Visa resultat

Environmental systems analysis, VMI010, MPEMA, Ht10

1. Did the course meet your expectations?

Yes, completely»		6		17%
Yes, almost»		15		44%
Partly»		8		23%
No, not at all»		5		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.35

- unsatisfactory course litterature, too low density of valuable information» ( Yes, almost)
- Subject interesting but execution varies.» (No, not at all)

2. One objective of the course is to provide basic knowledge of a number of tools/methods, and in-depth knowledge of others. Has that been achieved, according to you?

Yes, entirely»		12		35%
Yes, almost»		13		38%
Partly»		8		23%
No, not at all»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.94

- I don"t think that I have an in-depth knowledge of some tools. » ( Yes, almost)
- While I have learned about the tools, most of that has been done over the week before the exam on my own. Some knowledge was gained from the project but none from most lectures.» ( Yes, almost)
- Much more directed to the tools. The lectures are not good at all. Examples needed during lecture.» ( Yes, almost)
- I think that the course provide basic knowledge to all tools presented, rather than in-depth knowledge to some.» ( Yes, almost)
- I have not gained in-depth knowledge of any tool.» (Partly)
- Unclear which tools that where suppose to be basic and which that where suppose to be in-depth.» (Partly)
- Nä,det har visat sig vara en kurs som man bara skall komma ihåg en massa utan att förstå något.Vi har tvingats att lägga en massa tid på att komma ihåg skit. » (No, not at all)

3. The course also aims at providing understanding of how the various tools and methods relate to one another. Has that been achieved, according to you?

Yes, entirely»		6		18%
Yes, almost»		13		39%
Partly»		12		36%
No, not at all»		2		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.3

- Only one lecture about this... Hard to have a good overview» (Yes, almost)
- Jag ser inte poängen med att kunna dessa systemsteg utantill. Alla säger ju i princip samma sak men med olika ord. » (Partly)
- See above» (Partly)
- Tillslut förstod man att några av dem hände ihop, men det tog tid och det var inte förrän i tentaveckan.» (Partly)
- The "toolbox" text in the literature was really bad.» (Partly)
- If I learned something about the relationship it was from the book.» (No, not at all)

4. What is your opinion on the course content and scope? Any parts or aspects that should be taken out or added? Any parts on which focus should be increased or reduced?

5. Was the course well organized?

Yes»		11		33%
Partly»		17		51%
No»		5		15%

Genomsnitt: 1.81

- it would have been good if all the lectures about tools that we were supposed to use during the case work had been performed earlier in the course in order to make the information settle, especially the lecture on MCA.» (Partly)
- It was sometimes unclear which lecture halls we were supposed to be in. Be very clear when you don"t use rooms at V, and also you should write all changes of rooms on the course homepage.» (Partly)
- Poängsystemet med inlämningsuppgifterna var inte bra, konstigt att kräva obligatorisk närvaro när vi ändå bara satt och diskuterade (vilket man inte ens behövde) helt random. » (Partly)
- some problems with the exercises, but overall really good» (Partly)
- Supervisors bad synchronised, other fairly good.» (Partly)
- Some parts could have been better communicated by the course administration. E.g. the purpose/approach to the exercises. Maybe you could also have communicated the idea/concept of the course (which is really good): lectures that provide basic knowledge and introduction to the tools, the exercises which give opportunity to apply the knowledge and ask questions about the application. And finally to do a case study where you really use different tools in relation to eachother. An emphasis on the "röda trådar" in the course (even though there is a course syllabus) will increase the motivation and understanding among the students, I believe.» (Partly)
- There was a great compatibility problem with timeedit schedule» (Partly)
- Mistake to divide goroups that have people from different courses with conflicting schedule. The first deadline on the group assignment only stressed us, we needed an extre day for that, not a few hours and a deadline at 20.00.» (Partly)
- Not really. Hard to find a red line, many different lecturers who did not seem to have coordinated who was to talk about what.» (No)
- The compulsary attendance at the exercises, mix-up with computers room and so on made it feel badly organized.» (No)

6. Describe your background (program, under graduate education)

7. Was the course appropriate with regard to your background?

Too easy»		4		12%
At the right level»		25		75%
Too difficult»		4		12%

Genomsnitt: 2

- Meningslös» (?)
- But at the same time too hard. Very vague.» (Too easy)
- A lot of repetition. Also I had already read at least half of the articles in the course compendium in various courses.» (Too easy)
- Not difficult, but a lot to read. thats ok.» (Too easy)
- I dont think it should be compulsery to the students on "Geo- and water".» (At the right level)

8. Did you find the lectures easy to follow and relevant in content?

- Most of the guest lecture did not talk about what I feel is relevant, they only talk about the methods they use but not how. I would have wanted more practical examples how the tools work in "real life" We have already got the lectures about the tools.»
- Cannot a lecture be relevant in the content and hard to follow or easy to follow and not relevant? Hard to answer especially when i don"t feel legitimized to give anypoint of view!»
- Guest lectures late on fridays is a very bad idee!»
- Karins föreläsningar var lite trötta, jag hade önskat mer entusiasm för att själv bli intresserad och aktiv på föreläsningarna. »
- Do not have the guest lectures on friday afternoon, no one attends them that way.»
- Idiotiskt att lägga en massa föreläsningar på fredag eftermiddag! Dessutom är det bra om gästföreläsarna vet vilken bakgrund vi har och inte tror att vi är kemister.»
- Nor Shweta and Are»
- Karin need to improve her powerpoint-presentations. They many times felt very incomplete with scattered information. A good property of a powerpoint-presentation is if it easy readable "alone", eg when trying to grasp the tools a couple of weeks after the lectures.»

Karin Andersson
32 svarande

Yes»		9		28%
Somewhat»		14		43%
No»		9		28%
Did not attend»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

Ulrika Palme
32 svarande

Yes»		25		78%
Somewhat»		7		21%
No»		0		0%
Did not attend»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.21

Anna-Karin Jörnbrink, IVF
32 svarande

Yes»		7		21%
Somewhat»		11		34%
No»		7		21%
Did not attend»		7		21%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

Margareta Lundin-Unger, Kungsbacka WWTP
32 svarande

Yes»		15		46%
Somewhat»		12		37%
No»		1		3%
Did not attend»		4		12%

Genomsnitt: 1.81

Bo Bergbäck, Kalmar University
32 svarande

Yes»		9		28%
Somewhat»		12		37%
No»		3		9%
Did not attend»		8		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.31

Lena Torin, Golder Associates
32 svarande

Yes»		15		46%
Somewhat»		6		18%
No»		1		3%
Did not attend»		10		31%

Genomsnitt: 2.18

Annika Lindblad-Påsse, Golder Associates
32 svarande

Yes»		12		37%
Somewhat»		11		34%
No»		1		3%
Did not attend»		8		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.15

Johan Widheden, Akzo Nobel
32 svarande

Yes»		9		28%
Somewhat»		11		34%
No»		1		3%
Did not attend»		11		34%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

Tomas Rydberg, IVL
32 svarande

Yes»		6		18%
Somewhat»		14		43%
No»		4		12%
Did not attend»		8		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

9. How did you like the exercises (LCA, MFA, RA, EIA)?

- Why not grading them by a multi-criteria evaluation grid to have a better feedback? (for the one that want to and not sure every student is interested in, especially when writing on friday!»
- Attended one, but even though I had prepared a lot before, it was not time enough to finish it during the lesson and then it is stupid to have it on friday afternoons. Most people have better things to do on friday evenings than doing school work. Also you could just as well do them at home...»
- I think it was very unnecessary that we had to be there in order to get the credits. I did not feel that I got much help anyway from the teacher (who also left after about 20 minutes). And also I had noone to cooperate with. So I could just as well have done it at the library typing it into the compuiter right away.»
- Tycker det var konstigt med obligatorisk närvaro. Ska det vara det måste övningarna var strukturerade, nu räckte det ju att man satt där, man behövde inte vara delaktig. Samtidigt som de som ville lämna in uppgiften på förhand inte fick det. »
- Should focus more on understanding than just following steps.»
- Det är dåligt att litteraturseminariet ligger dagen innan vår andra tenta. Jag hade gärna kommit men INTE dagen innan vår andra tenta! Dåligt att det skulle vara så svårt att flytta litteraturseminariet.»
- The exercises is great opportunity to learn how the tools work. Sadly this opportunity was completely destroyed by bad instructions, lack of guidance, sometimes refuse from supervisors to guide, and most of all, great lack of time.»
- Not enough time to discuss.»
- It was a bit hard to get clear answers frpm our supervisor, Are. Not sure what level was expected.»

Were they instructive?
34 svarande

Yes»		17		50%
Partly»		12		35%
No»		4		11%
Did not attend»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.67

Were they sufficient in scope?
34 svarande

Yes»		18		52%
Partly»		11		32%
No»		4		11%
Did not attend»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.64

Were they sufficient in depth?
34 svarande

Yes»		15		44%
Partly»		14		41%
No»		4		11%
Did not attend»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 1.73

Did you get enough help?
34 svarande

Yes»		11		32%
Partly»		12		35%
No»		10		29%
Did not attend»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.02

Did co-operation in the groups work out well?
34 svarande

Yes»		17		50%
Partly»		12		35%
No»		3		8%
Did not attend»		2		5%

Genomsnitt: 1.7

10. How much time did you spend on the exercises as compared to scheduled time?

1 * scheduled time»		6		18%
1,5 * scheduled time»		9		28%
2 * scheduled time»		11		34%
more»		6		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.53

- Jag tror att övningarna hade gett mig mer om de var inlämningsuppgifter som man kunde göra under veckan och ha ett konsulationstillfälle istället. » (1,5 * scheduled time)
- I think the information about the exercises before starting with them were lacking. It came as a surprise that you have to spent so much time on them, so the planning was not good. FOr the first exercise you had made other plans after the exercise and you had to cancelled them in order to be able to finish . SO more information about the exercises so you can plan you day. » (2 * scheduled time)
- To little time and not so good having the excercises on friday afternoon. » (2 * scheduled time)
- Don"t have any of them at friday afternoons!» (2 * scheduled time)
- Dålig planering av övningarna när de tar 4 timmar att göra och ska vara inlämnade vid midnatt på fredagarna en del har inte tid att sitt fredag eftermiddag. LCA övningen var också väldig otydlig. » (more)
- Having an exercise 15-17 in a Friday afternoon with deadline at midnight is nothing else but disrespectful. » (more)

11. How did you like the case work?

- Far too large groups! The case work could have been very rewarding if only the groups were smaller.»
- I wished for some more focus about calculations»
- Quite a big group, 6 st. And difficulties to be able to schedule group work due to different schedules. Maybe other group constellations?»
- The project syllabus said ine thing, our supervisor sometimes said another thing. It could be more clear how much the syllabus had to be followed.»
- The group was too big, and since everyone had very diffrent schedules, and also some just had that one course at chalmers and spent much time at GU or KTH it didn"t really work out that well. I donät feel I learned that much.»
- See above, should have a larger freedom and start earlier to actually be interesting. The groups were too large, 6 persons are about 3-2 too many to make it effective. Especially when half are exchange students with less report writing experience.»
- The supervisors had not as much knowledge as needed»
- Again, don"t speak mumbo jumbo like a politician, give clear guidance. We are here to learn, not to guess what our teachers and supervisors wants us to do.»
- A bit hard to co-operate when students attend differnent courses. Much work was devided among the group members, so I felt that some parts were written without time to go through it thoroughly together. Because of this I think that the hand-in should only be graded by Pass or No-pass. »
- The groups where to big...and only a few of my group members studied fulltime at chalmers so it was hard to get together»
- Most information are in Swedish, so its a little bit hard for international students to collect informantion. So it"s better to group students according to their nationalities and alloting Swedish students in each group.»

Was it relevant for the course?
34 svarande

Yes»		32		94%
Partly»		2		5%
No»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.05

Good with hand ins of report?
33 svarande

Yes»		24		72%
Partly»		9		27%
No»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.27

Was the task to big?
34 svarande

Yes»		5		14%
Partly»		9		26%
No»		20		58%

Genomsnitt: 2.44

Did you receive sufficient support from supervisors?
34 svarande

Yes»		13		38%
Partly»		14		41%
No»		7		20%

Genomsnitt: 1.82

Did scheduled consultation hours work?
33 svarande

Yes»		16		48%
Partly»		13		39%
No»		4		12%

Genomsnitt: 1.63

Did the co-operation within the group work?
33 svarande

Yes»		22		66%
Partly»		6		18%
No»		5		15%

Genomsnitt: 1.48

12. Course literature

- Good to have a schedule for the course literature»
- Not so good course litterature! Not representable for a technical university like chalmers!»
- The text about RA is not very good.»
- It didn"t really answer all my questions. The article about e.g. RA could have been better.»
- Tyckte "valuation" var lite svårläst»
- Did nor buy it»
- You should try to find another article for the RA-part»
- Some text was too small. Valuation text was not very interesting, just difficult»

Was the course literatur valuable?
34 svarande

Yes»		18		52%
Partly»		10		29%
No»		6		17%

Genomsnitt: 1.64

Was it easy to read?
34 svarande

Yes»		7		20%
Partly»		18		52%
No»		9		26%

Genomsnitt: 2.05

13. Was the English proficiency of the teachers satisfactory?

Yes»		23		67%
Partly»		11		32%
No»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.32

- During Karin"s lectures I had a hard time keeping interest. She would probably have been more interesting in Swedish, which I found a bit of a pity.» (Partly)
- Formulations and expressions that made soem parts hard to udnerstand. Especially learining exam questions.» (Partly)
- It takes time to understand the vocabulary used.» (Partly)

14. Was your own English proficiency sufficient?

Yes»		25		73%
Partly»		9		26%
No»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.26

15. Other comments on the course?

16. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		5		14%
Fair»		5		14%
Adequate»		11		32%
Good»		10		29%
Excellent»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.02

- While the subject is interesting, the execution is really poor. Most of the lectures were impossible to get anything from, just displaying large flowcharts which you had no time to read or udnerstand. Less time should be spent on examples and mroe on slowly explaing the procedures, examplifying with one or two basig examples. » (Poor)
- Otydlig struktur Inte anknuten till programmet » (Poor)
- I had high expectaions, otherwise i would say adequate» (Fair)
- Lack of feedback on the group work and on the exercises entail an opacity on how we"ll be evaluated. Which reasonings are just unacceptable? Is opacity justifiable with epistemological reasons only?» (Fair)
- Very good, but could be better. E.g. the concept of the course could be better communicated. My experience was also that some of the lectures by Karin could be more well-structured and concise in some cases. Sometimes very many slides etc. » (Good)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?