Visa resultat

Science of environmental change, FFR166

Your own effort

1. Which programme do you belong to?

MP Industrial Ecology»		6		33%
MP Env Measurement & Assessment»		1		5%
Other Masters programme»		5		27%
Erasmus student or else»		6		33%

Genomsnitt: 2.61

- new name TSE» (MP Industrial Ecology)
- TSE» (MP Industrial Ecology)
- Technology, Society and the Environment» (Other Masters programme)
- mp technology society and the environment» (Other Masters programme)
- TCE» (Other Masters programme)
- MP Technology, Socitey and the Environment» (Other Masters programme)
- Erasmus Mundus programme, currently studying together with TSE (technology, society and environment) program» (Erasmus student or else)
- ERASMUS MUNDUS Masters in Industrial Ecology» (Erasmus student or else)

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

18 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		4		22%
Around 20 hours/week»		6		33%
Around 25 hours/week»		6		33%
Around 30 hours/week»		1		5%
At least 35 hours/week»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.38

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

18 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		1		5%
50%»		2		11%
75%»		5		27%
100%»		10		55%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

Goals and goal fulfilment

4. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		0		0%
The goals are difficult to understand»		1		5%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		15		83%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.05 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Sten went through what we should know on the last lecture!» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- they say what i am suppose to know, not what I am supposed to be able to do (calculations, written reflexions...)» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

17 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		11		64%
No, the goals are set too high»		6		35%

Genomsnitt: 2.35

- For someone from chemical engineering, this course doesn"t offer much new knowledge» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- On an average I would say they are reasonable, but the chemistry part is way to simple. If you don"t know what an atom is you should not gp to chalmers. And stems part was a little tricky, but I rather have a little to hard lecture than a too simple.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- Maybe it would be better to reduce the amount of topics and rather concentrate on the main concepts.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Too much of detailed information that we will forget next week...» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		9		50%
Yes, definitely»		5		27%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		4		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- The water chapter/part was too narrow/small (only about renewable fresh water/groundwater from a paper) and did not show the students broad knowledge(from the 4h lectures).» (To some extent)
- The questión felt a little to specific sometimes.» (To some extent)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.05

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		1		5%
Some extent»		10		55%
Large extent»		5		27%
Great extent»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.44

- The radiation part should come in the second part of the course, since there are a lot of difficult words to understand and the students haven"t adopted to English yet. Also it wasn"t clear why we talked about radiation in the beginning - show the students an overview of the course material over time, to clairify the different parts of the course and how they relate. Sten Karlsson"s slides are just very very hard to follow - they must be reorganized (concequent layout, defined letters and variables etc)!» (Some extent)
- sometime quite confusing teaching.» (Some extent)
- Depend on the teachers» (Large extent)

8. To what extent has the lectures by Sten Karlsson been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		3		16%
Some extent»		9		50%
Large extent»		5		27%
Great extent»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.22

- As far as i lived it, Sten try to make us understand things by the quantity instead of quality : he puts three slides presenting three slightly different graphs for the same concept, and can"t clearly explain the differences, and whch one we should trust as a base for our learning. It would be much better if he shows one single simpler graph made by himself !» (Small extent)
- slide and explanations too messy» (Some extent)
- It would be good if the outline of the lectures could be clearer, a presentation of the topic, and why it"s important in the climate context, before the information comes. Less slides, less information on each slide and a clear reference to where in the literature one can read more about the topic(author and side number) For some reason, it was first at the end of the course that I grasped what the whole theme was. It would have been nice to get that feeling earlier in the course and get motivated to read more. Maybe a course in pedagogics?» (Some extent)

9. To what extent has the lectures by Katarina Gårdfeldt (atm chem) been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		1		5%
Some extent»		5		27%
Large extent»		8		44%
Great extent»		4		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- The Chemistry is too simple. Katarina is a good lecturer, but the level is too low. But I think the problem is that some students don"t have enough knowledge when they come to the program, and that is the real problem.» (Small extent)
- I didn"t go to all of them, but she was interesting to listen to.» (Some extent)
- just a lack of exercises about chemical reactions, to check by oneself (and then in group) if we can d it without help. See the calculation session in "sustainable energy future" course.» (Large extent)

10. To what extent has the lectures by Rod Stevens (fresh water) been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		1		5%
Some extent»		10		58%
Large extent»		4		23%
Great extent»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

- I missed half of it.» (Small extent)
- I wasn"t at all his lectures» (Some extent)

11. To what extent has the lectures by Kjell Wallin (bioresources) been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		4		22%
Some extent»		8		44%
Large extent»		6		33%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.11

- This part felt a bit odd in the context. A very pessimistic view on future. I didn"t feel like going to the second lecture.» (Small extent)
- we pass very fast above the mathematical formulas for population regulation. Maybe less formulas and more examples would be better. And this lecture is quite depressing : "Kjell, are we going on the wall ?" - "I"m afraid yes" is a good summary of what I"ll bring out of this lecture...» (Some extent)
- It would be good with slides with more info on them, or that you got them printed out in the beginning of the lecture, because I took notes on a separate paper and it was hard to understand the slides after the lecture because I would have liked to write all the smart stuff Kjell said in the slides.» (Large extent)

12. To what extent has the lectures by Stefan Wirsenius (soils, acidification) been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		0		0%
Some extent»		6		33%
Large extent»		11		61%
Great extent»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- Good pase on the lecturing!» (Large extent)

13. To what extent has the three hand-ins been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		6		33%
Some extent»		6		33%
Large extent»		6		33%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- Too heavy, too slow, not compulsory enough, too far from what we are asked during the exams, and poor correction: "I will have to look at it" was a too frequent answer to questions about these hands-in» (Small extent)
- Unclear assignment! Spent lots of hours trying to understand what to do!!» (Small extent)
- They were good, but unfortunately it felt like I knew too little beforehand, and there was no time for supervision on the schedule. In the context we put far too much time on the hand-ins.» (Small extent)
- Most energy have been put on understanding the questions and NOT about discussing or trying to solve the questions themselves.» (Small extent)
- Should be compulsiory, since it"s hard to convince two other group mates to do it otherwise - and you don"t have time to do it by yourself.» (Some extent)
- The topics were interesting, but the tasks were not clear enough.» (Some extent)
- Sometimes they sara too hard. I would like it to be more theoretical rather than calculations.» (Large extent)
- But really time consuming» (Large extent)

14. To what extent was the presentation of a paper a valuable moment?

Small extent»		6		35%
Some extent»		7		41%
Large extent»		4		23%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.88

- I think it would be much better if we had one presentation at the end of each course instead of all at once. The saturation level is low when we are not teached by professionals...» (Some extent)
- But it was too many presentations for this short period of time, so it would be better to either split the group or have more than one session.» (Some extent)

15. To what extent was the demonstrations etc by Sten Karlsson of help for your learning?

Small extent»		4		23%
Some extent»		9		52%
Large extent»		4		23%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- I can"t think of any demonstrations etc at the moment.. What would that have been?» (?)
- Wasn"t there» (Small extent)
- I don"t understand the question. Demonstrations about what ?» (Some extent)
- final summary part need more strengthen though. more detailed would be good. » (Some extent)

16. To what extent was the demonstrations etc by Lars-Henrik Kullingsjö of help for your learning?

Small extent»		3		23%
Some extent»		7		53%
Large extent»		3		23%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- I never went to them so I don"t know» (?)
- Can"t remember this either??» (?)
- I was not in his group» (?)

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

Small extent»		2		11%
Some extent»		3		16%
Large extent»		11		61%
Great extent»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- Haven"t read it.» (Small extent)
- J&J is a really good book, but the lectures should be better refered (to the different literatures). As noted above, the water part shouldn"t be tested only on an extra material hand-out.» (Some extent)
- those literature that was copied and distributed by lecturer was really helpful.(they are closely related to the topics). But the reference book "Jackson & Jackson" is not.This book is really expensive, but we only used a little part of it. » (Some extent)
- The articles given out were really good. The book as well.» (Large extent)
- expensive but efficient second chance» (Large extent)
- Wikipedia was better sometimes, but the literature did help a lot when I could find what I wanted. There should be references on the slides, I think, if we"re supposed to study with the slides as a base.» (Large extent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		1		5%
Rather well»		13		72%
Very well»		4		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- student portal always broken down, especially the period before the examination.» (Rather badly)
- I didn"t use this so much, since we got the hand-outs in paperform, but I think the lectures came up too late, if I would have needed them. The best would be if they could be there before, or right after the lecture.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		5%
Rather good»		8		44%
Very good»		7		38%
I did not seek help»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- ...but as I said, unefficient. Sten very willing to answer the questions, but sometimes I didn"t understood even after five minutes precisions...» (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		5		27%
Very well»		11		61%
I did not seek cooperation»		2		11%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

21. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		5%
Adequate»		9		50%
High»		5		27%
Too high»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- Mostly because a lot of time was spent on understanding the assignment texts.» (High)
- Too high!!! Spent so much time on the assignments!!!» (Too high)

22. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		2		11%
Adequate»		8		44%
High»		5		27%
Too high»		3		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

Summarizing questions

23. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		4		22%
Adequate»		7		38%
Good»		7		38%
Excellent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- I think I expected something that would be a challenge in a different way. I didn"t understand much during the lectures, so the challenge was to understand afterwards what was important for the course context and read that. It would have been nice to feel that I actually learnt something during the lectures and then could take it to a different level.» (Adequate)
- Good knowledge to have!» (Good)

24. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

25. What should definitely be changed to next year?

26. Additional comments