the rest. »
- Great, Bo Kjellen and Jakob Lagercrantz in particular.»
- 1. Interesting 2.Very interesting 3. Not so interesting. Bad he talked so much about nuclear waste that there wasn´,t any time left to talk about how it was to work in an NGO 4. First half really boring. better after the break.»
- 1- Impressive and motivative 2- It was a great testimony of sustainability"s concept development in late years. 3- Average 4- Interesting topic but the lecture could have been more interesting»
- the 4th one is boring»
- very good, great choices»
- they are more interesting than the normal lectures»
- I couldn"t attend to some of the guest lectures because of collisions in my schedule. However, for 2 of them, I didn"t really understand the purpose of their lecture...»
- Very good and interesting, alla of them!»
- They all gave oss usefull information. »
- Jakob was great!»
- Very good lecture from Jakob Lagercrantz!»
- 1 **, 2*, 3*, 4*»
- Good experience with varied knowledge. It was interesting but sometimes boring too»
- Really interesting lectures, specially the first and the third one.»
- Good and interesting. They have been motivating for me.»
- They were interesting»
- 1»
- They were interesting and inspiring as well as showing the diversity of the field of industrial ecology.»
- 4. Lesser slides in swedish, not understandable for most exchange students. Lecture was therefore without any learning outcome.»
- 1. Clearly the most interesting person and an inspiring lecturer. Liked a lot. 2. Unbelievable experience as a negotiator but not the best lecturer. Still generally worth it. 3. I missed the first hour, but he seemed really knowledgeable and even surprisingly objective for a NGO worker. Interesting, especially considering the present "renaissance" of nuclear power. 4. Ok, but maybe a little too Sweden-centered for the international audience. The Swedish labeling system really does not help a lot at home.»
- Had mandatory lectures in my other course so couldn"t attend.»
- Very good»
- 1. was very interesting, good speaker. 2. also pretty interesting, but not so much new information. 3. didn"t attent 4. was too boring»
- I like them (specially Jakob L.) though the last guest lecture gave me the impression of being selling instead of informing.»
- -»
- Jakob Lagercrantz was very good and got the class involved. »
- All were good except Eva Eiderström.»
- Really interesting!»
- 1. Interesting, but perhaps over-simplified presentation. Might be more interesting to hear more about his Greenpeace days. 2. I missed this lecture due to a schedule mix-up - if at all possible, I think having the time-edit schedule be correct from day one would be a huge benefit to the course. 3. Very good. 4. Okay. My main complaint is that the subject matter was not very focused and coherent, so it made it difficult to take away any clear lessons.»
- 1. Really good 2. Boring 3. A little bit unclear 4. Good»
- All in all it was all very interesting, especially Bo Kjellén"s talk. »
- Did not have time»
- some of the guest were very interesting»
- Intresting to get some info from the life outside Chalmers. Motivation hearing what you can do.»
- I only sat the first two and thought they were very informative, interesting and inspiring. Of course in very different ways. But I actually found the later two not so interesting and decided to use the time for other studying. The nuclear waste lecture was a little dry for those who are not interested in specific detailes about the subject.. and even if I found Eva"s topic very interesting she unfortunately did not reach to us.»
- It was interesting to get other perspectives from people working in organizations, especially Jakob Lagercrantz was really good.»
- it was interesting!»

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		1%
Rather good»		20		30%
Very good»		24		36%
I did not seek help»		21		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.98

- Hard to get a hold of some teachers. » (Rather good)
- I had plenty of students we discussed things with and all lecturers answered questions if asked.» (Rather good)
- The lecturer were willing to answer questions during and after the lectures» (Very good)
- Good responce to emails» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		3		4%
Rather well»		16		23%
Very well»		46		68%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		2%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Personally, I would prefer to have shorter exercises which are meant to be completed, or at least written up alone. Group work always penalizes those who work hard and take pride in their work, either by making them do everything or by making them put their name on something they aren"t proud of.» (Rather poorly)
- The seminars were also usefull as an integration activity.» (Rather well)
- Sometimes I fear that some poeple do not know what "working in group" means.» (Rather well)
- We picked who to work with ourselves, how could it have been bad? :)» (Very well)
- I found very nice people to work with.» (Very well)

22. How was the course workload?

Too low»		2		2%
Low»		7		10%
Adequate»		43		64%
High»		12		17%
Too high»		3		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.1

- It wasn"t a very busy course, which was lucky as the other course was really hard one.» (Low)
- Based on your own interest. Easy to pass, hard to master.» (Low)
- Adequate if reading the literature during the course and attending the lectures. otherwise it is too much work just before the exam» (Adequate)
- maybe a bit low, but if you are interested there is really much stuff to read/watch etc so you can easily fill up the spare time so to speak. » (Adequate)
- The wideness of the topic makes hard to now well each part but give an amazing overview. » (High)
- The reading parts were wuite loaded and great effort needed to keep daily updated.» (Too high)
- Some seminars (especially the calculation ones) should be more guided.» (Too high)

23. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		1		1%
Low»		5		7%
Adequate»		27		40%
High»		26		38%
Too high»		8		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.52

- It wasn´,t this course that was the problem, it was the other compulsaty course. The workload gets to high when both courses have "hand-ins" nearly the same week.» (High)
- Not your fault.» (High)
- Too high, mainly since quantum mechanics take up an unreasonable amount of time, 6 days in the week was put on that course and one day on sustainable development.» (Too high)
- Due too the schedule collision.» (Too high)
- Self determened by me taking three courses (but still skipping one exam)» (Too high)
- I was forced to have 3 courses so it was a very awfull period for me.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

24. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		4		5%
Adequate»		9		13%
Good»		40		58%
Excellent»		15		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.97

- The course touches many "important" and interesting subjects, but sometimes the focus was a bit off the road. » (Adequate)
- I really learnt some interesting things!» (Good)
- A good intruduction to my master programme I think. Many aspects andmany things that I hope and think will connect to subjects in other courses so that there is a connection between everything. » (Good)
- A new sort of cource for me. Werry easy and nice to read. A litel like going bak to gymnasium. Because the lectures in this course were alwayes wery well structured and esy to concentrate principal points out of and the tentamina fitted well to the lectures. Well done :-)» (Good)
- A good but short insight to sustainability. Very good that also engineers have to think about these things.» (Good)
- Really good course it helped great deal to shape up my idea of sustainability. » (Excellent)
- Very good lectures! Interesting and at the right level. » (Excellent)

25. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

26. What should definitely be changed to next year?

27. Additional comments