ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

Visa resultat

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

ITR361-2011, ITR361

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-11-01 - 2012-12-10
Antal svar: 42
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 82%
Kontaktperson: Sönke Berhends»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers: masterskurs

Your own effort

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

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

42 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 2%
Around 20 hours/week»21 50%
Around 25 hours/week»17 40%
Around 30 hours/week»3 7%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- 5726999978 is my personal reply code» (Around 20 hours/week)
- 8127002383» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Code 4127002780» (Around 20 hours/week)
- Code: 4427000009» (Around 25 hours/week)
- 4627001989 » (Around 25 hours/week)

2. If you compare the course with other courses you have attended, how labour-intensive was the course?

42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 2%
the same»30 71%
much»10 23%
very much»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.26

- Good spread of labor during the course» (the same)
- It depend on how you measure, it was quite intensive during the weeks, but since it was not an exam at the end it might be less than an ordanary course.» (the same)
- labor-intensive for the case study » (very much)

3. If you compare the course with other courses you have attended, how difficult was the course?

42 svarande

very easy»0 0%
easy»11 26%
the same»30 71%
difficult»1 2%
very difficult»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- I"ve heard a lot of facts from the lecuteres in other SCM classes.» (easy)
- Easy since I have taken a similar course two years ago.» (easy)
- Not that difficult but it took a long time» (the same)
- It was difficult to be persistent in quality for the home exams due to the shift in writing partners. To allow one or two be writen with case-members would perhaps make more simple?» (the same)
- Asked outputs (home reports, case study) required hours of work as other courses. But grades given for some reports were lower than expected for reports where students invested similar time than spent in other courses" work.» (the same)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

4. How understandable are the course goals?

42 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»13 40%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»19 59%
I have not seen/read the goals»10

Genomsnitt: 2.59

- Maybe additional lectures in calculating LCA and the impacts of assumptions but using quantitative data» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- I have seen them but i can"t seem to remember what they were. » (I have not seen/read the goals)

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

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

37 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 8%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»34 91%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.91

- One could have reached deeper depths in the subject if the lectures hadn"t been overlapping so much in information. » (No, the goals are set too low)
- Since I"ve not studied the goals in detail it"s hard to answer» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

6. Did the examination (home examination reports and case study) assess whether you have reached the goals?

38 svarande

No, not at all»1 2%
To some extent»21 60%
Yes, definitely»13 37%
I don»3

Genomsnitt: 2.34

- It was very hard to be able to show that one knows what should be known and have the ability to analyze it and develop it further on the thight word limits. » (To some extent)
- Well, I"m disapointed how espacally the first hand in was corrected. I think the example for correction is to narrow and does not fit with the introduction there Magnus stated the opportunity for different viewing angels etc. In a master level more attention should be put on the analysis we made in the paper, if we are able to think outside the box. In my opinion facts presented from course littarure has got to high proprotion of the grading. » (To some extent)
- Don"t know because i don"t remember them» (I don)

Course administration

This section deals with the course administration.

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

42 svarande

Small extent»2 4%
Some extent»11 26%
Large extent»22 52%
Great extent»7 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

- Some articles were really hard to understand» (Some extent)
- Could be some improvements to the reading list. Some articles felt really relevant, others not quite enough. I missed "critical" articles as well, for instance, is CSR really all good or is there a backside...» (Large extent)
- I believe articles are very good material. Usually these also are new and updated and can cover more detail but also a wider range than a course book.» (Large extent)

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

42 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»4 9%
Rather well»25 59%
Very well»13 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.21

- It took too long time to receive the results from the home exam and therefore it was hard to know whether you"ve reasoned right in your arguments for the case study » (Rather poor)
- I think that we got to wait too long for the results of examination 1, with the correction guide it was easier to understand how you should design the last task.» (Rather poor)
- One home exam was delayed, which caused rather big problems for my personal planning.» (Rather well)
- I"m acutally abit tiered of having to spend 6-8 hours in total during the course just to find all articles. I understand the point of learning to be good at information searching, but it is still abit teadious to find them all online.... Reduce to a few symbolic obligatory articles that are placed in "good informations journals"?» (Rather well)
- I think the reference papers could be a little better organized on the homepage» (Rather well)
- Did not have any problems.» (Very well)

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

42 svarande

Very poor»1 2%
Rather poor»3 7%
Rather good»18 47%
Very good»16 42%
I did not seek help»4

Genomsnitt: 3.28

- Booked a meeating but sönke had gone home, sent a mail to blinge but got no answer. Otherwise it was pretty well organized and well communicated» (Rather poor)
- sönke was very helpful» (Rather good)
- Sometimes Maria did not know the answers to our questions, she only said whatever you put in the report motivate the reasoning, but sometimes it is needed more critical feedback from the supervisor.» (Rather good)
- Quick repons in emails» (Very good)

Lectures

This section deals with the lectures we have had in the course. The goal is to assess the relevance of each lecture as well as the performance of the lecturer.

10. Are the topics of the lectures relevant for the course?*

The course addressed a lot of different topics. Below you find the list of the lectures which we have had in the course covering the different topics. What topics should be definitely be included in the course? And what topics should not be part of the course? If you did do not have an opinion or do not remember , please choose "no opinion/I do not remember"

Matrisfråga

- SK was a very good lecturer, but many students found the topic of calculating the greenhouse effect too specific for this course. It would be interesting to hear even more about how companies are working with calculating the external costs today(eg. what methods and tools are they using?)»
- Perhaps too High focus on air emissions and too little on other external cost drivers and their respective reduction potentials etc.»
- Good lectures. I attended about all lectures and I would recommend you to make guest lectures mandatory, the where relevant and provided interesting facts which i believe everyone should have listen to. At least it states a good picture of chalmers and its students if they attend when there are guest lectures.»
- It is needed more practical material about the relevance of electrification of transport, since it is a real and important current and future option to reduce emissions from freigth transport.»
- "Power, rationality and decision making in transport infrastructure investments" Didn"t really feeel super relevant to the course, but it was fun and interesting.»

Environmental logistics (MB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»0 0%
relevant»15 35%
highly relevant»23 54%
No opinion/I do not remember»5

Life cycle assessment (MB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»0 0%
relevant»15 35%
highly relevant»24 57%
No opinion/I do not remember»4

Case Study - LCA of transport chains (SB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»0 0%
relevant»15 35%
highly relevant»25 59%
No opinion/I do not remember»2

Environmental impacts from the transport sector (MB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»0 0%
relevant»16 38%
highly relevant»22 52%
No opinion/I do not remember»4

Alternative fuels –,, Production and emissions (MB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»1 2%
relevant»24 57%
highly relevant»14 33%
No opinion/I do not remember»3

What is the greenhouse effect? (SK)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»17 40%
relevant»17 40%
highly relevant»4 9%
No opinion/I do not remember»5

A unifying framework for sustainable development (JO)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»2 4%
relevant»21 50%
highly relevant»4 9%
No opinion/I do not remember»15

Environmental strategies from a truck manufacturer’,,s perspective (TR)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»5 11%
relevant»18 42%
highly relevant»11 26%
No opinion/I do not remember»8

Sustainability aspects on rail transport (SB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»1 2%
relevant»20 47%
highly relevant»17 40%
No opinion/I do not remember»4

External costs in the transport sector (EF)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»2 4%
relevant»16 38%
highly relevant»20 47%
No opinion/I do not remember»4

Electrification of the transport sector: Potential and effects (SK)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»0 0%
relevant»24 57%
highly relevant»10 23%
No opinion/I do not remember»8

Environmental strategies from a truck manufacturer’,,s perspective (EH)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»3 7%
relevant»24 57%
highly relevant»8 19%
No opinion/I do not remember»7

Environmental strategies from a freight forwarder’,,s perspective (UH)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»5 11%
relevant»18 42%
highly relevant»9 21%
No opinion/I do not remember»10

Sustainability aspects on maritime transport (ZN)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»2 4%
relevant»21 50%
highly relevant»11 26%
No opinion/I do not remember»10

Reverse logistics (II)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»7 16%
relevant»19 45%
highly relevant»5 11%
No opinion/I do not remember»12

Logistics management and the environment I+II (MHB)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»1 2%
relevant»20 47%
highly relevant»12 28%
No opinion/I do not remember»9

Env. consideration when purchasing transport services (MBj)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»2 4%
relevant»23 54%
highly relevant»7 16%
No opinion/I do not remember»10

CSR in SCM –,, Socially responsible logistics (MBj)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»4 9%
relevant»24 57%
highly relevant»4 9%
No opinion/I do not remember»11

Power, rationality and decision making in transport infrastructure investments (GF)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»7 16%
relevant»19 45%
highly relevant»7 16%
No opinion/I do not remember»9

Sustainability aspects on City Logistics (ML)*
42 svarande

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

not relevant»2 4%
relevant»19 45%
highly relevant»17 40%
No opinion/I do not remember»4

11. How was the lecturer*

Please judge the quality of the lecture. Do you think that the lecturer has a good knowledge of the topic? Was he motivated, interested and committed? If you did not attend or do not remember any lecture, please choose "I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember".

Matrisfråga

- The guest lecturer"s from Linköping were great, but the level could be higher for SCM students. Much of what was handled we already know very well.»
- The Greenhouse effect lecture was out of the scope of SCM i.e. it was pretty technic. »
- In general the lectures were good, but some guess lecturers were not so good at communicating.»
- Jonas Oldmark totaly changed my view on how the earth and its ecosystems interact with pollutions - this is a keeper! Otherwise, several of the guest lectures where quite boring -> speed up, be more "jaw-dropping", make sure to communicate what the class allready know information wise and so on to avoid time spent on the same thing over and over again. The guest lectures need to be more specific, want more "hands on" knowledge of the areas. Now that just say "we think about this and that and really think hard about this" well, how does that educate me? not much, want examples, cases and concreate info =) the maritime guestlecture was good!»
- All of them were relevant - but the quality was POOR!»
- Because of extremly high work load in my other course I could not attend that many lectures.»

Magnus Blinge - Environmental Logistics*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»6 15%
much»20 52%
very much»12 31%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»4

Genomsnitt: 4.15

Magnus Blinge - Life cycle assessment*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»7 18%
much»18 48%
very much»12 32%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»5

Genomsnitt: 4.13

Magnus Blinge - Environmental impacts*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»8 21%
much»20 52%
very much»10 26%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»4

Genomsnitt: 4.05

Magnus Blinge - Alternative fuels*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»10 25%
much»19 48%
very much»10 25%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»3

Genomsnitt: 4

Sten Karlsson - What is the greenhouse effect?*
42 svarande

very little»5 14%
little»3 8%
neutral»11 32%
much»8 23%
very much»7 20%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»8

Genomsnitt: 3.26

Jonas Oldmark - A unifying framework for sustainable d.*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 5%
neutral»8 40%
much»9 45%
very much»2 10%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»22

Genomsnitt: 3.6

Erik Fridell - External costs in the transport sector*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»9 28%
much»12 37%
very much»11 34%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»10

Genomsnitt: 4.06

Zoi Nikopoulou - Sustainability aspects on maritime transp.*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»10 43%
much»9 39%
very much»4 17%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»19

Genomsnitt: 3.73

Maria Lindolm - Sustainability aspects on city logistics*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»9 32%
much»13 46%
very much»6 21%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»14

Genomsnitt: 3.89

Sten Karlsson - Electrification of the transport sector*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»5 16%
neutral»8 26%
much»15 50%
very much»2 6%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»12

Genomsnitt: 3.46

Sönke Behrends - Sustainability aspects on rail transport*
42 svarande

very little»1 2%
little»2 5%
neutral»10 27%
much»11 30%
very much»12 33%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»6

Genomsnitt: 3.86

Igor Insanic - Reverse logistics*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»4 15%
neutral»12 46%
much»10 38%
very much»0 0%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»16

Genomsnitt: 3.23

Maria Huge-Brodin - Logistics management and the environment*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»2 6%
neutral»13 44%
much»11 37%
very much»3 10%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»13

Genomsnitt: 3.51

Maria Huge-Brodin - Environmentally and logistics based business models*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»2 7%
neutral»12 44%
much»10 37%
very much»3 11%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»15

Genomsnitt: 3.51

Maria Björklund - Environmental considerations when purchas.*
42 svarande

very little»1 3%
little»1 3%
neutral»11 40%
much»12 44%
very much»2 7%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»15

Genomsnitt: 3.48

Maria Björklund - CSR in SCM*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 3%
neutral»10 35%
much»13 46%
very much»4 14%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»14

Genomsnitt: 3.71

Gunnar Falkenmark - Power, rationality and decision making..*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 3%
neutral»14 51%
much»9 33%
very much»3 11%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»15

Genomsnitt: 3.51

Sönke Behrends - Case study: LCA of transport chains*
42 svarande

very little»1 2%
little»1 2%
neutral»10 27%
much»11 30%
very much»13 36%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»6

Genomsnitt: 3.94

Tommy Rosgart (Volvo) - Environmental strategies from a truck manufacturer’,,s perspective*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»2 6%
neutral»10 33%
much»13 43%
very much»5 16%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»12

Genomsnitt: 3.7

Elisabeth Hörnfeldt (Scania) - Environmental strategies from a truck manufacturer’,,s perspective*
42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 2%
neutral»9 26%
much»16 47%
very much»8 23%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»8

Genomsnitt: 3.91

Ulf Hammerberg (DHL) - Environmental strategies from a freight forwarder’,s perspective*
42 svarande

very little»2 7%
little»2 7%
neutral»9 32%
much»12 42%
very much»3 10%
I did not attend the lecture/I do not remember»14

Genomsnitt: 3.42

12. On which topic (related to the course content) would you have wished to get a guest lecture by an external expert?

- CSR in SCM would be nice to hear from a company perspective.»
- Alternative fuels»
- Alternative fuels»
- Purchaser of logistic services»
- nothing other than that already given»
- Some poltician from the munucipality of Gothenburg»
- It"s good as it is today. »
- A fuel company like Shell, what do they develop to push alternative fuels»
- Bombardier guest lecture, about PRIMOVE, it is a logistics solution for sustainable cities.»
- Don"t know.»
- Company or organization that work on Environmental Impact calculation to show its practical use of it.»
- Alternative Fuels»

13. How many of the offered lectures did you attend?

42 svarande

0 - 25%»1 2%
25-50%»1 2%
50-75%»17 40%
75-100%»23 54%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- I miss the first week of class, because I wasn"t in Sweden» (50-75%)
- Some collisions with work, otherwise I tried to go to all. However, did drop out from a few due to dullness» (75-100%)

14. What were the reasons for not attending a lecture?

42 svarande

The lecture was not interesting to me»12 28%
There was a time conflict with other courses»21 50%
other reason»9 21%

Genomsnitt: 1.92

- I found it hard to judge what knowledge provided on the lectures that was relevant for the examinaion reports and the project. Some of the knowledge provided felt too redundant, simple or general to provide a good learning experience.» (The lecture was not interesting to me)
- You could just as well read the slides» (The lecture was not interesting to me)
- Since I have taken similar courses before, I left in halftime sometimes, but only if I had something else to do.» (The lecture was not interesting to me)
- A mix of the two given alternatives » (other reason)
- Extracurricular activities.» (other reason)
- Because of extremly high work load in my other course I could not attend that many lectures. I had to focus my time on the case and home exams and the hand-ins in Material Handling and Production flow.» (other reason)

Examination reports

This section deals with the examination reports. First, questions on the examination reports in general are stated, followed by questions for each examination report.

15. In comparison to an exam at the end of the course, how well are the examination reports in general for achieving the course objectives?

42 svarande

very poor»1 2%
rather poor»4 9%
neutral»7 16%
rather good»21 50%
very good»9 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

- The scoring was really unfair! Some students had answers from last year so they knew exactly what to write and get high scores. » (very poor)
- The restriction of words made the task extremely difficult and time consuming. There were some things that Had to be in the report, and with the limited amount of words it felt almost impossible.» (rather poor)
- Hard to know what is important to include. Clearer reading instructions would have been preferable.» (rather poor)
- I don"t believe that the reports gave me the opportunity to show that i got a deeper understanding for the topic as i could have shown on an ordinary exam with less limitation in words. To broad questions in the first report made it almost impossible to answer every thing in a clear way. » (rather poor)
- I think that the report gudielines should be clearer, what is expected of us.» (rather poor)
- Seems like we are doing the same things over and over again in the SCM programme.» (neutral)
- Keeps one up to pace and makes the course more manageable » (very good)
- Got more knowledge by this type of examination.» (very good)
- It is better to work on three different home exam instead of a big one in the end for me. It helped me to keep on track of what has been introduced in the lecture and get more motivation to attending the lecture too. » (very good)

16. Was it beneficial for your learning that you needed to work together with different partners?*

42 svarande

not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner»13 30%
neutral»9 21%
yes - working with different partners increased my learning»20 47%

Genomsnitt: 2.16

- It become very hard to arrange meetings with new persons all the time and with other courses involving grou projects it all messed up» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- Difficult to coordinate working in different groups in this course as well as in other courses» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- It took some time to find different partners to work with, which felt a bit useless.» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- Just created time management problems since we have parallel coursen with other groups as well. The reports would have been better if it would have been easier for us to plan when to meet.» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- It was difficult to change partner and work differently each time - ESPECIALLY SINCE WE DIDNT GET FEEDBACK TO KNOW WHICH WAY AND LAYOUT IS GOOD/BAD» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- This was just annoying - we are in the second year of our masters (fifth year of university studies) and we know how to work with others and new groups - this was just idiocy trying to get schedules to match, especially concerning the mixture of people from different classes.» (not at all - better to work alone or with the same partner)
- Prefer to work with a partner or in a team, however, constant change of the pairs felt a bit whimsy. (for me it was extra difficult because I read another course with similar structure and it all became quite confusing quite fast i.e. 10+ different teammates in one period was a bit to much)» (neutral)
- It probably did not have an effect on my learning. I think most people just divided the questions and answered them by them selves. But it is always interresting to see other peoples perspective even if they most of the time were similar. » (neutral)
- A better output can be obtained from two different points of view.» (yes - working with different partners increased my learning)
- It is good to work with people with different backgrounds and people that you didn"t know before because that is how is going to be at work.» (yes - working with different partners increased my learning)
- Good solution you implemented for report 2 and 3 where we could find partners on the homepage!» (yes - working with different partners increased my learning)
- And I made friend inside the class too» (yes - working with different partners increased my learning)

17. How was the workload for the examination reports in general?

42 svarande

by far too little»0 0%
too little»0 0%
okay»35 83%
too much»7 16%
by far too much»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- Very time consuming, and with the hand-out and hand-in deadlines so narrow, it made it so difficult to find the time to finish and hand in a good report. It would be better to give more time to finish the reports, for example hand out all reports in the beginning. Especially when the hand out of one report was delayed, it put me in a very difficult situation when managing two courses, since my planning schedule already was very tight.» (too much)
- I don"t have enough time for last examination report bacause of other examinations» (too much)
- I worked on home exam by myself, thus the workload is too much for one person when you can"t find a partner. » (too much)

18. How well did the administration, e.g. handouts, handins, etc work?

42 svarande

very poor»0 0%
rather poor»5 11%
neutral»8 19%
rather good»20 47%
very good»9 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

- Results from the home exams took to long time » (rather poor)
- except the fact that we were not given any feedback, hard to know if you are in the right direction or not...» (rather good)
- Well, it would have been nice to get report 1 back before handin of the secound and so on... But a suggested "this was the right answers" was good.» (rather good)
- Some articles and home exams were uploaded late on the course homepage.» (rather good)

19. Examination report 1 - Env. tools and concepts, calculation methodology

Matrisfråga

- More frustrating than difficult, one did not get the necessary space to express ones" expertice in the area. i.e. the quota words/questions was off»
- Well, as I mentioned before. It was to many questions to answer in so few words. It was also rather unclear what was expected on the report, which affected our grade. According to the solution the answers was to simple, I learned that CO2 affected the greenhouse gases when I was 13 years old. Is that really advanced level answer?»
- Too much to read!»
- I would like to see a 15 points exam in the hand out, I always wonder myself what is in there than is not in my report»
- Grading was unfair»

How relevant was the examination report for achieving the goals?
41 svarande

little»1 2%
neutral»22 53%
much»18 43%

Genomsnitt: 2.41

How was the workload compared to the relevance (maximum points given) of the examination report?
41 svarande

little»1 2%
neutral»28 68%
much»12 29%

Genomsnitt: 2.26

How difficult was the examination report?
41 svarande

little»6 14%
neutral»25 60%
much»10 24%

Genomsnitt: 2.09

20. Examination report 2 - Env. impacts and external effects, technical solutions/transport modes

Matrisfråga

- Better than the first one, still hard to answer due to the limitation in words. »
- I would like to see a 15 points exam in the hand out, I always wonder myself what is in there than is not in my report»

How relevant was the examination report for achieving the goals?
41 svarande

little»2 4%
neutral»25 60%
much»14 34%

Genomsnitt: 2.29

How was the workload compared to the relevance (maximum points given) of the examination report?
41 svarande

little»0 0%
neutral»30 73%
much»11 26%

Genomsnitt: 2.26

How difficult was the examination report?
40 svarande

little»2 5%
neutral»29 72%
much»9 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.17

21. Examination report 3 - Freight transport in cities, infrastructure, policy measures and economic means of control

Matrisfråga

- Well, good task but since it is still not corrected it is hard to get the entire picture of the task, and difficult to know what you expected of us.»
- I would like to see a 15 points exam in the hand out, I always wonder myself what is in there than is not in my report»

How relevant was the examination report for achieving the goals?
41 svarande

little»2 4%
neutral»21 51%
much»18 43%

Genomsnitt: 2.39

How was the workload compared to the relevance (maximum points given) of the examination report?
40 svarande

little»1 2%
neutral»33 82%
much»6 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.12

How difficult was the examination report?
40 svarande

little»2 5%
neutral»28 70%
much»10 25%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

22. What do you think was the best with the examination reports?

- Gives more time than an exam to test our skills.»
- That we could read articles.»
- Trying to put them in a real case context. e.g "You are working for a company" "You"ve being hired as consultant"»
- The possibility to discuss what is most relevent with your case partner»
- the third»
- to level out the workload»
- The best part was to be able to analyse what we have learn and see how well we understood the topic»
- Deeper knowledge than simple examination questions in an exam»
- Gives a broader knowledge than a exam in the end would have done.»
- looking up external references and giving our own reflections»
- Good to practice in writing reports with few words and you read all the course litterature. »
- It"s good that you had a relevant maximum number of words!»
- Using literature and write your own view, promotes own vision»
- Teamwork and topic»
- examination report 2»
- the self-study gained after the whole process of the examination»
- To use the knowledge gained in relation with the lectures and literature source given at the time. More active learning.»
- Continuous work in the course, using the knowledge just received during classes of last 2 weeks.»
- N/A»
- Good way to lern, but to easy »
- They gave you the oppurtunity to actually find the relevant information instead as with exam when you need to try to remember everything because you don"t know what will be on the exam»
- Focus on important part of course»
- It shares the burden of study in the end and helps the student to keep on track of the course. »
- That we had plenty of time, which we needed. And that there were recomended articles.»
- I liked working with others, and also »

23. What do you think was the worst with the examination reports?

- The limited amount of time and words. Either extend the amount of words or the given time. Or both.»
- That we couldn"t mention all the knowledge gained.»
- A bit to wide qeustions sometimes»
- Limited amount of words.»
- That it is very difficult to understand the grading of the reports, it seems very ambigious»
- the second one»
- no feedback»
- The delay with the feedback,because the uncertainty factor.»
- the word limit, took time to find the articles, which sometimes weren"t there. Got better towards the end of the course though!»
- The importance of the number of words»
- word limit»
- To few years and to narrow perspective in the assesment process»
- It was not easy to find the reading material regarding to the first handin + It was very much to read for the first one. »
- Limited number of words»
- The correction. When a task is rather open the correction should be too. But what we were expected to answer was so narrow.»
- exam. report 1»
- It was not so clear the output required. I mean, one real case was presented, but the questions to answer were sometimes general and sometimes seemed to be different to the analyzed case. With a limit of used words, itr is difficult to answer specifically to the case and also answer the general questions made.»
- To some extent difficult to know what is awarded with points.»
- to little reflections was needed»
- That there was little feedback on your results. The amount of points only tells you if you did good or bad in general. You didn"t know what you missed if you didn"t get 15 points and what was the most important parts.»
- Difgicult to know what to write what was important»
- It is too much workload for those who can"t find a partner.»
- It would be great if we could use some more words. It feelt to compact sometimes (eg. when supposed to list alternative fuels, almost nothing could be said about theise fuels). I would also have liked feedback earlyer.»
- It was a bit confusing with the goals of each paper along with the guidelines. It would be nice to have one clear set of guidelines instead of 1 overall one, and one for each report. »

Case study

This section deals with the case study work.

24. How relevant was the case study for achieving the course goals?

42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»0 0%
neutral»9 21%
much»23 54%
very much»10 23%

Genomsnitt: 4.02

- Good way of learning» (much)

25. How was the workload for the case study?

42 svarande

very little»0 0%
little»1 2%
neutral»14 33%
much»19 45%
very much»8 19%

Genomsnitt: 3.8

- Maybe we choosed a to long tranport chain..» (much)
- Little in the beginning, alot in the end» (much)
- The calculations were very time consuming.» (very much)
- The course material helped the case study a lot and clearly guide how to do the calculation step by step.» (very much)

26. How well did the administration, e.g. guidance, handins, etc work?

42 svarande

very poor»1 2%
poor»1 2%
neutral»9 21%
good»21 50%
very good»10 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- The description of what to include in the different hand-ins was very puzzling and could hence have been clearer.» (neutral)
- Special thanks to Sönke Behrends that he replied to my group"s inquiry really fast and details thus we felt we are supported.» (very good)

27. What do you think was the best with the case study?

- It gave hands-on experience when calculating and appreciating the emissions from a transport.»
- Get an overview of the whole course and its application.»
- It really helped to clarify the concepts learned when there were applied into a more realistic case.»
- That it gives an insight in the difficulty of assesing impact in the enviroment»
- the first part, regarding the LCA»
- by having different "small" deadlines, you level out the workload...»
- It gives you a good idea of the complexity of the topic»
- Interesting to follow a whole chain of transportation. »
- working with groups and getting a practical exposure»
- Applying tools in a real case was best. »
- The part 2, calculation methods learning»
- The awareness of the environmental impact of transportation»
- To go into more depth with calculations and see the actual environmental impact of different transport chains.»
- Force students to study a real case. Research done in my group included calling to the source of the transported product, which was very valuable.»
- The calculations since it put actual numbers on the emissions.»
- Learning LCA»
- It helped me to understand the course a lot by doing the case study even through it was a big difficult at the beginning. »
- good guidance»
- It was interesting to work in groups and also analyze the impact of goods used daily»

28. What do you think was the worst with the case study?

- Very time consuming.»
- Lack of data.»
- N/A»
- the last part, too long»
- since the hand-ins was not graded people dident finish the part, which were very annoying when we were supposed to do a opposition, and had to do it on practically nothing. maybe you dont have to grade the hand-ins, but at least set a demand on a "pass", so that people do what is supposed to be done. »
- The feedback system could be better, not only from student but for teachers also»
- Strange division between parts and the ability to change afterwords.»
- nothing»
- Finding a case (Company) was not to easy. »
- Part 3, not very clear»
- Guiding, I think that we should get more feedback on the hand-ins. Also during the presenation Maria said nothing, we had to point out to two groups that their data seemed totally wrong with NMVOC skyhigh and low SOx and NOx even though they had sea transportation 95 % of the way.»
- part 2»
- It was ok.»
- Nothing, it was good all over.»
- To extended task. Much time effort was requierd»
- The calculation of positioning should be more elaborated because a lot of classmates had no idea what that is when we asked them. »
- -»
- I think we couldve included more impacts, and covered all the negative externatlites, or at least added accidents»

Summarizing questions

29. What is your general impression of the course?

42 svarande

Poor»4 9%
Fair»1 2%
Adequate»10 23%
Good»26 61%
Excellent»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- From a Supply Chain Managment master this course was 80%-90% repete of previous courses.» (Poor)
- I dint learn anything new. Everything has been coverd of earlier courses. » (Poor)
- To easy, to much overlapping from previous courses» (Fair)
- Gave good tools to use when understanding and calculating the emissions from a transport, and understanding that it is difficult to reduce the amount of emissions without increasing them in another end of the supply chain.» (Good)
- I like and involved in the course a lot compare to other course I had taken.» (Excellent)

30. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The lectures were overall good.»
- The case study.»
- examination reports. but not that you have to change partner all the time»
- Guest lectures and home examinations»
- The case»
- less work on the final report»
- Magnus Blinge and examination reports»
- The examination reports»
- Case study»
- jonas oldmarks, sönke and blinges lectures and the structure of the home exam and case»
- Mandatory guest lectures. Or in some way make sure more people will attend.»
- case study and exam reports»
- Home exam reports»
- More advanced for SCM students. Much basic information for us considering transportation.»
- the examination method»
- The case study, the guest lectures, the home examinations»
- teh case study»
- Case study»
- Home reports, but making clear the relation between the presented specific case and the general questions asked to answer on it.»
- The case study»
- LCA»
- Home exam and case study »
- Home exams, case.»
- Case study»

31. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Let SK give a lecture with a wider scope.»
- N/A»
- Exclude the lecture about technical aspects in greenhouse effects. It was too technical.»
- less guest lecture and more theory»
- Give some feedback and a pass demand on every case hand-in (that everything that should be included, actually is included)»
- it was very difficult and time consuming to find the articles. It would have been better if they were all able to buy in a compentium.»
- Some guess lecturers»
- Number of irrelevant guest lectures»
- the way guest lectures are performed, there was to much repetition of information and often a quite dull speed. So more precise info from the course to the guest lectures and then a more jaw-dropping performance»
- word limit»
- Structure of Case study part 3»
- The examination report guidelines and more flexible correction»
- The case study should be revised by the supervisor in detail after the last hand in, not only by the opponent team.»
- the examination reports can be done with the same partner. Since there are particpants from different programs it was hard to arrange group meetings and the collaboration doesn"t become that good. Better to get to know one member so that the work will improve instead.»
- reduce one examination report»
- It is ok.»
- Use a course book.»
- Higher level on the course. »
- Some lectures were not good..»
- The guidelines for the exam reports»

32. Can you recommend others to attend this course?

42 svarande

Yes»33 78%
No»2 4%
no opinion»7 16%

Genomsnitt: 1.38

- In the end, there are many topics handled and there is a big chance that the student will find something if not all topics interesting and learn a lot.» (Yes)
- It totally addressed sustainability in the SCM perspective.» (Yes)
- Students who have not taken the SCM master will get a good basic understanding of transports » (Yes)
- Because is a very interesting and relevant subject and people usually don"t pay attention to the real impact on transportation systems» (Yes)
- Important aspect of transportation» (Yes)
- Covered a large field and gives alot food for thought» (Yes)
- Interesting course which includes a relevant and important topic.» (Yes)
- Intersting topic, very important» (Yes)
- Only for people outside the SCM programme.» (Yes)
- I learnt a lot from this course thus I will recommend it to others.» (Yes)
- But the people from M might have taken a little too similar course the third year.» (Yes)

33. Additional comments

- It was a good experience for me since I learn many thing I didn"t know before»
- reply code: 0027004064»
- my personal reply code: 0327003411 »
- A good course, maybe too much material for such a short study period, and difficult to get very high grades.»
- 5927003658»
- case study guidance could be more flexible instead of scheduled cause we found out the question when we were working on the project. It is hard to move forward without solving the question in mind or it was crucial step in the calculation thus we would like the instance help. Moreover, guidance is more important in the end of the case study there isn"t any schedule one. »
- Overall, it was an interesting course, fair workload, and I learned a good amount»

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från