Visa resultat

Chalmers Masters Programme Evaluation 2012

Masters Programme

1. Architecture and Civil Engineering

Architecture»		30		13%
Architecture and Engineering»		8		3%
Design and Construction Project Management»		31		14%
Design for Sustainable Development»		26		12%
Geo and Water Engineering»		17		7%
Interior Architecture»		0		0%
Sound and Vibration»		15		6%
Structural Engineering and Building Performance Design»		60		27%
Architecture and Urban Design»		7		3%
Infrastructure and Enviromental Engineering»		21		9%

Genomsnitt: 5.51

2. Bioscience, Molecular science and Chemical Engineering

Bioinformatics and System Biology»		6		5%
Biotechnology»		35		33%
Chemistry and Bioscience»		5		4%
Innovative and Sustainable Chemical Engineering»		37		35%
Materials Chemistry and Nanotechnology»		21		20%

Genomsnitt: 3.3

3. Computer Science, Information Technology and Electrical Engineering

Biomedical Engineering»		29		10%
Communication Engineering»		24		8%
Computer Science: Algorithms, Languages and Logic»		46		16%
Integrated Electronic System Design»		6		2%
Interaction Design»		33		11%
Networks and Distributed Systems»		22		7%
Secure and Dependable Computer systems»		8		2%
Software Engineering and Technology»		40		14%
Intelligent Systems Design»		0		0%
Computer systems and Networks»		22		7%
Electric Power Engineering»		18		6%
Embedded Electronics System Design»		11		3%
Wireless,Photonics and Space Engineering»		24		8%

Genomsnitt: 6.26

4. Engineering for Sustainable Development

Electric Power Engineering»		17		21%
Environmental Measurements and Assessments»		4		5%
Industrial Ecology - For a Sustainable Society»		13		16%
Sustainable Energy Systems»		36		45%
Technology, Society and the Enviroment»		10		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.22

5. Management of Innovation and Technology

Business Design»		18		11%
International Project Management»		13		7%
Management of Economis and Innovation»		43		26%
Nordic Master in Maritime Management»		10		6%
Quality and Operations Management»		34		20%
Supply Chain Management»		28		17%
Entrepreneurship and Business Design»		17		10%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

6. Mechanical, Automation, and Industrial Design Engineering

Advanced Engineering Materials»		9		4%
Automotive Engineering»		21		9%
Industrial Design Engineering»		22		10%
Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering»		21		9%
Product Development»		36		16%
Production Engineering»		23		10%
Solid and Fluid Mechanics»		9		4%
Systems, Control and Mechatronics»		41		18%
Applied Mechanics»		23		10%
Materials Engineering»		11		5%

Genomsnitt: 5.68

7. Microtechnology and Nano Science

Materials and Nanotechnology»		8		32%
Microtechnology»		5		20%
Nanoscale Science and Technology»		8		32%
Wireless and Photonic Engineering»		4		16%

Genomsnitt: 2.32

8. Physics, Space Science and Mathematics

Applied Physics»		18		18%
Complex Adaptive Systems»		21		21%
Engineering Mathematics and Computational Sciences»		20		20%
Fundamental Physics»		11		11%
Nuclear Engineering»		15		15%
Radio and Space Science»		5		5%
Physics and Astronomy»		3		3%
Nanotechnology»		5		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.36

Background and Introduction

9. How satisfied are you with the Masters programme so far?

Not at all»		12		1%
Not so satisfied»		61		5%
Neither/Nor»		103		8%
Satisfied»		608		52%
Very satisfied»		367		31%
No opinion»		6		0%

Genomsnitt: 4.1

10. What year did you start the programme?

2007»		21		1%
2008»		20		1%
2009»		81		6%
2010»		512		44%
2011»		525		45%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

11. Where did you study for your Bachelor degree?

Sweden - Chalmers»		731		63%
Sweden - another university»		44		3%
University outside Sweden»		346		29%
Other»		36		3%

Genomsnitt: 1.72

12. Are you

Female»		344		30%
Male»		802		69%

Genomsnitt: 1.7

13. How satisfied are you with the information (before applying) about the Masters programme (MP)?

1158 svarande

Not at all»		26		2%
Not so satisfied»		139		11%
Neither/Nor»		214		18%
Satisfied»		571		49%
Very satisfied»		194		16%
No opinion»		15		1%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

14. From where did you get the most important information about the programme?

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

The web»		739		63%
Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers»		390		33%
Presentation/Information within Chalmers»		268		23%
Presentations/information outside Chalmers»		20		1%
Written information (not web)»		81		6%
Friends»		461		39%
Other sources (please comment)»		33		2%

- I studied computer science at GU, which has many courses in common with the chalmers computer science programme, so I had an idea of what it was.» (The web, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- Profesors, lecturers, swedish students.» (The web, Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Friends)
- talked directly to master coordinators» (Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Written information (not web), Other sources (please comment))
- studievägledare» (Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- i was an erasmus student at chalmers» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- People who were already taking the same Master» (Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- LÄnken till mål fungerar ej...» (The web)
- K-g Olsson, head of architecture & engineering» (Other sources (please comment))
- Talked to some master coordinators, but I think there is alot of improvements needed» (The web, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- the other Students» (The web, Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Friends)
- By asking the master coordinator.» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- Discussion with the master coordinators.» (The web, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- Company representants said it was good» (Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- Erasmus Mundus Master Programme, therefore from the specific website of that programme!» (Other sources (please comment))
- If I did not have friends that had taken the program I would not have gone for it because I think the presentation of the program was really unispiering.» (The web, Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Friends)
- Research Papers» (The web, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- E-mail conversation with the administrator of the program.» (Other sources (please comment))
- Teachers.» (Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Other sources (please comment))
- It was a complicated story.» (Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers)
- I think the S2 presentation of the masterprogrammes were not so good. It was too little focus on what you would learn in the master programme, and to much on how everyone should follow their dreams (though Petra Mede was cool, I won"t deny that).» (Friends)
- From a Professor in Austria» (The web, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- I found the program on mastersportal.eu» (The web)
- K-G Olsson, programansvarig Arkitektur och Teknik» (The web, Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Other sources (please comment))
- My former supervisor where I did my bachelors.» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- older students that take the same programme.» (Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- Read about the program on Chalmers website. It then took me about 7 calls to the administration, master program coordinators and God knows who to find out what courses I had to take in order to apply - none, in the end, since I had a guaranteed place due to my Bachelor in Design Engineering. Funny how no one could tell me that right away? After 5 years, my general opinion of Chalmers" administrative organisation is that is it completely useless. » (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- Students who were already enrolled in the programme» (Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- speaking with former and current students on the phone. There should be appointed students to speak with any applicant that has questions» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- Since i was naieve enough to think that I cannot contact people "high up" such as the master co-ordinator, I resigned myself to believeing that the information on the program webpage would be the most I can get and I applied for the program with blind faith. This was my fault in a way and hence I would not completely blame the program for it. However, the information on the program home page can be made a bit more informative. Such as how the course homepage on the student portal for Nanptechnology looks these days. It seems to have a map with all the different paths that can be taken and things like that. My program had a map of sorts. But not the kind that is now on the Nanotechnology Program page which is pretty clear. In addition to this, the fact that the program co-ordinators or master co-ordinators can be contacted and that they are available for discussion should be emphasised since people from some cultures find it difficult to raise questions to perceived superiors. Also, information on the different groups at MC2 could be made available as well. People will benefit from it since it helps them decide earlier on what kind of courses they can take in order to make a definite career path and not just take random courses ending up in an unfocussed situation. p.s. Just a point of note. The webpage - http://www.chalmers.se/en/sections/education/masterprogrammes mentioned below does not work. The page displays a 404 error.» (Other sources (please comment))
- other stdents» (Friends)
- But the information from the teachers could have been more structured!! » (Presentation by Master Coordinators and teachers, Friends)
- Took one year off before the master, to narrow it down I used "presentations/information within Chalmers" but for the final decision I used "the Web" and "friends".» (The web, Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Friends)
- Scholarship» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- I got a contact with one of the PhD students at Sound & Vibration and she offered me to come there and ask question, drink coffee and see the institution.» (The web, Presentation/Information within Chalmers, Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- Other master students.» (Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- A friend who studied his master at chalmers explained to me the differences of the masters program For industriall engineering and managment so that could be something to add the differences between them» (Friends, Other sources (please comment))
- www.studyinsweden.com» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- Studievägledare på Chalmers.» (The web, Other sources (please comment))
- Very little relevant information provided by Chalmers... To get a honest and profound understanding of the quality and profile of the programme you absolutely need friends to discuss with.» (Friends)
- Going from civil engineering, the information flow at this master´,s programme has been extremely bad. Noone seem to know anything, nothing follows the schedule (if there is any) and the web page is hard to use (or it is hard to find the right information)» (Friends)
- no other source information» (The web)
- I dont understand how hard it can be to have a intoductioncourse for those hwo are interested,probably the younger persons get this naturally but as an older person with no connections it has been really hard to get the info one need.» (Other sources (please comment))
- Email contact with the course director.» (The web, Other sources (please comment))

Your own effort

15. How many hours per week have you spent studying at this programme?

1155 svarande

Less than 30 hours/week»		80		6%
Between 30-40 hours/week»		363		31%
Between 40-50 hours/week»		461		39%
Between 50-60 hours/week»		182		15%
More than 60 hours/week»		69		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.82 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.82

Goals and goal fulfilment

16. Have you seen the goals of the Masters programme (before now)?

Yes (more than 5 times)»		74		6%
Yes (between 2 and 5 times)»		382		33%
Yes (once)»		349		30%
No»		250		21%
No opinion»		102		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.93

17. How understandable are the programme goals?

The goals are difficult to understand»		15		1%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		209		18%
The goals are clear enough»		490		42%
The goals are very clear»		68		5%
No opinion»		360		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

18. Do you think the goals are reasonable for a master degree?

No, the goals are set too low»		10		0%
No, the goals are a bit too low»		61		5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		685		59%
No, the goals are a bit high»		11		0%
No, the goals are set far too high»		1		0%
No opinion»		374		32%

Genomsnitt: 3.92

19. Do you think the goals are fulfilled within the programme?

No, not at all»		13		1%
To some extent»		176		15%
Almost»		288		25%
Yes, definitely»		307		26%
No opinion»		354		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

Programme layout/structure/design

20. How satisfied are you with the programme curriculum?

Not at all»		17		1%
Not so satisfied»		103		8%
Neither/Nor»		174		15%
Satisfied»		648		56%
Very satisfied»		161		13%
No opinion»		48		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

21. Is there any subject/course that you would like to add into the programme?

Yes»		421		37%
No»		310		27%
No opinion»		401		35%

Genomsnitt: 1.98

- More choices of programming languages.» (?)
- more practical work for manufacturing engineers. preperation of machine tools etc.» (?)
- Network on chip» (?)
- I would like to regret some of my own selected courses.» (?)
- more physcology cours for better understand how people work and to better manage a change for employyes or orgnaisational change » (?)
- Perhaps more courses like Design Tools could be available.» (?)
- failure analasys» (Yes)
- Make more biochemistry/molecular biology courses alternative compulsory, or spread the ones that are more over the year» (Yes)
- Yes, a course in software engineering would be good to have. I suspect it is sought after in the industry.» (Yes)
- Some courses that we can choose in year 2 requires courses that we don"t have the opportunity to follow during our first year. It would have been good to be informed earlier about the 2:nd years courses and have the required courses as selectables during year 1.» (Yes)
- An advanced course in Many body theory (condensed matter)» (Yes)
- Project Management» (Yes)
- - way more technical oriented courses. » (Yes)
- More geotechnical courses and rock courses, Decrease amount of water courses would be better.» (Yes)
- Idea evaluation!» (Yes)
- More elective courses for specialisation. Insurance law, surveying etc» (Yes)
- Usabillity and some more practical courses» (Yes)
- MKB» (Yes)
- More geotechinics, geology and infrastructure and maybe more hands on environmental courses » (Yes)
- More algorithms courses. Advanced machine learning. Advanced type theory.» (Yes)
- Software architecture focused on applications and not hardware systems» (Yes)
- Something more for the Systems track» (Yes)
- Biological Physics» (Yes)
- Theoretical Computer Science (Logics, Cryptography, Algorithms)» (Yes)
- Procurment Risk analysis» (Yes)
- Make the course "Sustainable Energy Future" mandatory instead of optional.» (Yes)
- Individual work. Everything is in groups. I am doing my thesis myself, and I realise how much we could learn from not being in groups all the time. Solid 3D CAD. We learn Alias, and this is supposed to be sufficient. For a job application, if they require good skills in Solid Works for instance,. Could I state that I have that? Or that it is a piece of cake for me to learn that, because I know Alias? I would like to see courses in Adobe"s software as well. Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash for instance. There was a course in Photoshop, but it was in my opinion not qualified to be a Master"s course. Flash is good to be able to create interactive interfaces to test usability. But I never learned or used Flash. » (Yes)
- Fatigue» (Yes)
- To few courses aimed at advanced optics.» (Yes)
- more lectures, theoretical background» (Yes)
- More specialized design courses» (Yes)
- The workshops and theoretical content around Graphical User Interfaces is very weak. The Master is too oriented to developers, but in general developers don´,t want to programma, they wanna get more skills around dealing with GUIs. A course related to the automotive industry interfaces development.» (Yes)
- A course in visual design or sketching, something that helps student to communicate ideas when developing products.» (Yes)
- Some course in mechatronics, but perhaps more suitable on bachelor level teknisk design» (Yes)
- For physics I would like to see more programming courses as many industry related work include software prgramin and knowledge» (Yes)
- It would be valueable to have one mandatory course in project management and leadership since many positions we apply for after graduating wants to see this kind of knowledge in our resumé.» (Yes)
- I"d like to have had some project management course.» (Yes)
- In the line of a theoretical QFT education it would have been good with some material on renormalization. A short course ? A crash course on some mathematical background for quantum theory and differential geometry not included in the bachelor years. i.e representation theory and differential- and Riemannian geometry» (Yes)
- Catalysis course which does not collide with cfd.» (Yes)
- More concrete courses, some subjects tend to be fuzzy even after completed course.» (Yes)
- The changes made after i started are great, but sadly i cant take those courses now.» (Yes)
- ERP systems, IT in logistics, to have a first experience in SAP, often required by companies for internhsips» (Yes)
- More options for project management and business courses» (Yes)
- Excel-course Organizational behavior » (Yes)
- Yacht materials» (Yes)
- Learning the required software in a more structured way» (Yes)
- Ecodesign» (Yes)
- a more applied version of the corrosion course given by the chemistry section. their course are based only on theory and has no applications really. i would like to see more on alloying for corrosion protection, evaluating corrosion and compressing the theory.» (Yes)
- Sustainable energy futures instead of environmental system analysis as compulsory. Less compulsory courses, and more semi-compulsory courses.» (Yes)
- More advanced mathematical engineering courses» (Yes)
- Strategy and corporate finance» (Yes)
- More focus/an extra course on sales» (Yes)
- Some kind of project solving course tightly connected to the industry.» (Yes)
- Advanced cryptography» (Yes)
- More financial mathematics» (Yes)
- As for now there"s two concrete courses which is good. But it would be nice to have the option to also take further courses in steel and timber. » (Yes)
- Railroad engineering» (Yes)
- if possible to add (even) more bio-nano related subjects» (Yes)
- Sustainable development, environmental impact assessment» (Yes)
- some software letures that we didn"t have in our collage in home country, but every student here grasped. E.g. Catia V5, InDesign, Flash,etc.» (Yes)
- Better introduction in the beginning, letting one know what to expect » (Yes)
- 1) I recommend to introduce Verilog HDL and TCL scripting in DAT091 and DAT110 courses respectively.» (Yes)
- Eco-design and a course in Cost calculations for a product.» (Yes)
- Fire protection as a step into fire engineering » (Yes)
- Biomechanics» (Yes)
- Machine learning» (Yes)
- I think, it would be really useful to relate this program with a practical approach. maybe, some practices with the industry or at least project related with real scenarios.» (Yes)
- Computer Arithmetic and algorithms» (Yes)
- An advanced course in wind power modelling and grid integration (in contrast to ENM095 - Sustainable power production and transportation, which is way too basic to be an "advanced level" course in this master program). For those who are interested it would also be interesting to have a course dealing with advanced issues around hybrid electric vehicles (ENM095 is very basic also in this area). Furthermore it would be interesting to have a course dealing more specifically with the challenges of the electric grid of tomorrow, i.e., the development of complex power systems, microgrids and smart grids and how they all interact.» (Yes)
- Applied CFD and applied FEM, training in several common simulation tools is needed.» (Yes)
- some more subjects to electable!» (Yes)
- HVDC courses » (Yes)
- Leadership courses.» (Yes)
- More geotechnins and better road and railway courses, the water courses are the only that keep up to standard.» (Yes)
- Maybe som more electronics and also maybe the ELectric Drives 1 course.» (Yes)
- Project Management as mandatory» (Yes)
- For people having a Chemistry background it should be good to take "Fasta tillståndets fysik" a course I felt I needed in this field but that we"re not able to take during our bachelor» (Yes)
- More about people and interactions between people» (Yes)
- decision making or something about psychology» (Yes)
- in the ideal world the geo and water program are two programs. Because me, don"t really care about the water...still i have to waste my energy on this because its a mess to take courses at GU.» (Yes)
- More relation to working life. More courses and more HOMEWORK!» (Yes)
- There are too few courses to choose from. During one semester you should take four courses and there are four courses to "choose" from. I would like more courses on traffic and road and railway engineering.» (Yes)
- More digital design!» (Yes)
- Conceptual design of building structures. Could be in the context of bridgedesign, high-rises/shyscrapers, light-weight roofs or whatever. Also, the effect of climate on a larger scale is interesting: Aerodynamics of buildings, Urban heat island-effect and so on.» (Yes)
- A course in Linux and its features. Probably as an optional course. I"ve been using it for two years and think that more people should use it. If there was a course in Linux more people would probably be intrested.» (Yes)
- Engineering history Most work is done analysing existing strucutres, how about more structural design?» (Yes)
- When I have started to look for jobs I have seen that a lot of companies requires software knowledge that have not really been used in the Education. In my case I have applied for jobs within Ergonomics and HMI. The software requirements have been Delmia V5 (Ergonomics) and Flash (HMI). None of these softwares are available in courses at Chalmers as far as I know, or at least not to the extent that I would have liked.» (Yes)
- Design Communication. How to sell your ideas or designs» (Yes)
- Courses dealing with structural analysis (more courses in ex. FEM, dynamics, material mechanics etc) Courses dealing with design of larger and more complex structures (such as part of a building or bridge) instead of only structural elements.» (Yes)
- Electric engineering courses» (Yes)
- some courses from technology management and economics (quality and operations management)» (Yes)
- I am interested in geotechnical engineering and I think that there are too few courses in this subject.» (Yes)
- More course about Renewable energy and Hybrid Vehicles» (Yes)
- Some more materials course. » (Yes)
- basic fluid mechanics fundamentals of FEM» (Yes)
- I think that all the courses could be more innovative. It feels like the courses have had the same structure as they have had for the last couple of years and that is not especially inspiering. » (Yes)
- software (!) archictecture. design patterns m.m.» (Yes)
- A course on advanced web technology could be interesting. Maybe also a course in machine-level programming (as far as I know it"s only given in the bachelor in Swedish). The dependability course was very good, but highly focused on hardware issues. A similar course more geared towards high-availability and software issues could be interesting (i.e. construction of data center infrastructure, configuration management and server availability).» (Yes)
- Some kind of internship or practice at a company» (Yes)
- Add more geological courses» (Yes)
- I think all the courses should be more innovative, a lot of the information seems very old and not as "fun" and exploring as it could be» (Yes)
- Microscopy» (Yes)
- Currently we are having courses like "Galaxies and observational cosmology". It would be better if we had separate courses on Galaxies and Observation cosmology. 7 weeks seem to be too short a time to study such a huge field of research.» (Yes)
- More Automation!» (Yes)
- Courses from the specialisation called mathematics at GU.» (Yes)
- Internships & prototyping (course with that focus)» (Yes)
- Slightly bigger focus on modeling social and economic systems.» (Yes)
- Offshore engineering» (Yes)
- Antenna engineering» (Yes)
- Conflict management and Negotiations (could be based on cases "played" by students)» (Yes)
- Invite some emeritus to come and talk about what they do now.» (Yes)
- More buisness reflects and linkage to industry/reality» (Yes)
- Information Retrieval Systems» (Yes)
- introduction to matlab especially for international students» (Yes)
- I would suggest many other more USEFUL subjects for the Master Software Engineering programme. For example, Design patterns, "the real Software Architecture", Enterprise Softwares, and so on...» (Yes)
- I would like to see more courses about programming design principles and such architectural courses, but that"s perhaps not suitable for SET, as I am under the impression that it should be more towards management than developer..» (Yes)
- Project courses, system thinking, relevant cases from the real world, connection in between the subjects and to architecture, a relevant and modern material course» (Yes)
- mechanical design (not as a large project)» (Yes)
- I think its awful that i could combine reading MMIC & introduction to communication engineering courses, since they overlapped. » (Yes)
- Some course on sound design for interaction designers» (Yes)
- Rigid body dynamics » (Yes)
- Business creation or such» (Yes)
- Something about safety for the second automotive year in period 1 and 2.» (Yes)
- Better financial module» (Yes)
- More building physics courses. Making it possible to study full-time within building performance design without having acoustic courses.» (Yes)
- Advanced Excel and presentation technique/retorics» (Yes)
- Perhaps more front end coding involved in the course, not only doing mockups but also build actual GUI"s for example. Could also introduce a follow-up to the Information Visualization course where the techniques learned in the current course are applied.» (Yes)
- Corporate finance» (Yes)
- An optional course which includes a more in depth view of Labview might be useful.» (Yes)
- Metallurgical processing» (Yes)
- Economy and management and Quality!! Maybe some from the I-masters! The programme lacks connection to engineering and future work(except for 1 course!)» (Yes)
- Maybe some more control theory» (Yes)
- More evening courses in computer software, art (such as Kroki-kursen) and on architectural theory (such as "Materiell Arkitekturteori"), and why keep the studio "Architecture for Extreme Environments" when it´,s always cancelled?» (Yes)
- Computer Graphics deals with programming for GPUs, which can be used for solving extremely parallel problems using CUDA, for example. If CUDA, or some other general purpose calculation language was to be added to that course, it would fit very well into CSALL.» (Yes)
- Group psychology (available for IPM students)» (Yes)
- It might be a good idea to expand the machine learning part of the programme, since it is a "big" topic in computer science today and is wanted by many businesses. Artificial Neural Networks (like in MPCAS I think), but taught by CSE professors might be a good start.» (Yes)
- More geotechnics and civi engineering» (Yes)
- It would be good to have a compulsory course on renewable energy systems as this is one important thing that comes in my mind when hearing "sustainable".» (Yes)
- I think it would be good to add some economics or project managment to one course. MAybe not a complete course but in combination.» (Yes)
- I would like to have more specified courses, I think there is only a few courses that really goes deep into different subjects, many is like in the bachelor degree.» (Yes)
- make more of the material coarses from mechanicak engineering mandatory selective so you can get a broader knowledge» (Yes)
- A human communication course» (Yes)
- There could be a couple of more technical courses related to design, like web languages or level design for games. They don"t necessarily have to be new courses but maybe embedded in already existing ones.» (Yes)
- Windpower engineering with both mechanical and electrical focus» (Yes)
- microwave measurement techniques» (Yes)
- software architechture for medium and larger projects» (Yes)
- Some non technical course, loke project managment, business administration etc.» (Yes)
- I think many of the courses are quite similar, they touch upon the same topics. More consideration should be put so that the content do not clash. Some general information are repeated a couple of times. » (Yes)
- More dynamics and less material mechanics although I know it is not really possible. But maybe the fluid dynamics could be something on it"s own.» (Yes)
- similar courses to tailored materials» (Yes)
- Offshore Construction» (Yes)
- More branding courses!» (Yes)
- Bridge Engineering» (Yes)
- Databases. Java» (Yes)
- Electrochemistry as I think it is very relevant to energy related materials.» (Yes)
- Research Methodology» (Yes)
- Image Guided Surgery Biomedical Sensors Practical term or internship at a company in Sweden.» (Yes)
- Education on ISOs (9001 etc)» (Yes)
- I like the new design with different tracks within the program that wasn"t there when I started.» (Yes)
- More Traffic Engineering related subjects that could be selected.» (Yes)
- Biomechanics» (Yes)
- legal, negotiation» (Yes)
- field trip to some industrial park and field trip to waste treatment plants, waste water treatment plants, power production plants, and so on» (Yes)
- Wider choice of courses, e.g. a course in bridge design would be great.» (Yes)
- more introduction course for programming languages like C,C++,Fortran and Matlab. We had a course in matlab at Chalmers but it was not enough for those who have not had at their home university.» (Yes)
- Building economi/material economi» (Yes)
- More discuss courses where your critical approach that you been learned earlier come to use» (Yes)
- I would like to have a course in ecology, or environmental science, not just how to evaluate the environment but deeper facts on how everything is connected together.» (Yes)
- Project management for engineers wasn"t included when I attended the programme but it is now which I think is very good.» (Yes)
- Hightech design vs lowtech design» (Yes)
- product design» (Yes)
- More emphasis and interaction with developing countries" policy makers or other stakeholders in order to have a better understanding of how the situation is. In other words to work in cooperation with some organizations like Engineers without borders, UN, etc.» (Yes)
- more traffic, road and railway engineering.» (Yes)
- More practical courses. For example a course that consists only on laboratory work, e.g. disassembling parts, etc.» (Yes)
- RF IC Design» (Yes)
- Courses about new technologies such as wind and solar power.» (Yes)
- It showed some courese on the web page before I applied and it appealed me, but unfortunely the course which is selected for 2nd-year student is canceled after I attened the programme... It"s really disappointed and frustrated to face that...» (Yes)
- project psychology» (Yes)
- I think it is against the idea of letting the student forming their own knowledge base and study route to force them to choose 8 out of 10 courses + a MTS. In general it would be nice to be able to open up for reading courses in a broader field, such as the advanced separation, industrial economy...» (Yes)
- More PLC programming, and more practical automation» (Yes)
- Some more in depth course on user studies» (Yes)
- Finance» (Yes)
- Interactive Design, Service Design» (Yes)
- Decision making and negotiation. More HR moral stuff. Also it would be good if you offered some kind of international master where ones gets the oppertunity to also lear an extra language.» (Yes)
- Solving indeterminate structures (N,Q,M)» (Yes)
- Methods in argumentation and negotiation » (Yes)
- More traffic planning courses. And more courses overall to choose from. » (Yes)
- Programming with C/C++» (Yes)
- Some course that take care of subjects like entrepreneurship.» (Yes)
- Make a case-based course mandatory such as Strategy creation and change.» (Yes)
- Advanced Heat Transfer » (Yes)
- eHealth should not be mandatory but elective. Instead it could be reasonable to put more attention on antenna engineering since more than one course involves knowledge about waves and antennas» (Yes)
- Something related to human-centered design in automotive engineering, electronic design again this field in particular.» (Yes)
- Vehicle dinamics» (Yes)
- windpower, solarpower and unconventional like tidal power» (Yes)
- Hardware verification and Description Logic in computer science» (Yes)
- micro processor programming» (Yes)
- Agile project management methods» (Yes)
- A machine learning course that isn"t a joke» (Yes)
- General management/leadership course - leadership strategies, power, behavior of people, psychological and sociological aspects etc.» (Yes)
- Programming for Interaction Design, Data visualization, Frontend technologies, Service Design, Real design courses (together with Valand, for instance)» (Yes)
- I would like some advanced courses, especially in LCA and EIA. (In my opinion the courses available at the moment are not advanced)» (Yes)
- Progammes name is Geo and Water, but it could be more geotechnics and more hydraulics courses available!» (Yes)
- there should be one course related to (power system protection)» (Yes)
- Marine insurance» (Yes)
- Marine engines as an elective course» (Yes)
- More commercial software training. Theory is vital but we get essentially no knowledge in how a engineering work on daily basis.» (Yes)
- Data mining Robotics» (Yes)
- Some game Course, where the students learn about important milestone games. » (Yes)
- More AutoCad with Novapoint app.» (Yes)
- There are several courses I would like to be able to take, but the mandatory courses in the first semester hinders this ability. » (Yes)
- more MMIC, RFIC» (Yes)
- There could be some more courses(elective) on optimization or artificial intelligence. For instance, heuristics and constraint programming.» (Yes)
- More negotitation and strategy classes» (Yes)
- Space technologies regarding space systems and so on.» (Yes)
- Operation research Game theory Model thinking Mathematical modelling in complex systems Computational mathematics for complex systems» (Yes)
- I studied Food and Health and I think there could be more practical work. More field trips to factories etc » (Yes)
- more modelleing courses, e.g. CFD.» (Yes)
- more on functional programming and compilers» (Yes)
- more courses regarding traffic and road engineering» (Yes)
- Systems Biology. It is an optional course for us, but I think it is worth to be mandatory course.» (Yes)
- organisational psychology» (Yes)
- MS Project Tutoring» (Yes)
- CAD» (Yes)
- an electable course in computational fluid dynamics» (Yes)
- a more specialized technical course about HVDC and wind turbines ,current course is very general.» (Yes)
- Applied signal processing, with a focus on attaining skills needed to do the most common things.» (Yes)
- Industrial symbiosis» (Yes)
- optimization» (Yes)
- Prostheses and embedded systems as signal communication» (Yes)
- I think this programs needs more structure. It is not easy to see what courses are available to take, and whether they are profile or elective courses.» (Yes)
- Some courses/course related to networking might be helpful from the perspective of job market.» (Yes)
- It is completely puzzling why there is no usability course and no cognitive sciences course. Should be mandatory. » (Yes)
- Algorithm course» (Yes)
- I would like to have more freedom to choose courses, for example research courses are not needed for me.» (Yes)
- An advanced network infrastructure course of some sort, to continue where Routing and Switching technology left off.» (Yes)
- Usability Testing - practical course» (Yes)
- In general I"d like more projects, exams are not a good way of learning on masterslevel.» (Yes)
- More about Real Estate» (Yes)
- More finance» (Yes)
- Risk Management Cost Analysis» (Yes)
- Something about public transport and sustainable urban planning and design. LTH has two courses in these subjects which are very interesting. Something more on "Lagen om offentlig upphandling". It is overall too few elective courses to choose from.» (Yes)
- Corporate finance, eller att den ska in under de första 3 åren på I. Samt argumentation in the way Hjerpe taught us in the Seminar course» (Yes)
- bioinformation» (Yes)
- Basic algorithms and some classical numeric optimization. » (Yes)
- stem cell biology» (Yes)
- entrepreneurship or business course» (Yes)
- Bridge design» (Yes)
- A proper software architecture course would be nice» (Yes)
- change environmental system analysis by sustainable energy futures.... we lack a course we deeply understand about issues such as this... and , as of now, ESA is repetitive with LCA. » (Yes)
- more Linux specific development » (Yes)
- To specifically answer this question, I would have been really interested to see more courses on bionanosciences. There was only one course we had in my program which was Microtechnology (it is today, as you obviously know, not available in the roster of programs). I would have also liked to have had project work, which I do not deny that we had. We did, but I would have liked it to be more than literature study or a field report. It would have benefitted my class much much mroe to actually work on a physical project. An example I can give is ensuring that every student who goes to the program has an opportunity from Day 1 to work in the clean room and to get a Driver"s License. That way, when it comes to the 15 credit project course in the start of the second semester, they and the lab instructors will have the confidence to let the students work on a project in the clean room and of course under supervision but minimal supervision. This way, the students who finish the program will attain real world skills even before they complete their program and will find it much easier when it comes to thesis work. In my program I would have loved the program itself to have been a bit more focussed. I know that many of my friends found focus by working in specific research groups. Unfortunately, students like me don"t quite sit at the top of the class (although not at the bottom either) and hence are not really considered research group material. Throw in cultural or just plain mental difficulties behind asking, requesting, raising questions etc, and you have students who will easily lose out on the multitude of amazing opportunities that the university and in this case the specific program has to offer.» (Yes)
- More elective courses » (Yes)
- Software architecture, learn about how to build large systems» (Yes)
- Transmission design, suspension design» (Yes)
- verification courses needed» (Yes)
- Railway design, hydraulic works» (Yes)
- project planning, cost estimation» (Yes)
- generally many courses includes problems that could appear in reality and are well backed up by the theory, however there are few courses that includes any discussions/information how such problems are dealt with in reality.» (Yes)
- More legal stuff.» (Yes)
- CAD (not alias), interaction design» (Yes)
- More Network courses like Router and switching in cisco Academy environment » (Yes)
- more hands-on courses in terms of instrumentation and design» (Yes)
- More laborations!» (Yes)
- More courses - more choices. Could be interesting to have more courses taht involve discussions and seminares, like the water resources course in the first period year 1 which was a lot of analysing and discussion. This course needs t change structure though. But the goal of that course is to create thoughts and discussion. those kind of courses are very giving. » (Yes)
- More concrete situation with calculation, management decision support system. In some a bit more of hard science combined with soft ones (statistic, probability, microeconomics...)» (Yes)
- There are so many theoretical courses that are just the waste of time and our memory to memorize the 500 page books .Instead give practical courses useful for a career and related to new technologies.» (Yes)
- DAT280 - Parallel functional programming» (Yes)
- I was only able to study the "mandatory" courses since I switched from another program, due to that I didn"t have the opportunity to choose a course which focused on paper as a material, which would have been interesting.» (Yes)
- Sustainable Product Development, Cleaner Production» (Yes)
- Risk management in elective compulsory list» (Yes)
- For the Fluid part something I feel is missing is a course in how the fluid behaves. In the bachelors the course "strömningsmekanik" you can learn the basics, and then in the masters program you can learn how to calculate on it using numerical methods. But there aren"t much of how the fluid actually behaves (other than around 2 weeks in the Turbulent Flow course).» (Yes)
- Some digital/electronics course dealing with logic and processor layout.» (Yes)
- Geotechnics and road engineering as compulsory courses not as elective» (Yes)
- More technical courses related to shipping» (Yes)
- » (Yes)
- mechanics construction and CAD, Application courses for controll and mechatronics» (Yes)
- courses on electronics(embedded systems).» (Yes)
- information visualization» (Yes)
- Courses treating CAN communication and also the newer vehicle protocol FlexRay should be available in this master program» (Yes)
- More creative industries, courses related to technology vs art» (Yes)
- More courses regarding Geotechnics and Rock Engineering» (Yes)
- More modeling courses at non-PhD level.» (Yes)
- Electric power management» (Yes)
- Analysis methods or smth like that. Definitely would be helpful during master thesis and further.» (Yes)
- Technology specific courses: Hydro and ocean power technology, wind power technology etc.» (Yes)
- Ritningslära och CAD hantering, det är dåligt att en civilingejör kan gå fem år på chalmers och sen hamna på ett bygge och inte kunna tyda en ritning ordentligt.. ej heller rita något som kommer i närheten av en ritning.» (Yes)
- Something more practical!» (Yes)
- Integrated Electronic System Design» (Yes)
- Maybe more chemical engineering» (Yes)
- about earthquake. Not only dynamic structural, but earthquake course regarding to building/ bridge.» (Yes)
- A course in C++-programming would be useful.» (Yes)
- oral and graphic presentation skills personal evaluation with teacher more tutorials a clearer follow-up between first and second year of master more information about master thesis before it starts process course and skills practised throughout the master» (Yes)
- Mechatronics, thermodynamics» (Yes)
- Some sketching course, could be semi-obligatory» (Yes)
- Would love more wrokshops as a part of the studio projects,prefarabely 1:1 workshops» (Yes)
- Before the so called "Room acoustics" it would be good to learn room acoustics. This first course could have the name "room acoustics". The present course could change name to "applied room acoustics" for example. That would be really great!» (Yes)
- BIM» (Yes)
- More CAD» (Yes)
- Graphic Design and Sketching» (Yes)
- Six sigma» (Yes)
- Air tightness of buildings (Paula Walgren) Green building certification» (Yes)
- Course in Testing would be a good addition during the first semester.» (Yes)
- more electable courses in hvac, building physics. » (Yes)
- A very clear communication before the start of the course or an introductory course for Matlab could be added in the first quarter. More practical labs and courses like Chalmers formula student.» (Yes)
- more process engineering related courses» (Yes)
- Hydrogeology» (Yes)
- A course that is more focused on the environment» (Yes)
- - Race car engineering course - Advanced Hybrid Vehicle course» (Yes)
- Petroleum Chemistry» (Yes)
- There is no specific one, but biomedical engineering is not only signals as Chalmers do in the first year of the program. Too much emphasise on signal courses, and not so many in biology and this is wrong according to my opinion, as bio is related to biology and related sciences. » (Yes)
- The Algorithms course should be obligatory on all Computer Science masters (or perhaps bachelor...)» (Yes)
- more renewable energy i.e sunpower, windpower, wavepower. there has been a lot of focus on power plants so far» (Yes)
- More courses concerning CFD, for example Turbulence Modeling from Applied Mechanics» (Yes)
- The old project course that I took, which was 15 cr.» (Yes)
- One can always add more. Hard to tell now if there is a need. Better to ask graduated students.» (Yes)
- C and C++ programming for game developers. Focus on the differences between Java and C++, and what a skilled game developer need to know. (This is for the game design track.)» (Yes)
- Railway Engineering and planning. City planning.» (Yes)
- Computational methods for reliability and risk analysis» (Yes)
- More project courses, more courses on system level (rather than calculating vct in one concrete beam)» (Yes)
- power system protection» (Yes)
- Something about machine learning » (Yes)
- Lean» (Yes)
- Microcontrollers related course» (Yes)
- More security based courses» (Yes)
- I really enjoyed the Information Visualization course, and would love a follow-up to that one, but which focussed more on the practical aspects of infovis (since the one we had was almost purely theoretical).» (Yes)
- Making a course which will provide concrete guidance about spacecraft making and controlling. » (Yes)
- A real course in Architecture (if not on bachelor degree in IT programme).» (Yes)
- A research methodology course» (Yes)
- Research methodology» (Yes)
- An applied course in common communication protocols would have been great. » (Yes)
- Leadership & communication level 2» (Yes)
- Det borde vara mer tydliga och bredare inriktningar för vatten, trafik, geo etc. Ibland finns inte så mycket att välja om man vill inrikta sig.» (Yes)
- CCNA, CCNP, MCSE.» (Yes)
- More courses about renewable energy production, mainly wind and solar. Some more electrical power engineering courses could be integrated, for the students with that background.» (Yes)
- I would like to have the option to select more IT courses.» (Yes)
- For procurement it would be very valuable to have some kind of introduction to law and contract reading.» (Yes)
- General management, leadership etc. Like TEK030» (Yes)
- More sales, basic accounting/finance for those with non-economy background, negotiation, presenting» (Yes)
- It would be nice if we had more choices to choose. » (Yes)
- In the track of computer systems, maybe Computer Graphics can be added, and the Compiler Construction can be removed» (Yes)
- Swedish» (Yes)
- VLSI design, RF Electronics» (Yes)
- Sales, we do a lot of marketing and packaging year one, but no sales studies» (Yes)
- Multi-core CPUs have become rampant in many applications, therefore programming paradigms like OpenMP and MPI are widely used and it is essential to include an advanced course covering these subjects.» (Yes)
- Some management part so you can choose a more "soft" orientation, and not soft as lazy but like not so much Matlab stuff...» (Yes)
- Any optimization course » (Yes)
- More focus on building technology and building physics» (Yes)
- Innovation management» (Yes)
- More sales, financing for startup and negotiations» (Yes)
- Geothermal energy is definitely not highlighted enough» (Yes)
- Possibility of industry collaborated projects. » (Yes)
- Advanced Quantum Field Theory» (Yes)
- should be more engineering» (Yes)
- Economy, Mathcad, How to build a house/bridge, » (Yes)
- chassis design» (Yes)
- I would like to add biololgy, since there is a focus on environmental design and we often deal with these kind of questions, I actually think biology students would be good to have in the class» (Yes)
- More infrastructure classes, at least one railway course. » (Yes)
- Negotiation Theory. It was a 2 lecture/workshop in the Service Contract Management course. The whole Service Contract Management course would be good to add in except it has it"s own flaws in not being so practical. If the SCM program improves then I would recommend it for my program.» (Yes)
- The fluid track of the programme is very much based on how to calculate the fluid flow numerically. Maybe an advanced course in fluid dynamics could be added. » (Yes)
- Software ergonomics, Project management» (Yes)
- Architectural debate and rhetoric, centering on architectural politics.» (Yes)
- Stochastic optimization algorithms (belonging to the physics department) seams consistent to our program as well.» (Yes)
- A course about popular communication and interfacing standards currently used in Industries.» (Yes)
- Frugal engineering» (Yes)
- After the control theory courses, there should be a course which covers implementation and practical aspects which is not handled in the theory based courses. This particular course should also be totally project based, meaning that the lectures should always be related to the project. I am aware that there is a course which sounded like a course which should fulfill that purpose, judging from the master programme presentation, but the specific course is not what I expected. And that is the course "Embedded control" - it should be called "Computer related history and philosophy" in my opinion.» (Yes)
- More guests from / field trips to industry. More courses in how to design things in a clever way, similar to the courses in "maskinkonstruktion" and "maskinelement".» (Yes)
- More technical courses, that could include detailed lectures over the programming(coding) skills.» (Yes)
- I think that the programme coordinator could give some advices on what courses could be of interest when taking the non-compulsory courses (4 pcs). Eg. the course Environmental Aspects on logistics and Transportation is a good complement to the master Technology, Society and the Environment.» (Yes)
- Some one like me who his only passion is concrete and courses related to it how can be satisfied? I mean we studied heat and moisture, Indoor climate, FEM which I think instead of these courses I could`ve studied deeper in a field which i really like...» (Yes)
- Agile project management and product development project management, may not be a separate course, but a least several classes in a course» (Yes)
- A easier way of choosing courses from other program. The courses are to fixed now and if you want to take some more they dont fit with the schedule.» (Yes)
- CCNP: Cisco Certified Network Professional » (Yes)
- A more deepened Excel course» (Yes)
- Academic behviour, how everything works , with extra courses, personal choise, duggor , tentor praktik, for me who is from social-group 3, this has been the biggest time eater, not to speak of how unfriendly people get when they have a chance to rise above....» (Yes)
- Less robotics courses and more complex systems simulations.» (Yes)
- Sales» (Yes)
- Product development, processes of innovation and company start-up. A lot of the courses focus almost solely on analysing current systems, but not on approaches to develop new ones.» (Yes)
- Something about the software for telecom equipment» (Yes)
- Lean Production - in Sp1 or Sp2 also.» (Yes)
- More courses within the division of structural engineering » (Yes)
- The offer of elective/optional courses for some study periods was very limited.» (Yes)
- Some of the elective courses such as Change management.» (Yes)
- Make sure Revised courses are good before starting.» (No)
- There is a large room for choosing various elective courses in the programme, which is good.» (No)
- (Not related to this question, but the link in question 16 didn"t work)» (No)
- After all, the one course I would add, Classical Electrodynamics, has already been added to the programme. I"m a bit concerned with the removal of the course in Classical Mechanics, but maybe it works out fine. An earlier introduction of group theory methods would be useful.» (No)
- You should make it easier to study abroad for a full year!» (No)
- Good with so much free choises» (No)
- Quantum informatics as a quasi obligatory course» (No)
- Just more flexibility with choosing courses» (No)
- It is good that my program, Intellectual Capital Management now offers 2 elective courses (total 15hp)» (No)
- The freedom to choose (semi-) elective courses provided a great way of "customizing" the curriculum.» (No)
- Maybe add one more opportunity to have the lean course, some friends have stated that they want that.» (No)
- But I would exclude packaging from the compulsory courses» (No)
- But some courses overlap to much» (No)
- There have been too much management and too much repetition » (No opinion)
- Since the programme is already changed (doesn´,t really exist any more)this question is kind of irrelevant.» (No opinion)
- it"s nice to be able to chose courses from other programs» (No opinion)
- The courses in computational biology and dynamical systems are partly overlapping. They could be restructured to allow for more other material, e.g. on time series analysis.» (No opinion)
- It seems difficult to sign up to courses "owned" by other programmes. What"s up with that?» (No opinion)
- I think if we are interested in a particular course in another program we can get it without any limitation. » (No opinion)
- more study visit and contact with the industry...» (No opinion)

22. Are there any courses that you think should be heavily revised (or even removed) from the programme?

Yes (1 to 2)»		513		44%
Yes (3 to 4)»		83		7%
Yes more than 5»		7		0%
No»		371		32%
No opinion»		170		14%

Genomsnitt: 2.65

- The mandatory project course in the spring creates issues for people who would like to study abroad.» (?)
- Most of the first years courses are not applied mechanics at all, in my opinion, they are very theoretical, never to be used, fundamentals of mechanics. I think it is a bit missleading to discribe this programme as "applied". Automotive Engineering (vehicle dynamics for example) is applied mechanics to me, even though some of their courses are too non-scientific to be called engineering.» (?)
- The "programme" is a set of disperse compulsary courses. The relations between these courses have to be evaluated and motivated.» (?)
- The recommended courses after Christmas year 1 should be revised,structured in a another way. » (?)
- The AI course needs better administration» (Yes (1 to 2))
- the rigid body course» (Yes (1 to 2))
- There should be a fourth branch of the program which deals with industrial biotechnology. This could contain the courses in industrial biotechnology,systems biology, metabolic engineering.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Computer Networks, overlapping old courses. No focus. Too diverse» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The content in some courses are too scattered.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Marine economics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Computations in mechanics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- modelling and problem solving» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modelling and problem solving in civil engineering» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The AI course is sadly more about project management than AI. It needs more lectures and fewer but more in-depth assignments.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- MMIC course should be extended to 15 credits, covering two periods. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Data Aquisition and data handling in systems biology Biopolymers and biocomposites» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Freight Distribution» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations Planning and Control, as it is now this course focuses on learning without understanding. The book provides information on the format "this operation is good in this situation" without explaning why or providing any basis for understanding how the different theories goes together. This course needs to be remade so that it focuses more on an analytical learning. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- wave loads and seakeepng, Should be there but changed.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations Strategy» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Yes, but I think it is on its way to put the most important ones in the beginning and put HVAC later.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Simulation of complex systems, we had a new teacher so maybe it becomes better next year. But it did not have any content to follow and the lectures where very vague. Complex systems seminar. Feels like I"m wasting 7.5 credits going to mandatory lectures that often clash with other courses.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modelling and simulation, good content, not well lectured. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- EAU and RAC» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course Transportprocesser which every year have a extremely high number of people failing. There is something in the exam that do not fit the course, obviously.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations improvement project could be more as a project within a company and not another batchelor project. This meaning more regularly status-meetings with supervisor at Chalmers. This can maybe be a little less theoretical and more practical - for example finding projects that can lead to more connection with the company involved and even finishing with a pilot project at the company to see if the work can do some good.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations strategy year 1, period 3 » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Computations in mechanics, add a fortran/python course» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Customer relationships Production Flow Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Global Chemical Sustainability. I didn"t learn anything I didn"t already know from BSc.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Marine economics. No challenge.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Research methodology - Make into small part of other course since uninteresting in current format» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The idea evaluation course. If that is done, much more people will apply for the program since it will enable them to study one semester abroad. Also the VEF course can be removed.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- LCA course should be restructured. It teaches basic stuff but the project depends more upon MS excel skills, which gets repetitive and boring after some time.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The metal processing: casting, forming, joining - course should be removed or altered. there is no way a course with 4 graduating parts having a different examiner on each part works in reality. the workload is huge and the course is more about finishing assignment rather than having any time at all to repeat and reflect on what you are actually learning.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The term paper course. It is absolutely dreadful. Mainly because of the teacher (Benedikte Borgström) but also because its timeslots collides with the other courses.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Surface and nanophysics should be revised. I found it hard to learn anything, not because I knew anything beforehand, but because of the structure of the lectures. I know there"s other students who don"t agree with me though.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Head and Moisture and material performance need to be heavily revised! I think that the two courses shoud be combined into one. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- More associated courses to choose from» (Yes (1 to 2))
- BOM035» (Yes (1 to 2))
- applied nuclear chemistry» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat and Moisture and Materials Performance should be heavily revised. the content is good but the arrangement of the courses is not that good. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The focus today is too much towards Image processing and analysis, it should be more up to the student which way to go within the program. Also, eHealth and bioelectromagnetics should be revised and considered whether it should be contained within the progamme.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Interaction Design of Social Media and perhaps Tangible Interaction» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Social Media for interaction design» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Artificial Intelligence, project course lp4 2011 could be better with more lectures.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The GIS course - It"s way too easy, the stuff taught should be something people learn in their bsc. Geotechnics - Could be a lot better organized. Why are there not home assignments or realistic projects?» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Yes, the course "power electronic converters and applications" should be removed from recommended courses. Or at least it should be mentioned early on that Power electronic converters is a rquirement and electic drives an recommendation. That course is way to heavy on the electronics to be recomended as it is now.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations Strategy needs a refreshment. Operations Improvement project needs a more devoted teacher and more structure. Even if the class is very small. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Mecatronics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- not removed but reduced. Innovations management and research design are both very extensive courses and doesn"t really fit in to 7.5hp» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The leadership course was a bit lame.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Material Performance is pretty much the same course as we took in the Bachelor programme, only in english. It could be heavily shortened to some 3-4 ECTS. It could be turned into a laborative course focusing on testing and designing and controlling building materials, for example engineered wood products, mixing concrete, or laminating glass. Also, Heat and Moisture engineering isn"t the best course. It focuses on details that I"m not sure is worthwhile spending time on. Either way, they shouldn"t be compulsory. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- I don"t think that we should have to take a theoretical deepening course in engineering. Perhaps for someone that wants a "Civilingenjörsexamen" but not for someone that only wants a master degree. I have taken a lot of engineering courses in my bachelor degree so I think that is enough.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Product Lifecycle Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Nuclear Chemistry course needs either.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Term paper and seminars» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I feel that the course Heat and Moisture engineering is very porly taught. The aim and the knowledge of the couse is important, but the teaching is not very good and therefor the learning outcome from the course is not very high. This is very sad since it is a mandatory course for the master programme. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Production Management, Production systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced software architecture som innehöll för mkt hårdvara» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Logistics course is too basic to be in the late 3rd semester.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Material courses (Material Performance and Heat and Moisture) are not at advanced level, the teachers does not listen to the students and there is an attitude that I do not think appropriate at Chalmers master programmes.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Dynamical systems is way to rhapsodic» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course "Design project in Systems, Control and Mechatronics" should at least offer one automation project.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- ESA-course and LCA-course needs some changes» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Foundations of prob. theory was just a recap of earlier prob. courses with some measure theory. It"s better to take a course in measure theory instead. Mathematical modelling has a bad teacher.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Physical ergonomics - remove or revise. Material, manufact... - Revise» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The term paper course are not » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The 3 PM module at Northumbria has very much in common with the modules during the first year at chalmers. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Courses from Northumbria University: Project, Programme and Portfolio Management, Project Sustainability» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The biorefinery course should include more on the topic of where are we today and how does the future look. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced chemical engineering and process analytical technologies» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Both of the Distributed Systems courses need to be heavily revised, and preferably include more recent topics, like distributed databases and perhaps more focus on how self-stabilizing systems are working today. Examples would be nice as well.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- systems biology course too broad as a single course,should be revised» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat & moisture engineering and materials performance. The courses are important but out of date, the level is too low and the exams Ifind does not measure valuable knowledge but the ability to for example draw straight lines. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operations strategy» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Yes the product development project. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Antenna engineering could focus more on what we actually need to know and less on math.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- enterpr.ship and proj. management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Methods of interaction analysis» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Vehicle dynamics, it needs a shape up. And i have strong beliefs in that the examinator will fix that.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- business marketing and purchasing (dreadful course) project planing and market analysis (bad administration, don"t get final grade for 5 months! and feedback is very late)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Material performance should be heavily revised. Also Sustainable building should be more focused on engineers if it goes under the engineering master.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Environmental management - either needs to be heavily revised to appropriately address the audience (largely students with engineering backgrounds) or should include a module "crash course in management concepts" in the first ~2 weeks of class. Sustainable development - the syllabus is too expansive, I would sacrifice some breadth for a little more depth.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems engineering course does not really fit into the program. The material is almost completely covered in other courses in the program, and the little knowledge that extends beyond that does not justify the course. Besides, the course in it self was quite poorly executed. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Design Processes and Management » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modelling and simulation shouldn"t be mandatory.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Materials Performance and Heat and Moisture engineering. The subjects are somewhat relevant, but the structure of the courses is horrible. Maybe they shouldn"t be compulsory for students taking the Structural Engineering route.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The methods course should be devided up between all other courses instead of having one methods course. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Remove "Leadership in Architectural Professions" (Master’,s thesis preparation course) and revise "Design Systems"» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Applied Mechatronics, needs some more "Applied Mechatronics" Robots and Robotic Systems, great robot labs (thanks to Nyquist), the rest of the course needs some rework.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- AI, to much writing reports» (Yes (1 to 2))
- International Projects Organisational Project Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Models of Computation should be revised. If one fails to complete the elective assignments, it becomes extremely hard to get enough "points" to pass the course, even with a passed exam. There is no point in me trying to take a re-exam, since I have too little points from the assignments. My best option is to take the course again next year. The course literature also seems a little too hard, considering the fact that I took the course in my first year of the program (before I took Programming Language Technology, for example).» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heating, ventilation and air condictioning» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Think the changes that have been made recently are good» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modelling and simulation Applied Mechatronics » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Artificial Intelligence was a pain.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I think that Advanced Chemical Engineering and process analytical technology was too easy, only a breif description of different operations.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Aesthetics of interaction» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded control is not as good as it could be.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Machine learning has great content but was very badly administrated by responsible. Parrallel function programming need a trim» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded Control Systems is way too fuzzy.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The "Applied Coordination Chemistry" course should include more work load, as it now doesn´,t realy reaches the 7,5hp » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Autonomous agents should be revised so that it doesn"t span over two study periods despite having all it"s credits in just one of them. Algorithms should have it"s focus taken away from hefty assignments and more focused towards exercises.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The examination form in some courses seems a bit mismatched with the content of the course. To have almost all of the course credits for redundant exam in a project heavy course seems like a sub-optimal solution. The courses affected by this is primarily Software Product line engineering and Model driven engineering.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Ergonomics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Ergonomics should be changed (but I think it has been already! And the Design for Quality... course should be revised, but as it was held the first time this autumn, that is quite natural)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Since in Biotechnology programme we had three tracks to follow, namely biomaterial, food science and biomedicine, so there"s no reason for courses like system biology and industrial biology to be compulsory. Compulsory course like Biochemistry and molecular biology is fundamental and we are ok with that, but the two I named are totally irrelevant to all three directions according to their contents. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Building Materials The lectures in this course could be much better. Building Physics The lectures in this course could be much better.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Structural Systems - heavily revised. Materials Performance - revised or removed. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- There are low quality on the courses "Building materials" and "Heat and moisture". They need to be changed in some way.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Research Methodology» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Research metodology would be benefitial to either have within the bachelor level or as a recap in conection to the master thesis» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Freight and transportation system» (Yes (1 to 2))
- water courses» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The lectures in the course Product developement project was very fundamental (1st year bachelor level at times) - needs to be revised. The course in finite element simulation in design also needs to be revised, way too much time was spent on the software which was had A LOT of bugs.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I have talked whit the local prof.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Physical Distribution as an elective course that you have to take if you want the autumn year 2 to be 100% elective should be removed. Gave absolutely nothing.. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- eHealth. I know a lot of people in my class like this course, and I think it could be revised to be really good. Right now I feel that we haven"t learned anything new since the first couple of lectures. All lectures are at approximately the same level (like an introductory lecture), without raising the level through out the course (which I think is because most lecturers only hold one lecture and they are not aware of what we have already learnt during the course so they all go trough the same things for the first half of the lecutre, but with a little different angle). The focus is very much on what the field looks like today, what is the obstacles, what is the importance of the field, what is happening in the field. This is all interesting, but it is more of an introduction to what is going on in a field, than teaching us ways of problem solving, ways of thinking or giving us new tools to have in our mental toolbox. We"re not taught anything that we can use when we go out to work, it"s only a site seeing of how it could be to work. I also think that there is too much focus on signal processing in the programme, but that is more of a personal preference since I realize that it could very well be important for many jobs in the area.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Geotechnics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Software Architecture. Also Software Leadership and Quality Management, however that course seems to have been removed already.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Introduction to Embedded Electronic System design lab series are not suited for students that do not know VHDL.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Structural dynamics feels really malplaced.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Sustainable power production and transportation (improve lectures)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The leadership course should be revised and renamed. The idea of the course is good, but I did not like how it was carried through. Today the course is too personal, it should be more academic and give students access to relevant sources of information about leadership.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course in Modelling and problem solving was catastrophic. I got a grade 5 but a learned nothing. It is sad that it is compulsory» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Vehicle dynamics, due to the current lecturer.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course in heating and ventilation should be removed, or at least revised to fit into the program better.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Course: Sustainable electric systems - Need to be revised or at least change the Examination teacher.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- construction coverment (revised heavily) Design project management (removed/revised heavily)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The complex systems seminar (2011/12) should be heavily revised. It is mostly a waste of time since the presentations are often on irrelevant topics. The presenters get too little feedback on their work. The Simulation of Complex Systems course is too basic (2011) and could accomodate more meta-discussion on modelling approaches and what simulation models really tell us.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded control systems would be better if there was more connection between lectures and the projects (which are really interesting) » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Discrete event control optimization and real time systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Social Media course needs lots of more work» (Yes (1 to 2))
- My opinion is that "Innovations Management" and "Reasearch Design and Methods" are way to extensive. Both of these courses correspond to 7,5 points each but they acctually, with no exaggeration, feel like 15 point courses. You do learn a lot, don"t get me wrong, but come on. There is a price. Many of my friends had a lot of anxiety. Some of them acctually got gastric catarrh. Is that they way to go? They need to be revised so that they correctly represent the 7,5 points which they have been appotined. I am surprised that the school of chalmers does not, more often, look into courses to see wether the workload is fair. I have seen the syllabus for other similar courses in other swedish and international schools and it is quite obvious that the syllabus from these two courses at chalmers cover more then they should.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The methods course should come earlier » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course Heat and moisture engineering. The teaching is not good at all since the teachers don"t agree on facts. The project inte the course is a joke, not serious at all and we did not get any info about what the exam would be about.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- R&D strategy and organization is too similar as the Technological Change and Industrial Transformation» (Yes (1 to 2))
- computer networks» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Solid course Structural Dynamics for Fluid division» (Yes (1 to 2))
- eHealth revised» (Yes (1 to 2))
- It is good that diagnostic imaging isn"t mandatory any more, cause if you want to have another focus than imaging it is hard was hard to find time for all the other courses. Image analysis did not have the most inspiring lectures but I have heard that it was better this year than last.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- "Interstellar medium and star formation" could be revised to get a more analytical approach rather than phenomenological.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Its, for me, too much industial processes. The first 6 months felt like a course in turbines and combustion. It is important but not to that extent» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The "project work only" courses (last year"s Industrial and Technical Challenge projects). The need at least a lot more technical and theoretical background to be useful.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Real time systems where not very informative.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The machine learning course. It should definitely not be removed but it needs to be heavily revised. In my opinion the teachers involved in that course shouldn"t be allowed to be responsible for courses at Chalmers » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Production Management - the course name proposes a management view production. Actually the contents were a little different, and there were repetitions. Better alignment of course name and contents necessary, more general management aspects, skills for future leaders.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Similar content in emwc and in fundamentals of photonics. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Nuclear chemistry. Could be a good idea to change the lecturer to someone who doesn"t consider failing 80 % of the student his greatest achievement in life. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- IPR010 was way to heavy on workload compared to the learning outcomes, i.e. a lot of pointless work to do. Aside from that, I think all engineering Bachelors"s include a project management course - why again?» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Software Architecture needs to either have a basic course in the bachelors or be reworked. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Simulation Engines, more focus from the teacher, and higher demands. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The prepare course for master thesis should be more focus on the future thesis work, and more clear about the purpose of the courses. Because the prepare course I took this year is not of clear purpose of education to improve one skill, but also has little relationship to prepare for master thesis.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- International Business Relations» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The first semester of the program should not just include mandatory courses, especially since the quality of some of the courses are very low. Materials performance and Heat and moisture engineering are embarrassing for Chalmers, the courses are basically the same as in the bachelor (Byggnadsmaterial and Byggnadsfysik) but in english, e.g. why do we have to carry out exactly the same experiments as in the bachelor? Why can"t the teachers explain their subject in a way the students can understand, instead of explaining, they offend the students asking. Some times I think the teachers react this way in order to hide their own lack of knowledge in the subject. Furthermore, why don"t the teachers arrange for a course evaluation of these courses? I feel like I have wasted 15 credits on courses that won"t make me into a better engineer. The credits could instead have been used to enable deeper knowledge in structural engineering, which is my field of interest. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- mechatronic design embedded control systems - this year very unclear and vague content, hardly any connection to the course material etc. due to new teacher?» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Termpaper and seminar should be revised, the termpaper was sooo boring. Customer relationships should focus more on strategy and negotiation skills.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- 1. Structural Biochemistry» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Artificial neural network» (Yes (1 to 2))
- ACAD could be more advanced, more surface modelling.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Adv. Chem. Eng. and PAT: Remove the PAT part or improve it A LOT.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Algorithms» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Hevily revised, The design project» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Complex systems seminars» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Design Processes and Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Design and Construction Project Management is the weakest course» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Research Design and Methods. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Finance» (Yes (1 to 2))
- More serious MTS course » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Term paper and seminars» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded control systems » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The goals are set too low in some of the chemistry courses (not the first course Nuclear Chemistry)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- RAC is not a good course. Way too much work for little amount of knowledge. The criteria for degree 5 is a joke, after all the work that we put into it.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Science of environmental change» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat and moisture. Läraren Tang är ingen bra föreläsare, han pratar om sådant som inte är relevant för kursen och det blir tröttsamt att lyssna på i längden. Sedan har han svårt för engelskan vilket gör att han får fundera för varje mening han ska säga vilket också blir påfrestande att lyssna på. Alla föreläsare i denna kursen hade för långa powerpoints med oftast för mycket text på varje slide. Vi hade en inlämning i denna kursen som inte gav mycket nytta. Det kan även tilläggas att kursen FEM-basic (som går parallellt med Heat and moisture) överbelastade studenterna alldeles för mycket. Man fick helt bort prioritera Heat and moisture vilket är fel. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Machine Learning course was horrible. The teacher was barely understandable when he talked, and his slides didn"t help much either. The book he recommended used completely different ways of introducing material and getting help and feedback regarding labs was very cumbersome.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Source Coding (Probably is removed now).» (Yes (1 to 2))
- User centred design: skipped this course partly because I already studied this area and partly because it focuses on the design processes instead of the basics of user centred design. Information Visualisation: is actually more of a cognition course. it focuses on how things should be but gives no experience in actually making visualisations. The analysis of interaction design should be revised towards usability, but I know they are already working with revising this course. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced topics in distributed systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- linear control and embedded control should be heavily revised» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Distributed systems should be completly remade It is by far the worst courses I"ve had during my 4 years at Chalmers. It could be intresting but does not work in its current form. I"d like to learn some about the technology of spotify or amazon etc., which isn"t mentioned in the courses. The best courses are Fault tolerant and realtime systems, whatever you do.. keep them, they have excellent quality!» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Pollution prevention, global chemical sustainability » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Financial Management is not a good course. Project Management needs to be better as well, today, the course is to light. Revice MOCI to be 10,5 hp and PM to be 3,5» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Aesthetics of interaction Interaction Design Methodology are both rather pointless, pretending to do science but in the end you learn nothing from it» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Nuclear chemistry course ,This course is very difficult to pass.I attend many time but still now its not possible for me to pass this course. Not only me many student try to pass this course for long time .so I thing chalmers should remove this course as a mandatory .Many student not able to finish masters only for this course . » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Microwave engineering» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Strategic Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I do not think that engineering geology should be mandatory.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- R&D Strategy was too much repetition» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Human Response to Sound and Vibration, Design of Silent Products» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Complex systems seminar» (Yes (1 to 2))
- drug development» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Kursen term papers & seminars passade inte riktigt in de övriga kurserna under höstterminen. Den kanske kunde integreras i de andra kurserna. Som student från chalmers, är man dessutom mer införstådd med hur vetenskapliga texter ska skrivas. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advance Production system was unfortunately not at the advanced level that I was hoping. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- courses overlap each others e.g. Automotive engineering with ICE and VTS» (Yes (1 to 2))
- VEF » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Software architecture» (Yes (1 to 2))
- ESA vs LCA.... change ESA for sustainable energy future... or industrial energy systems.... or make it really different one from each other. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Software architecture, and » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Financial management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- heat and moisture engineering, indoor climate and HVAC» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Knowledge and learning» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Software Architecting, was about real-time systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced aerodynamics, Vehicle and traffic safety, aerodynamics, hybrid vehicles and control» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Term Papers and Seminars - It hade a few good points but it took too much time compared to what you got out of it» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Traffic and urban planning» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Global Chemical Sustainability. I think it is the worst course that we had in Chalmers and it is the first course the exchange students has. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- design processes» (Yes (1 to 2))
- International projects could be improved.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I wish I"d never taken Applied Mechatronics. And it should not be semi-obligatory or anything else.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- the electable course strategy change and creation is pretty much just repetition from other courses, but lower level (undergrad course) » (Yes (1 to 2))
- R&D, remove» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Ergonomics and Human factors - Very basic course for master"s degree Advanced CAD - Need lot of improvements» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Cad, could be improved. The link between master project and course product planning and market analysis, could be done better. Now it is two separate courses with own goals, but with the same final goal. Difficult combination. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Even if imaging is not of interest, one is still forced to do image analysis plus diagnostic imaging especially if one does not have a background in chemistry !» (Yes (1 to 2))
- term paper and seminars should at least be a "graded" course, overlaps between courses the first reading period could be avoided by communication between the courses » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The wastewater engineering course needs more skilled teachers. We"ve had computer exercises where there are three teachers present but only one knows teh program and can answer our questions. I think that"s really upsetting. The water resources course should have a lowered amount of work. More discussion and open seminares instead of just project after project. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Customer relationship (too much repetition and overlapping with others courses) Freight transport system (not clear enought)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- TIN171 Artificial intelligence» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Discrete event control and optimization is very easy and similar to discrete event systems. The education (mainly professor and supervisors) in Distributed systems is really poor. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- CFD is too heavy, Design of industrial energy equipment.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Integrated product development» (Yes (1 to 2))
- There is a lot of overlap between the courses, maybe this can be looked at.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Nanoscience, this course was really terrible. Do somethin real instead. Look at the Quantum Matter course by Henrik Johannesson. The first quantum mechanics course was not good and could really be at a higher level.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Product LifeCycle Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Materials science, with the bonus points that can lift an exam grade from 3 to 5 only based on bonus points.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- CFD, to much workload in to little time, it is also a "dugga" in the middle of the course that is acctually the real exam but I belive that they call it "dugga" not to break Chalmers regulations. I also doubt that Chalmers is OK with the fact that you only can recieve grade 5 by: well written exam, well written report AND oral exam. The recomended course Risk Management and safety was extremly bad, I was embarrassed towards the foreign students by the shape of the course, among all bad things was the fact that us Chemist had more compulsory hours than the rest even though the course credits and name on the paper was the same, then we also had assignments every week but I have no idea if I did them correctly or not => I didn´,t learn anything because of the lack of feedback, we only got a grade in the end I have no idea what it was based of... I was glad to hear that they are going to change lecturer so hopefully the course would improve but I beg you to look in to this because the course "var under all kritik!"» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modelling and simulation needs to be revised. Some of the controll theory needs to be removed and replaced by more practical courses.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- There should be soil lab testing course » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Materials selection and design, the lectures were no good, but the concept is. Environmental prod. development: There should be test aded so that you could get more than just one grade. I felt like I did very much in the project, but other that didn"t got the same grade. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat & Moisture engineering. The problem is not the curse, it is the teachers and the lack of excercises. Extemely bad litterature and it is a reason that so many people failed the exam. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The Digital sketching course should be adjusted to last for a maximum of two periods (not three periods like it is at the moment), because it"s extremely inconvenient for many students (due to master thesis etc.). Ergonomics should be removed or only be mandatory for students that haven"t done the course before, but bachelor students already had a similar course in their 2nd year in bachelor. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Materials performance should be revised since it"s to similar to a course in the bachelor. Same goes for heat and moisture engineering. Both courses also use far to much powerpoint as a teaching aid-to an extent that it lessens the possibility to understand and keep up.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Structural systems- bra med preliminär dimensionering, men ser inte poängen i att "ranka" olika byggnader. Riskutvärderingen var ganska tafatt också. Applied dynamics-tillämpa mer för VoV» (Yes (1 to 2))
- HVAC systems engineering should be improved or become optional. Sustainable electric power systems needs to be revised for next year, but that"s to be expected since it was the first year it ran.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Geotechnics Material performance» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Computer Networks(Basically is 2 courses, should be split into computer networks and network programming) Network Security(Should be examined on a basis of take home exams or projects as well with a final presentation... too much theory cannot learn so much information with other courses and labs also running in parallel)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advance analtytical chemistry and systems biology shouldn"t be mandatory» (Yes (1 to 2))
- In general I think the courses can be on a higher level. More advanced rather than repetition of undergraduate courses. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Structural dynamic is good, but too deep study (i dont know if it will usefull during work or not). better to use something close to real case in civil engineering.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- 1. Software Leadership and Quality Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Mainly Heating, cooling and air conditioning engineering systems. I can"t see why this course is compulsory.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Complex systems seminar (it"s boring and doesn"t give much enough)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Materials, manufacture and design engineering» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Yes, Heat and Moisture. The lectures have to be more clear and maby reduce the amount of teachers. It was very hard to find time for the course because the work load of the FEM course.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The starting CAD-course does not have to be obligatory. I think there might be other courses that should be there instead.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Design of Silent products must be better. If it can not be improved this course should be deleted. This year this course was just not serious. Room Acoustics also needs to be improved. As it is now it takes too much time and the structure is awful. However this course have the potential to be really good. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Fundamentals of photonics needs revision» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The project course should be in the first year, so you can finish every mandatory thing that year.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Finanical Management, Project Management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I think Sustainable Energy Futures should be elective for those who come from programs that contain a lot of environmental courses (like chemical engineering at Chalmers) If this is not possible, perhaps the course could be revised so that it gives 7.5 MTS credits, so that extra courses outside MPNUE would not be necessary to get a degree» (Yes (1 to 2))
- applied mechatronics , PLM » (Yes (1 to 2))
- This two courses are very important, but are not well organized. The teaching was not good. Heat and Moisture Engineering Materials Performance» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Sustainable development - I would have appreciated having more scientific and sociological lectures that offered different and perhaps even contradictory view points to discuss and less hippie propaganda. Nordic Architecture - The question discussed (Is there a Nordic architecture... etc) could be re-vised. It would have been more interesting to have a less introverted approach and place "Nordic architecture" in a global historical context instead. Additionally the course is quite basic and could be half as long and not compulsory for home students. Personally I thought this course was a waste of time and I would never have chosen to do it.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Software Architecture did not feel relevant at all to the programme, heavy fouces on hardware rather than Software, poor guidance. Only good part was the german (?) who talked about actual software architecture. Model Driven Engineering was a good course in theory, but the layout was immature and concepts could be introduced in a better order. Also the tools used sucked, the teacher said there was better tools from Microsoft used in the industry, why can"t the course be done with them?» (Yes (1 to 2))
- yes, the CAD-course. Should be improved and updated.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat and moisture and material performance should not be mandatory! Material performance is covered in the bachelor and could be even more specialised and volunatary. Heat and moisture is a worse version of the bachelor"s byggnadsfysik and does not cover anything further. It is of no use for students taking the structural engineering branch after christmas.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Although aptional: Genetically engineered foods» (Yes (1 to 2))
- ssy150 Multimedia and video communication ssy145 wireless networks» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Some are too simple, like statistical inference, others are unnecessarily hard, like functional analysis. A better balance targeted at students with homogeneous background would be great. Sometimes there is too much time spent explaining basics to students with very different background from engineering physics/engineering mathematics.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Corrosion» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Modeling and Simulation shouldn"t be mandatory especially in the very first quarter. Applied signal too. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Combustion Engineering should not be so heavy as a lot of students are not very familiar with chemistry. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- The modelling course, but I think this has already been changed.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The AI course wasn"t at all what I expected (too much writing and too few lectures), and the Methodology course was too diffuse...» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Leadership» (Yes (1 to 2))
- the leadership course was not very good.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- I think that the game design track should have less focus on interaction design and more on game programming.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat and moisture engineering needs to be revolutionized, it is neither up to date, interesting or challenging at this point.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- MDE revise » (Yes (1 to 2))
- power system analysis: should be heavily revised, needs to be structured, add power transformers topic, expand several topics such as balanced and unbalanced faults. Books contain well structured topics then why not to brush the course program according to the "power system analysis. John J. Grainger, William D. Stevenson". power electronic converters: replace teachers, who did not try their best to explain topics. We were left merely alone with our course book. Thanks God, we had good book to study on. All tutorials need to be corrected - a lot of misspelling. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Computational Biology, Simulation of Complex Systems, Dynamical Systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Data Conversion Techniques» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Research design and methods, if not removed it should be shortened» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Molecular Electronics» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Operating systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Unfortunately, Methods of Interaction Analysis was a little bit unsatisfactory. It also had some scheduling difficulties.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded Control Systems needs revising. While the content is interesting, the quality of the course was so bad that Chalmers ought to be ashamed.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- It may be possible to make Heat and moisture engineering a bit more organized. FEM basics could be shifted a bit from theory to practice. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Advanced Software Architecture (should focus on either basics or advanced, not both), Software Product Line Engineering (should focus on whole BAPO)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Foundation of probability theory should be before Stokastisk analys. Mathematical Modeling should be revised not really so clear what that course should give a student.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Merge advanced ICM Theory and KBBDM» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Kbbdm & advanced ICM» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded system control, make it better!» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Not mandatory with Nordic architecture» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Design, process and management (7,5 Hp)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Model and problem solving, Man fattade inte vad som var meningen med kursen, vad man skulle lära sig och till vilken nytta. Ingen visste detta ens i vecka sju. Environmental risk assessment in engineering borde också revideras då den var dåligt planerad av de olika lärarna och man fick ingen feedback samt de hade ingen granskning av tentorna.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The economics course in the second year are ridicouls. Not what entreprenours needs to learn and the teacher is everything else than good.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Linear Control System Design (revised), Embedded Control Systems (revised)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded control systems» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Term Paper and Seminars - bad coordination and unclear goals. Freight Transport System - too basic. Like a basic course in logistics. Not master level.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Introdcution to electronics system design. More lectures about VHDL basics should be given, to the simple definitions of electronics system. Otherwise, the lectures are boring, and the labs are difficult.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The "optimization - a first course" is a unsatisfactory course. The subject is not presented in a good way and the mathematical formulation is awful, and the course book is horrible.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- More about energy, building physics, control systems, daylight, solar screening, » (Yes (1 to 2))
- VEF should be changed» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Courses should include feedback from teaching staff Environmental product development needs to be more closely guided by teachers.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- introduction to vehicle and traffic safety» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Project in Applied Mechanics: the project should be changed to something else. The information was very confusing, especially for the EMA-group. Different answers from different teachers.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Water and environmental engineering» (Yes (1 to 2))
- * The DTIM course needs significant changes. The market criteria is 100% on the final exam and the exam was build for academics and not for the business designer! E.g. one exam question was "what did X say in the article Y?" . Seriously, students don"t learn from this. We just cram our knowledge the day before and then forget it all afterwards. We prefer workshops and practical simulations based on real life cases. Furthermore there is an overall lack of "valuation" studies. We touched on it in the DTIM course but it wasn"t in the exam. Additionally, the valuation was at a basic level for those wanting to value a company. What about those wanting to value intangibles? The ICM track needs this sort of learning. I.e. practical workshops on patent and other IA valuations.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Ubiquitous computing» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The course antenna engineering needs to be revised. An antenna course in the programme is a must in my opinion but this course as it was given this semester was a disappointment.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The construction governance course is very difficult to grip, the lectures are broad and the content feels like it is not well planned. The grading system, with several assignments should be revised. We did not even get feedback from them, i have no idea how i performed and it have not given me anything for the future, because i do not know what to improve and what was good. I think the grade on the assignments should affect the course grade, which only relyed on the exam. The course design processes and management was planned very badly. Not much information, the lectures was not framed in a good way, i could not see any point of them. Tutors giving feedback the assignment was not even informed about the content before meeting the student. Revise heavily or remove. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Machine learning was without doubt the most worthless course experienced suffered since attending at my first class at an age of 6.... The subject is good, but the people running it are not. Parallel functional programming. Too much haskell which, to be honest, doesn"t seem to be that useful for parallelism. Let the course be about more erlang instead. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- TDA956 (Hardware description & verification) MCC091 (Introduction to Integrated Circuits) » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Embedded Control: This course should cover everything from a practical aspect which is necessary to know to be able to apply skills from previous control courses.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Distributed Systems. Very bad course.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- The CFD course should be made as optional course for the students from solids track.» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Environmental Systems Analysis» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heat and moisture (remove) FEM (revise)» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Strategic management» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Leadership and Communication» (Yes (1 to 2))
- There should be more preparation for MATLAB especially for the Industrial Biology course. Most of the international students have never used MATLAB before and it"s very difficult to catch up given the limited time during the study period. Systems Biology is a very boring course and it"s very hard to understand the contents and lectures in class. The handouts are not easy to understand. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- Heating and ventialtion needs to be completely remade because it"s a complete disaster right now. I don"t really see the need for a complete course in the subject. It seems more like a part of something else since there are so many other things that are more relevant. I would also strongly suggest that the courses Computational Fluid Dynamics and Combustion Engineering do not collide as the do now because many people wanted to take both but couldn"t. I took both courses but the terrible schedule meant that I couldn"t spend enough time on either course which is a shame. The courses go very well together. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditionning) systems engineering did not work very well. This is especially a problem as the course is compulsory. » (Yes (1 to 2))
- I would split up structural engineering and building performance from the beginning» (Yes (1 to 2))
- wastewater engineering» (Yes (1 to 2))
- Fo students with bachelor degrees from chalmers mjany courses are repetition of things we have done before. e.g. advanced alanytical chemistry, no new learning goals and poorly organised» (Yes (3 to 4))
- All the "methods"-courses overlap heavily. Also the design courses: prototyping, information visualization, graphical interfaces, etc Way too much redundant knowledge tought.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Not removed, but revised: Advanced Passive Safety (but I think this is ongoing), Advanced Active Safety (does the student really meet objectives, are they too low?), Engineering of Autmotive Systems.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- production managemnet and production systems, production project pre-study» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Aesthetics of Interaction: The workshops and even the AIM of the whole course is incomprehensible. Graphical Interfaces: Lack of proven "success cases from industry", poor and contradictory feedback from teachers in workshops and an exam methodology that prioritize to memorize content from an excellent book instead acquiring knowledge. Interaction Design of Social Media: No connection between the lectures and the workshops. The course project aim is even unclear for the teachers and the schedule has been not respected and more than the 50% of the lectures were cancelled without precious advise from the teacher. Methods of Interaction Analysis: content interesting, but lectures and literature should be improved (not much content at all). Many schedule issues with teacher.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Nordic Architecture is really boring and ancient. The matter space studio have the worst organization, lack of communication and very confusing information. The head teacher really needs an assistant to keep track of everyting and present clear information and make sure the goals for the course are followed.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- ACEDPAT and AST should be revised. CFD examination is questionable since the examination is not entirely anonymous.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The level of the teaching has been very low compared to the standard at the bachelor programme (Eng Physics). A lot of lecturers that are not interessted in teaching!» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Power Market Management is a kind of course which might be of use to a limited number of graduates who enter to Power Market business. I will never go to that field and I think it"s not the right time to put that course in a Master Program. These kind of general courses can be placed in Bachelor program if seems necessary. Also High Voltage Technology was a kind of course which I won"t use in my future career and I didn"t enjoy. I think HIgh Voltage Engineering was enough. Another course which seemed very general and a lot lower that the level of a Master course was Sustainable Power Production. I had chosen Chalmers to study my Master because I had read on Chalmers website about this course, and I was expecting a lot more practical useful course other than what was offered in reality in Chalmers. A lot of attending students belonged to other non-electrical Master programs and this shows that this course was a very general basic course, maybe more suitable as a Bachelor course.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The six sigma course is not good, the projects are very different, some är excellent and some are really bad and it is difficult for the student to influence that. The lectures are not adjusted for us students and they are often badly performed. The grading is not transparent and unfair. The managing operations processes course adds very little new knwoledge. The research methodology course is very slow. The course 2011-08-26 12:00 Strategic Management and Economics of Intellectual Property has a project that is enourmous, without given the proper time or bonus points. Also, the teachers gave some projects really hard critizism, which was unfair and acutally mean. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- ASAT - not what you"ve expected after the sat course in the bachelor. GCS - worthless and easy, nothing that enhanced my education. MTS course - WTF is this shit? Why do I have to do this? Its not like these things a unknown problems to engineers now days... Waste management - The plastic part was probably new and interesting 10 years ago, now days that is rather obvious... » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Road courses, they builds on 100 questions without learning outcome, and the exams are built more with statements instead of questions, easy to misunderstand them. Geothecnincs could be built more with a project work to increase understanding.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Materials performance, Heat and moisture engineering and Geotechnics do not have the same quality as the FEM- and material courses (Concrete, Steel, Timber).» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Construction governance, Environmental Management, The project management course could be incorporated in ánother course» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Risk Management, Change Management, Lean Production and Transportation Systems» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Course in Geotechnics should be revised, courses during autumn year one should be revised, especially courses in building materials and heat and moisture. Teaching in those courses are definately not satisfactory! Courses in geotechnics doesn"t seem to be at master level, they should give more guidance as to how design and analysis of geotechnical structures can be performed. Couple geotechnical courses to other design courses such as structural concrete, maybe a joint design task? eg. design and analysis of concrete slab in concrete course and design of piling foundation in geotechnics?» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Distributed Systems was awful. It"s an interesting and important subject, but the course should be heavily revised to be more practical, and the presentation of the material needs to be improved. I worked in the field for 4 years, and I often had the feeling that the slides were factually wrong. The labs for Unix internals should be closer related to the subject matter. If a new similar course will be constructed, e.g. with a focus on Linux instead of BSD, a lab to write a little kernel module might be fun, for instance. In general, most courses, especially the labs, seem too easy for master level. Only the two real-time systems courses were really challenging so far. I prefer a more project oriented approach for labs, i.e. one larger project, possibly in a team of about 5 people that spans over the whole course.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Systems biology, Industrial biotechnology» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Applied Mechatronics (now known as Mechatronic Design) - Complete revision, there is no "applied" in this course. Robotics and Robot Systems - Highly interesting labs, otherwise not. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Marine transport systems and Marine propulsion systems was a waste of time. Ship resistance and computational hydrodynamic, Ship geometry and hydrostatics and Wave loads and sea keeping were all very unprofessional.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Very bad structure, content and examination way: Sustainable development(the examination is not about knowledge but just to memorize lecture slides), Science of environmental change (Too heavy), Environmental system analysis(really bad!!), Environmetal management(too much included, and too heavy workload), Applied industrial ecology, LCA-course» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Environmental systems analysis Environmental analysis of water All courses with environmental in the name!» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The ones we had in Newcastle were by big parts similar to what we"ve already done at Chalmers the year before. So those courses should be compared to what we"ve done before and replaced I think. The one that was new for us was environmental management. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Take away Production systems, no comments. Move Production management to lp1 and PEWD to lp2, and run project course as 15 credit course during spring. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- The material courses held at the beginning (manditory) are incredibly poorly managed. These (Material performance, Heat and Moisture Engineering) should be heavily revised. They are important subjects, but the courses are just repetition of undergraduate courses conducted in poor english. NOT good enough for masters studies.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Less overlap between courses. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Life cycle assessment, Environmental management, Environmental system analysis» (Yes (3 to 4))
- CAD, purschse and marketing (removed), PPMA» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The structure whit a lot of assignments and projects in the courses, which has lacking of information, and are not reflecting the lectures are taking a lot of non-learning and understanding time. I feel that i want to read and understand more of the course material to get a feeling for the subject and be able to have more confidence in my knowledge regarding my courses taken. Heat and power, Design of industrial energy equipment, modelling and planing. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Source Coding Multimedia Communication Wireless Networks» (Yes (3 to 4))
- NC-CAM course need to be more guided, and a little bit harder/ more content. Advanced maufacturing systems was NOT an advanced course at all.. advanced metal forming and casting course needs alot more structure, especially the metalforming part was not good at all.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Material Performance Heat and Moisture Engineering Geotechics (optional)» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Materials Performance, Heat and Moisture Engineering, Structural Systems: Design and assesment. More emphasis on other building techniques and materials beside concrete since the future sustainable building sector is demanding a change. The master program is right now a bit narrow-minded.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- MDSD was very chaotic, some research courses» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Power system analysis, Power system operations, high voltage technology» (Yes (3 to 4))
- MVE140 - Foundations of probability theory Pointless course. Spent less than an hour in total, got a 5. Shouldn"t be mandatory. TMS165 - Stokastisk analys - del 1 (fall 2010) Good course, but way too easy. An important subject that should be done more thoroughly. MVE095 - Options and Mathematics This class should be held much earlier. maybe lp2? I know it might be difficult to arrange for I students to do it earlier, but for students at MPENM it is too easy at that stage of the programme.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Unix Internals: the professor doesnt know how to talk in English and the labs are inefficient with irresponsible lab assistants. Internet Technology(Computer Networks): The lecturer "Elad" doesn"t know how to teach and just wastes time ,the lab assistant for configuring networks doesnt respect students and is just there to scare students . Distributed Systems : the lecturer is very knowledgeable but has much difficulty conveying it in English,and the lab assistants are not qualified for this course (they are the same as unix internal course ) Routing Technology : is a great course but it should be held over two study periods instead of one and its credits should be 15 instead of 7.5 ,the lecturer expects impossible goals for the course Our program is called networks and distributed systems but its courses concerning networks and distributed systems are awful and is good just at the security track!!!! In one point you wonder it was better if you just took practical courses online instead of wasting time and money in a famous university like CHALMERS!!! » (Yes (3 to 4))
- E-Health, Bioelectromagnetics and some other courses that are mandatory.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The most crappy ones so far have been Random Signals analysis, Manegrial economics and Multimedia communication.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The courses given by Building materials (i.e. Materials performance and Heat and Moisture) are not good at all. Quality of lectures was definitely lower than in other courses in the programme.Projects were graded differently depending on which of the examintors graded them (this was poitned out but nothing happened). Also, there was no chance to give an opinion on these courses since no course evaluation was sent out. The course Geotechnics, given right now, is unorganized and lacks literature (if I pay for a compendium I expect more than powerpoint slides and equations that refer to BKR). » (Yes (3 to 4))
- Leadership course for 5th grade - way to abstract and long The whole Urban and architectural design laboratory structure is strange - too much research in comparison with actual result Thesis preparation and thesis - could use more guidance and following up during the work. Yes, you should be able to work more or less independently, but not on your own! Nordic architecture course could be shorter and include bigger questions Sustainable professions is just a useless course with too little reflection and connection to the profession» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Heat and Moisture should be removed» (Yes (3 to 4))
- I understand that be able to work in groups really is very important at a work. But on the other side the most important goal for me right now, is to get as much technical skills as possible and I feel group projects don"t give me that kind of skills. I would really prefer more technical courses with focus on pure technics and the opportunity to really sit down and focus rather than having a lot of group meetings.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- Building physic courses has low standard and bad exams.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- The CAD course needs to be a lot better. Having a background in mechanical engineering at Chalmers I must unfortunately say I barely learnt anything new about product development during the Master"s programme. Ideally the second year should be free from mandatory courses in order to make it easier to study abroad.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- While the courses in the master programme fits well with aim of the master programme, the overall academic level of the content needs to be improved. » (Yes (3 to 4))
- The first QOM-course (TEK145) is a "trailer course" with different subjects each week and getting to know the course mates. A good thing, but not much news having read the I-bachelor. Did not feel like 15 credits, an option to read an elective course at the same time could be nice. The SP2 courses TEK150 and TEK161 where really good and had the standard I expected the courses to have. Operations Strategy TEK156 could be much better, did not learn much more than during the week in the TEK145 course. The case gave some practical experience, but still I had higher expectations of the course. Research Methodology TEK290 would be better to read as a part of the bachelor thesis, or as an optional course. Even if I haven"t got any good suggestions on hand, the slot could be used better. The Project in Operations Improvement course TEK165 could improve with better projects. The information of the mandatory elective projects should be co-ordinated better. Now the information came after the last application date for the product developing project, and no news from previous year were given.» (Yes (3 to 4))
- ALL the mandatory courses need major revision.» (Yes more than 5)
- water courses» (Yes more than 5)
- Most of the courses of this progamme are such a complete mess! Firstly, it"s really rare to find some of them that are related to the job market or real life cases because usually they are either too abstract or too complex things that no one else uses out there . Secondly, some others courses are really bad when it comes to organization (ambiguous info about assignments, exams, diffuse lectures and so on). Please, take a look at some official courses of IT industry that are out there (Oracle, Microsoft VMware), then you will have a very clear picture about what I mean. Moreover, lectures, assignments, recommended literature and written exam"s content usually are not related to each other in some of those courses. So, by the end of the period it is normal to find yourself not able to take exams even though you have been studying intensely in that time. (Just to mention, we had a teacher that provided us one question in his home exam that we only could answer by reading "A SWEDISH ARTICLE". But, help me out right here... Is this a master programme in English or not?) And on top of that, this knowledge sharing is completely inefficient because it"s too time consuming. We have to come many times per week to University to attend to mandatory group meetings, which oftentimes we spend more than 50% of the time just wondering about what we are supposed to do. In other universities, it is possible to learn things properly spending much less time, specially if everything is organized and the subject"s goals are well stated.» (Yes more than 5)
- I think the subjects in most courses were good, but more content or especially more deeper knowledge could have been added. As Chalmers is a school for engineers, I think the courses in this Master need to be more engineer oriented, with more calculations and tools to able to use in real application.» (Yes more than 5)
- Tangible Interaction - update the content with current technologies and redo the schedule for projects. Social Media - Useless in this way Graphical Interfaces - Instead of small exercises and implementing a board game on screen, it would be highly appreciated to have more "portfolio" level outcome Prototyping in Interaction Design - Adapt according to what was needed in the courses afterwards (photoshop, arduino, processing, paper prototyping, flash, rationale argumentation).» (Yes more than 5)
- The whole programme must be rebuilt. At this this point chalmers architecture is the unpaid whore of the market, and it wants me to be it minion, no way, It needs to find its core again, but it feels like most of the interests are connected to moneymaking and personal benefits. With no soul one easily come to that solution. The way i see it Chalmers Architecure are paid NOT to educate people in architecture, but instead it is a filtration-unit for autodesk and skanska. I havnt learned anything about architecture but everything about how to win a competition or how to stretch the truth in order to buy a Porsche Chayenne. Yes I am bitter, i thought that the university were a place where universitality (truth)was the goal. but instead im an biological slave for actors in the market.How this came to be architecture is strange, But logic( see about money, above) » (Yes more than 5)
- But science of environmental change where not a good course due to unsufficient pedagogy from teacher.» (No)
- But some exterminators (e.g. Dan Andersson & Kenth Lumsten) could preferably be changed to someone more pedagogic» (No)
- The course in Artificial Intelligence, that is optional in the programme, had trivial project assignments and subjective/arbitrary grading in an environment that repressed creativity. I"m glad that I didn"t study Computer Science, because that education just seems to make zombie output of ambitious input students.» (No)
- Maybe the R&D organization course should focus only on organization (maybe on internally focused strategy, but no industry analysis!!). We have to organization courses and the overlap with Economics of Innovation and TCIT was large. I think spending more time on organization would have let us go deeper, but maybe this is not the focus field of the teacher either?» (No)
- But, I have not taken so many of the courses, since I"ve done a exchange year, and got quite much recognized. » (No)
- But tell if the courses are not on master level» (No)
- The courses are chosen perfectly and need not be changed. Of course new technologies are always added to improve the quality and standard of the program» (No)
- I think all courses that were compulsory in period 1 and 2 were relevant and good, but perhaps a course like "Risk assessment and decision support", which was in period 3 and not compulsory, would make more sense as a compulsory course than for example "water resources and environment". » (No)
- Not heavily. The courses that were delivered during the first and second study period of my program could have been a bit deeper and could have pushed students to do more reading on their own to clear the course i.e., leaving the basics to the students to read up on and focussing on the actual focus of the course.» (No)
- not anymore.» (No)
- But all of the coursers standard must be higher!» (No)
- Since the programme is already changed (doesn´,t really exist any more)this question is kind of irrelevant.» (No opinion)
- The course Power System Analysis should not be removed but perhaps revised. This is due to lack of structure and competence in teaching. Moreover the simulation program used in the course is quite bad.» (No opinion)
- All the courses I have had complaints with have either just been heavily revised and needed some more time settle or they have been revised just after I took them.» (No opinion)
- I think the changes made to the programme last year was good and is very thought through.» (No opinion)

Programme administration

23. How satisfied are you with the programme administration?

1157 svarande

Not at all»		32		2%
Not so satisfied»		90		7%
Neither/Nor»		169		14%
Satisfied»		549		47%
Very satisfied»		267		23%
No opinion»		51		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.93

24. How satisfied are you with the support from the Student centre?

Not at all»		31		2%
Not so satisfied»		83		7%
Neither/Nor»		155		13%
Satisfied»		488		42%
Very satisfied»		266		23%
No opinion»		130		11%

Genomsnitt: 4.1

Study climate

25. Did you feel welcomed by Chalmers and the staff at the Masters programme during your first days?

No, not at all»		16		1%
To some extent»		77		6%
Quite OK»		197		17%
Yes definitely»		561		48%
Excellent welcoming»		244		21%
No opinion»		61		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.97

26. How satisfied are you with the cooperation between you and your fellow students?

Not at all»		8		0%
Not so satisfied»		52		4%
Neither/Nor»		81		7%
Satisfied»		482		41%
Very satisfied»		508		44%
No opinion»		19		1%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

27. How satisfied are you with the opportunities to come in contact with teachers?

1155 svarande

Not at all»		9		0%
Not so satisfied»		48		4%
Neither/Nor»		105		9%
Satisfied»		546		47%
Very satisfied»		429		37%
No opinion»		19		1%

Genomsnitt: 4.21

28. Do you think that the student opinions and results from course evaluations have significant impact (taken seriously by the Programme coordinator)?

Not at all»		62		5%
To some extent»		185		16%
Could be improved»		318		27%
Yes, definetly»		410		35%
No opinion»		176		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

29. How large percentage (%) of the teachers in the core subjects within the Master programme have a good pedagogical ability?

0-20 %»		35		3%
20-40 %»		106		9%
40-60 %»		327		28%
60-80 %»		478		42%
80-100 %»		188		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

30. How large percentage (%) of the teachers in the core subjects within the Masters programme have a good ability to teach in English?

0-20 %»		14		1%
20-40 %»		58		5%
40-60 %»		184		16%
60-80 %»		386		33%
80-100 %»		504		43%

Genomsnitt: 4.14

31. To what extent is your knowledge/competence from your Bachelor degree sufficient to attend this programme?

Very poor»		6		0%
Poor»		28		2%
OK»		107		9%
Good»		337		29%
Very good»		659		57%
No opinion»		11		0%

Genomsnitt: 4.43

32. To what extent do the courses in the programme make use of, develop and deepen your knowledge/competence from your Bachelor degree?

1148 svarande

0-20 %»		45		3%
20-40 %»		122		10%
40-60 %»		316		27%
60-80 %»		458		39%
80-100 %»		208		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Summarizing questions

33. Considering your experience from this programme, would you choose this programme if you could turn back time?

No»		38		3%
Probably not»		56		4%
I would consider it»		141		12%
Yes - probably»		343		29%
Yes»		567		49%
No opinion»		7		0%

Genomsnitt: 4.18

- Depends» (?)
- Yes» (?)
- It is a big mess.» (No)
- ave not learned much the past year, and i don"t think we been treated that well from the programme. feels like the institution (PPU) doesn"t want to be in contact or care for the students. » (No)
- Lack of information and confusing and unclear goals. » (No)
- Low standard, and the teachers doesnt teach us basics only formulas to apply. And because the roads are quite bad I would choose to go to KTH and their infrastrucure instead.» (No)
- Because I feel it is to wide.. im not learning anything specific and it is a lot of repetetive work and too little work. It is to easy» (No)
- I have not learned much in this programme. The compulsary courses are few and the one that I have taken so far are of low quality. (The exception is Real-time systems.)» (No)
- The courses have been the same for decades and there is a lack of interest from the teatchers to make the lectures and tasks more up to date. I feel ignored as a student and the only courses I feel really saticfied with does not belong to MPSEB. I think the standard is too low and this could damage the reputation of Chalmers.» (No)
- I would choose another: CAS.» (No)
- I would choose "Production enginering" instead» (No)
- I think that I would most likely have gone the CS:ALL route instead, as it seems to have better courses and teachers overall.» (No)
- I really regret my decision! When I came to Sweden I thought that university teaching quality would in fact vary from country to country and unfortunately it does not. Back to my former university, despite its not good education services, it was even better than here because, over there, I could at least go to do internship in industry and get work experience beside my studies. But here, I can"t do anything as I"m also not learning things properly or at least the things which I need know to be able to find a job in my field. I feel like I"m completely tied, bound wasting time and money. Why don"t I just roll back?! I would love to do that If I could. Unfortunately I"ve invested all my savings in this "adventure" and now I have to take this burden until the end.» (No)
- Absolutely not. As written above the courses are held in a very unprofessional way and we learn alot more in the courses at Applied mechanics. » (No)
- Lack of connection with engineering! Seems like the sustainability-dept are not working for deep understanding for the sustanability when it comes to this masterprogram which includes environment,TECHNOLOGY and ECONOMY!!! » (No)
- I think it is a good program but if I would choose again I dont think it is the best program for me to reach my goals.» (No)
- The job market of other Electrical engineering master programs are better.» (No)
- too much courses, less practice, which means I can learn it myself.» (No)
- I would not take it because of the department of Product Development because they are not listening to their students and their needs.» (No)
- u mentioned my reason by answering previous questions » (No)
- I found out that many other branches of engineering (EESL, Space Engineering, Electric power engineering, etc) can do what we are suppose to do, but better than us. I still do not understand what a biomedical engineer can do better than others since it is a halfway from different disciplines. I cannot get the feeling of the "needs" for biomedical engineer.» (No)
- The curricula is designed by what are the teachers" interest instead of listening (even following) the industry"s needs. Being a design degree, and from service design / human-centered design perspectives the education is rather poor. It wouldn"t be hard to look how is it done in Umeå or Valand, or even Malmö to produce quality degrees as output.» (No)
- If I could turn back time why would I live the exact SAME life I did the first time!? But seriously, I guess I prefer more modelling so I would do the math program or the one at mechanical engineering.» (No)
- Too focused on shaping the student in the same shape. Too few elective courses and the encouragement to studies abroad have been minimal. There seems to be a way of thinking that the master program is complete with no faults even though the variety is small compared to other universities. Lack of competent teachers with regard to teaching skills and pedagogical instruments is below all critisism. And also concerning the master thesis there is not enough personnel to supervise and examine which in the long perspective leads to a thesis with lower quality. » (No)
- Because it does not suit me and therefore I am changing masters programme.» (No)
- I think I should have chosen KTH for a MAster degree in Networks ,they are much better and more organized .» (No)
- Due to less learning outcomes and involvement of unnecessary courses. » (No)
- i feel there is a big gap between bachelor and master - things that are taken for granted that you have learned or realized the overall organization of the school and master programs is insufficient - from master administration, to studio organization with teachers, tutors and schedules and to student administration with registration for courses etc» (No)
- It"s related to signals too much and there is only one option in biotechnology courses. All the other paths are prety much the same. There are great fields in the Healthcare technology that are absent from the program.» (No)
- The co-operation between the encubator and the school just doesn"t work. Academia as well as the encubator are built up for the students to work with ideas that are high tech and somewhat developed. And they are really not. Secondly, the business coaches from the ecnubator have never run a company and they don"t know what they are talking about. » (No)
- fist, it"s this area I"m interested in. second, hearing from my former classmates it seams like the computer science programme has a higher quality standard than the two masters belonging to my bachelor programme, namely software engineering and interaction design. » (No)
- It has cost me like 600000 sek to be ridiculed buy naive materialists who gets paid to do it. At the same time these naive thinkers are building appartments that cost 14.000.000.sek , is that your COMPETENCE? ARE THEY JOKING WITH ME? No they are not, because Chalmers are telling them: -IF you dont do it then somebody else will. The threats work, and the students and the faculties, they dance, they dance the dance of the market, our false god. Oh thau maker of fortune, for thee i will se my children ignored. For thee my intersts are tranformed to mearly dreams of a dreamer. My children transformed to spitful benefit-taking bastards of free thinking. The biggest threat of all. How i tremble when i see their to the market unbound will. How I swear, those sparkling and happy eyes, must be shut, if I dont, somebody else will. Oh my child how wrong you are. Avance my dearest, straight into the arms of the market. Like me, your soulless father. Shining before you, in my coat of ignorance and obvious lies. Thats why.» (No)
- It did not live up to what was said about it during the presentation of it and it was poorly managed.» (Probably not)
- Not too challenging. Too much "soft" knowledge. No clear profile, besides the game track.» (Probably not)
- Very few lessons, less then expected. Did not learn much.» (Probably not)
- Because is too oriented to developers and the gaming area when the HCI and GUIs areas has not be fully developed in the program me. Even when Chalmers seems to be an excellent institution the master seems out of the excellence standard I was expecting from this university.» (Probably not)
- Becouse I did not know how bad the job-situation would be after taking this program. I would have chosen something where I would be more likely to get a job afterwards...» (Probably not)
- I did not get to further my knowledge in the field.» (Probably not)
- the classes are poorly teached, i would go for another group... also, the level is a bit to low.» (Probably not)
- Not necessarily because of the program but because I realized that I was more interested in Business Design. I did however realize this after I had chosen and the SCM-program is fairly good, although maybe not for me.» (Probably not)
- Not: It is more heavy on theoretical physics than I expected, I like agent-based systems and statistics.» (Probably not)
- i think the algorithm and languages is a bit more advanced» (Probably not)
- Did not meet expectations, but would any other? similar programme» (Probably not)
- I have a small chance to get a job after this program.» (Probably not)
- Very Free, no lectures, unclear goals. U are in your own, not like you are in school. No workshops, hardly any lectures. » (Probably not)
- Overall, it did not meet my expectations in terms of academic rigor. I think this is as much (or more) a problem with the student body than it is with the teaching staff. Expectations in student performance are set too low, in my opinion, and the quality of work reflects this.» (Probably not)
- The student who are from electrical(Bachelor), its tough to complete the nuclear chemistry course.» (Probably not)
- They work a lot at getting students there, but not at keeping them satisfied when they are there..» (Probably not)
- The Job market for this programme is limited» (Probably not)
- More interested in another programme» (Probably not)
- I would choose a program with more structure to it.» (Probably not)
- Some of the mandatory courses was bad, I"ve heard that the CSALL has better courses with better teachers.» (Probably not)
- I think I have stated most of my reasons in the comments above.» (Probably not)
- It was incredibly badly handled. Most courses where either completely new or about to be terminated.» (Probably not)
- I would have choosen a program with more commercial aspects.» (Probably not)
- would prefer a more hands on approach, theory supported by practical learning ie a lot more lab time (and not just Matlab programming!!)» (Probably not)
- Much of what is taught is repetition from the bachelor. Many courses at MPISC seems to have little money to make it a good course and a good master.» (Probably not)
- Would have chosen a programme with more imaging and machine learning» (Probably not)
- Too many compulsory and semi-compulsory courses, you should be able to tailor what you read depending on what you will do after. For instance, if you are not interested in the Astronomy courses you should not have to read it, the same goes for fundamental physics courses. And maybe you even want to read courses from other master-programmes to a greater extent. I would probably choose Applied Physics for just this reason.» (Probably not)
- Very poor pedagogic in staff. Time spent is not efficient learning» (Probably not)
- Because I"ve had to write a Bachelor"s thesis and take five extra courses to get a Civil engineer degree and the only line within the field seems to be research and I do not want that.» (Probably not)
- There was too much focus on controll theory, I would prefer something less theoretical and more practical» (Probably not)
- Food science is under monopol of Industrial Biotehnology....» (Probably not)
- because there is not so many opportunity in job market. » (Probably not)
- When I chose the programme I did not realize the extent to which it was focused on design and not engineering. If I would choose again i would go for the Software Engineering programme instead and use the free corse choices to take all the courses specific for the game design track. I loved the Game Design track but did not enjoy most of the other couses of the programme (the interaction design courses).» (Probably not)
- Would choose another» (Probably not)
- Too much money for the quality of the pragramme. Especially when there is Germany.» (Probably not)
- Did not meet my expecation. Much repetition from bachelor» (Probably not)
- I feel the architectural education at chalmers sometimes favors a "lazy" non-questioning attitude towards architecture. Students pursuing conservtive and mainstream approach to architecture run little risk of critizism, where as higher demands on hour self concerning originality subject you to disproportionately greater risk. The school should definitely support investigative projects more. » (Probably not)
- Because I demand so much more from a Master"s programme. I think you really have to sit down and reflect upon how to make the programme and individual courses world class because now practically all courses, at least the mandatory ones, have a long way to go. I have studied at another university abroad so I know things can be a lot more professional. And, don"t underestimate language skills.» (Probably not)
- Many courses within the programme touch on the same topics and a lot of repetition is happening. This limits the possibilities to work more in depth with things. A very large amount of the teaching (project works especially) is done by Ph.D. students. Personally, I have realised that I prefer a slightly different specialisation and the many compulsory and semi-compulsory courses limits these options. In depth level of teaching is not always as high as expected, but at same time getting high grades at exams aredifficult since they are significantly higher demanding than the actual course work previous to them.» (Probably not)
- Teachers are not teachers att all. They know nothing about presenting the subject in an interresting way. Highly survere.» (I would consider it)
- To few geotechnical courses. Also better coopertation with the constuction program with some construction courses would be better.» (I would consider it)
- Would prefer a more structured program. Not allow students to take bachelor level course as electives in Master program. » (I would consider it)
- Jag tycker nivån har varit för låg faktiskt, just på geo. Det har varit lite av en "walk in the park" om man jämför med grundutbildningen och om man jämför med klasskamrater som går t ex konstruktion eller management. Jag hade önskat mer utmaning faktiskt. Å andra sidan tror jag man har lärt sig mer än vad man kanske tycker just nu men jag skulle ändå vilja ha mer utmanande kurser. Jag gillade Infrastructural geo engineering (namn?) kursen när man fick ett riktigt projekt, tänka själv och lite mer verklighetsförankrat. Mer sådant. » (I would consider it)
- I might have wanted to study the entire master abroad (not only one semester)» (I would consider it)
- Many fuzzy areas at the moment.» (I would consider it)
- No challenge at all. As well as a compulsory course during fall semester year 2.» (I would consider it)
- It is not challenging enough. Compared to my bachelor this is easy. Hopefully I"m prepared to work afterwards anyway.» (I would consider it)
- It is a good programme but it could be even better if some of the content was reviewed.» (I would consider it)
- not easy to find a job» (I would consider it)
- I have realised that my interest and thus main competence lies in the fields of electric power engineering, thus I would not be sure as to which programme I would apply for if I could turn back time. But definitely either.» (I would consider it)
- I come from the Architecture and Engineering Bachelor programme, which I feel is a very well planned programme and most of the courses is relevant and good. I now feel that many courses from MPSEB could be more inspiering and be better taught. Many times I have felt like the teachers aren"t very interested in learning the students, to make sure that they actually understand. They just keep on going and theaching in the same manner they have been doing for the previous years. » (I would consider it)
- The programme itself is good, although problem with administration. Such as messy schedule, bad handling and coordination of different courses, bad communication from coordinater. Very bad handling of supervisors for master thesis.» (I would consider it)
- the help from the administration is extremely poor» (I would consider it)
- Maybe I would choose the mathematical master program of GU.» (I would consider it)
- I took a lot of material courses as optional courses and maybe I should have taken that master instead» (I would consider it)
- More civil orientated courses in the structural and geo and water combined. Take the relating civil courses from both programs.» (I would consider it)
- Too easy, especially in the beginning» (I would consider it)
- It has been to easy, spending two years on those courses that I could have been done in less time is a bit of waste. » (I would consider it)
- It is more narrow than i expected» (I would consider it)
- A lot of courses were too basic and especially the exams and duggas (product development management, product development project, PLM).» (I would consider it)
- Good cooperation with industry but this should be improved. Students should spend time more in practical areas more than sitting in the class. Industrially based project is very good opportunity.» (I would consider it)
- Since I realize that it is a little to electrical and practical for me. But it"s very possible that I"d still choose it again.» (I would consider it)
- Was more interested in Traffic Engineering. Too much Geo and Water/Wastewater Engineering» (I would consider it)
- Because of that the area is interesting, but poorly executed» (I would consider it)
- The quality in the courses vary a lot and sometimes it does not feel that i can evolve in the speed that i could due to that the structure of the courses are like breakes. » (I would consider it)
- To much workload.» (I would consider it)
- For me, i would probably rather choose the other environmnetal programme (ecology). I have been struggeling hard in this programme and i feel constant stress, and therefore i would probably choose some other programme if i could re-do my choice.» (I would consider it)
- it is even a new programme to me from my Bachelor programme» (I would consider it)
- Since the tuition fees were introduced, probably that would effect my decision.» (I would consider it)
- I hope I will not be regret when I am getting old. Although it is not easy to find job in industrial with this program. I choose this because I have strong curiosity. But I may choose communication engineering or computer science at the very beginning. » (I would consider it)
- Because in this course teachers in authority are different from teachers responsible for the course. and especially the quality of teaching and teachers. They might be good researchers but not good teachers at all. » (I would consider it)
- I would consider it because it is a very interesting part of engineering, however i would like the the courses to have higher standard so i would feel i have the top notch education in the area.» (I would consider it)
- I would like to have more practical applied courses and less discussions or writing about sustainable development.» (I would consider it)
- the programme i am satisfied but when I start to find job i find it does not match the job market so good.So if turn back time I would consider it. » (I would consider it)
- No idea where to apply for work and the education feels a bit unclear» (I would consider it)
- I have a greater interest for traffic planinng, why I would probably prefer a master at LTH.» (I would consider it)
- Not sure I"ve learned enough valuable stuff to justify the time spent. Might have considered a computer science or a business master instead» (I would consider it)
- Maby Navel instead» (I would consider it)
- Because my interest has changed a bit.» (I would consider it)
- Subjects don"t go in sufficient depth in most cases. Courses seem to be designed to be easy so as to ensure students get high grades rather than to improve their understanding.» (I would consider it)
- The somewhat strict » (I would consider it)
- no practical knowledge. no cooperation with the industry. no visit to the industry.» (I would consider it)
- I might have chosen a programme more tuned to industry needs, like software engineering.» (I would consider it)
- Applied mechanics seems fun» (I would consider it)
- A lot of courses that have suppringsingly bad quality to be in a master program. » (I would consider it)
- Miscommunication regarding the Chalmers formula student as a course in the homepage.More details should be added that ne would be selected only after clearing the interview.Again if student from all disciplines are selected for CFS ,why is CFS only considered this as a elective course in Automotive Engineering and not in other courses. » (I would consider it)
- The CSALL program seems more serious and more close to Computer Science.» (I would consider it)
- While it"s awesome that you can choose freely among so many courses, there should be more guidance/strong recomendations on the order in which courses should be taken. Sometimes the formal prerequisites aren"t enough.» (I would consider it)
- The administration of the studio and the coordination of the Master Thesis has been horrible.» (I would consider it)
- I would choose the same program, but skip the "obligatory" courses Heat and moisture & Materials performance. » (I would consider it)
- The program syllabus is sufficient to get familiar with almost all areas within electric power engineering. Another frustrating thing took place during my first year: nearly 40% of teachers who really possess pedagogical skills and have good command of English. Some of them I want to sort out into extreme categories. Best teachers: - Jörgen Blennow - Stefan Lundberg - Yuriy Serdyuk - Stanislaw Gubanski - Poopak Roshanfekr - Ali Rabiei Worst teachers: - Per Norberg - Thomas Hammarström - Tuan Le - Xiangrong Chen » (I would consider it)
- I can not find a title in the job market to match my program, the student in my program find job more depend on their bachelor degree. Or to be more related with the industry or get close into.» (I would consider it)
- Mediocre course quality compared to other master programs. The overall feel is that students are an afterthought, it doesn"t feel as structured and organized as it should.» (I would consider it)
- I think i was more suited for Secure and Dependable (Though since that is gone, I would choose this one again)» (I would consider it)
- Had not researched enough on what some of the courses contained. And never considered Data/IT master programs.» (I would consider it)
- Had higher expectations.» (I would consider it)
- It suits my interests well» (Yes - probably)
- This or business design.» (Yes - probably)
- But I would have chosen other courses to take beside the core courses.» (Yes - probably)
- I started the programme when the Alias CAD course was not mandatory, I would seriously consider another programme if it had been mandatory.» (Yes - probably)
- There are not a lot of other choices really. Also there was enough choices within the programme to customize it to my liking.» (Yes - probably)
- I liked the programme but it is not so easy to explain for a future employer what we have been doing.» (Yes - probably)
- I attended Networks & Distributed systems for one year before changing to Interaction design. Very good decision for me!» (Yes - probably)
- I probably would but many of the courses are basically repetition from the first 3 years, which i"m disappointed with. » (Yes - probably)
- Most of the courses have been very interesting even if it sometimes was a little difficult to understand exactly the role of a particular course looking at the whole picture» (Yes - probably)
- It is a nice design, and the mix of courses is very good. Some of the courses are excellent but quite a few are really bad. I am interested in the subject, so I would probably chose it again, but I would like to change some of the teachers, like Mats Winroth, Sverker Alänge and Stefano Barone.» (Yes - probably)
- I like the subject but some of the teachers are not so good.» (Yes - probably)
- It is the most interesting programme.» (Yes - probably)
- But if the master program Chemistry and Bioscience still excisted i would have choosen it!» (Yes - probably)
- its the only programme for geotechnical studies» (Yes - probably)
- I would choose the programme, though i would probably revise the curriculum and change some courses to courses from other programmes such as applied mechanics» (Yes - probably)
- I like the courses, but I feel that I am a little diffuse in what I know. I don"t feel that I have some special knowledge in somthing in particular. However, a reason for this might be that I have studied parts abroad (1 Erasmus semester and also the Master"s Thesis in KL), but I am very happy that I got the oppontunity to study abroad, so I would not change that.» (Yes - probably)
- Even though I was disappointed with the low difficulty level in the beginning, the content of the master is exactly what I was looking for. I might consider doing the Software Engineering or general Computer Science Master instead, though.» (Yes - probably)
- I think this program is what I expected but I definetely think that there are som coarses that need to be evaluated and developed.» (Yes - probably)
- If I had know I could skip some courses that appear as compulsory I definetly would have chosen differently. » (Yes - probably)
- Its and interesting subject» (Yes - probably)
- I would choose the same programme but with some different non-compulsory courses. Also, this: http://xkcd.com/716/» (Yes - probably)
- Maybe a bit low level on the courses» (Yes - probably)
- It"s what I want to work with.» (Yes - probably)
- You can"t turn back time... If it was possible, I would bet all my money on events I know will happen, and possibly take some courses at Chalmers just for fun.» (Yes - probably)
- The level is too low.» (Yes - probably)
- Chosen gibbs or mei instead» (Yes - probably)
- My background is biological science, and I follow food science here, which gives me more chances to know a new area.» (Yes - probably)
- The programe is great, but the cost of living in Sweden is extremely high!» (Yes - probably)
- Because I think it is a very interesting field of science and I like the topic of the courses that are included even though I feel that many courses could be improved.» (Yes - probably)
- Sometimes it"s hard to see the applications of what I"ve been studying. What do I get good at by studying this program? "Complex adaptive systems" is a bit too broad to really say anything.» (Yes - probably)
- I would consider business design» (Yes - probably)
- What one learn does not give any decisive advantages. More real life case based, like HBR.» (Yes - probably)
- It"s the only programme with exciting fundamental physics!» (Yes - probably)
- Following the programme has introduced me to many new topics that I probably would not have encountered otherwise (or much later). Although if I had the choice again I might go for a more computer science oriented programme rather than software engineering.» (Yes - probably)
- I might have chosen sustainable energy systems and taken some courses from Industrial ecology, you dont need all courses since they overlap so much.» (Yes - probably)
- I would like more physics... » (Yes - probably)
- there are some courses I had wished for, which is not available. I would probably look around to see if there were any better options. if not i would have done the same choice» (Yes - probably)
- Hade valt några andra valbara kurser» (Yes - probably)
- I would have chosen the program but I wouldn"t follow the program as intended during the first semester. Instead I would have chosen my own path in order to get a degree as Civilingenjör i Arkitektur och Teknik but not a degree MSc in Strucutral Engineering and Building Performance. The crappy courses discussed previously dose not way up to the opportunities the title will give in the future.» (Yes - probably)
- Maybe I would choose a program in another unisvesity in Sweden with more focus on infrastructure» (Yes - probably)
- Or may be Structural Engineering, but I like my program.» (Yes - probably)
- Good reputation of programme, however, I might have chosen a different field of study. » (Yes - probably)
- The programme was quite ok but the country and the weather!» (Yes - probably)
- Since there is no bechelor course about this, I think the curriculum should be more systematic» (Yes - probably)
- Overall it"s quite good, except some incompetent teachers and some chaos (we didn"t know what subjects exactly will we have at 2nd year for long time). Otherwise it"s as I suspected it will be.» (Yes - probably)
- The heavy preassure during the first semester is the only thing that could make me reconsider my choice. » (Yes - probably)
- The master in not dynamic enough, not enough integration with association and extra activity that could help the student to develop and test their knowledge. » (Yes - probably)
- It"s really difficult to tell. But I might have chosen a more computer engineering oriented path.» (Yes - probably)
- I think this programme fits better for the guy who has 2 or 3 years" working experience.» (Yes - probably)
- Personally I like both aspects of Computer Science, both the user problems and and the technical aspects. Personally I would not complain if the courses sometimes was a bit more technical.» (Yes - probably)
- Because there are few options and hard to find information suggesting otherwise, or to find detailed information about the programs - it"s details one wants.» (Yes - probably)
- Seems like one of the masters programs where you get the most theoretical knowledge that is hard to grasp when working. Comparing to the management masters program, the same knowledge can be learnd to a further extent while in practice. Almost all larger companies offer courses in economics, project planning etc. » (Yes - probably)
- The subjects are interesting and fun» (Yes - probably)
- I like most of the courses, but perhaps I would get more of the nice parts if studying a computer science programme instead» (Yes - probably)
- I was told it was the only program from which I could graduate with a (civilingenjör) master of industrial design engineering.» (Yes - probably)
- Although I was not satisfied with some of the courses, the the Matter Space studio I attended provided a great platform for developing personal interests within the field.» (Yes - probably)
- If MPARE hadn"t been cancelled, I would"ve chosen that instead because of my undergrad background from Arkitektur och Teknik.» (Yes - probably)
- I would hope that the organisation would be better. Otherwise I am satisfied» (Yes - probably)
- because the other programme Geo and water seems even worse, what I have heard from my friends even though the subjects are interresting. » (Yes - probably)
- Great opportunity to learn a lot,» (Yes - probably)
- Det ligger mest i linje med mina intresseområden.» (Yes - probably)
- I like the programme a lot, but the lack of renewable energy courses is a limiting factor. Also the lack of integrated power engineering courses and difficulties to choose them as elective courses.» (Yes - probably)
- Advantages of this programme: we have a project to do. Disadvantages of this programme: The dedicated courses for our programme is limited.» (Yes - probably)
- I didnt know that it would be so much hard courses with matlab programming.» (Yes - probably)
- relevant for my interests» (Yes)
- It has been the best two years at Chalmers. Have never had this support from teachers and fellow students.» (Yes)
- Six sigma, Ida gremyr, Lars trygg and sverker alänge! » (Yes)
- All and all a good choice for me, some administration issues needs attention, ans well as some of the classes. Some of the lecturers had an unfortunate view on lecturing technique. » (Yes)
- In my opinion it is the only serious master program at Chalmers.» (Yes)
- Marvelous masters program. » (Yes)
- Excellent opportunity» (Yes)
- Best programming-master. You cant be a good programmer without the Algorithms-courses (should be added to some other IT-masters also)» (Yes)
- It"s what I"ve expected, did consider the Energy systems master, but this one is and would be a better choice for me» (Yes)
- There are a lot of fun to study these knowledge» (Yes)
- I studied to be a "högskoleingenjör" before and did not feel that I had enough knowledge start working. I therefore applied the IDE master program to deeper my knowledge within those areas that I find the most interesting and that I want to work within. Because of all the selectable courses I have been able to "Personalize" my education based on my own interests and therefore I am very satisfied. » (Yes)
- I chose this programme because I knew that I wanted to develop my geotechnical studies so this programme was the only option.» (Yes)
- I love the subjects that I study here and would definately choose it again.» (Yes)
- Best alternative for the jobs I want. » (Yes)
- It gives good broad understanding of PM fundamentals, helps to develop personal networks.» (Yes)
- It remains my field of interest.» (Yes)
- Or business design» (Yes)
- Only contender would be the Entrepreneur School» (Yes)
- It really suits my interests. And the relationship among the students and also between students and teachers are excellent. Also the MIND (Erasmus Mundus) programme is a great opportunity to see Industrial Ecology in an international perspective.» (Yes)
- Of all the Chalmers programmes, this still best suits my interests, and gives valuable knowledge for a future career.» (Yes)
- The programme is exactly what it seemed to be and I am very satisfied with the results, even considering that I was here for just 1 year as an exchange student. This programme was one of the more satisfying choices I have made.» (Yes)
- Did not know what I wanted to study before master and Biotechnology had a wide range of courses possible to pick and choose!» (Yes)
- But I change some of the elective courses.» (Yes)
- It fulfills the expectations I had when I applied to a very large extent, plus the study climate is really good. That makes even a busy schedule and a hihg workload fun.» (Yes)
- Very good programme within my field of interest. » (Yes)
- This is what i want to work with in the future, some of the courses are excellent (Structural Concrete with Björn Engström). The crappy courses(Material Performance, Heat and Moisture Engineering) unfortunately comes with the package right now.» (Yes)
- » (Yes)
- Learned a lot.» (Yes)
- The course mixture is very intresting and a good match for my intrests.» (Yes)
- Good teachers. B. Mehlig and K. Lindgren are both brilliant. M. Wahde, S. Östlund, E. Edlund are also fine.» (Yes)
- If you want to continue as a process engineers there are no other opportunities. The program also provides a wide range of courses in different fields and the courses feels mostly relevant for my education.» (Yes)
- Because it is the only master"s programme dealing with what I want to work with and what interests me, so it doesn"t really matter how good or bad it is.» (Yes)
- Because I get more and more motivated to study for every course I take!» (Yes)
- It is a really good programme that has broaden my perspective and given me the oppurtunity to learn many new things.» (Yes)
- It"s the field that interests me the most out of those offered. » (Yes)
- Because it is practical and pretty useful» (Yes)
- well-organized programme interesting courses good connections to industry» (Yes)
- exactly what i was looking for!» (Yes)
- It is to 90% what I was expecting and looking for.» (Yes)
- Because it is really a different experience and a valuable chance both for study and student life.» (Yes)
- Because I like systems biology very much! I regard it as my future career.» (Yes)
- There is no other MP I"m considering» (Yes)
- it is great fun, and of a good educational level» (Yes)
- Great teachers, ambitious students.» (Yes)
- researching filed is very fantastic,such as biomaterials.I"m very interesting in that.And also Chalmers is almost best technical university in Sweden.We feel very proud of it.» (Yes)
- I learn a lot that complement my bachelor, new ways of working, doing research, taking responsibility for my own projects and working with people from different disciplines. » (Yes)
- I like the subject» (Yes)
- I am very happy with the course, I have done.» (Yes)
- because it broadened my horizons, let me observe how things are done in another country» (Yes)
- I have developed a strong interest in materials, in particular polymeric materials» (Yes)
- It is what I expected» (Yes)
- Lots of experience» (Yes)
- I think this programme seems like one of the best Chalmers has to offer. S2 is a strong department with a lot going for it. Friends in other programs seem slightly disappointed in comparison.» (Yes)
- Because I"m not interested of any other subjects than Industrial Design Engineering.» (Yes)
- Most of the programme is good, even though parts of it would need revising. We have a good master cordinator that cares about the quality and content of the programme. » (Yes)
- Very pleased with the programme as a whole.» (Yes)
- 1) interesting 2) you learn a lot 3) good opportunities to get a job 4) nice combination of theory and applications» (Yes)
- I"m interested in sustainable development and there is no other master programme in architecture with this theme.» (Yes)
- I have always wanted to be a structural engineer and I think the master"s programme is perfect except for the mandatory courses.» (Yes)
- Knowledge and skills contained in the core course are excellent» (Yes)
- It is one of a few programmes that I could choose from and I find most of the courses really interesting» (Yes)
- Good teacher, interesting courses, nice fellow students.» (Yes)
- It is my big interest.» (Yes)
- It is a subject that interests me a lot, which is reason enough, I think.» (Yes)
- It"s challenging and interesting! » (Yes)
- Yes, but the administrative difficulties are/were terrible!» (Yes)
- I wanted a job in this area.» (Yes)
- It exceeded my expectations» (Yes)
- This is what I"m interested in.» (Yes)
- I"ve been satisfied with my choice all along!» (Yes)
- Det har varit två fantastiska år för min del. » (Yes)
- I am currently on an exchangde program and haven"t attended master corses on Chalmers yet» (No opinion)

34. What should definitely be preserved in your Masters programme?

35. What should definitely be changed in your Masters programme?

36. Do you have any general suggestions for improvement of Chalmers Master programme?