Aktuella utvärderingar

Visa resultat

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

SP1_12/13 Sustainable development, FFR160

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-10-28 - 2012-11-06
Antal svar: 37
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 47%
Kontaktperson: Christina Larsson»

Your own effort

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

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

37 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»9 24%
Around 20 hours/week»13 35%
Around 25 hours/week»8 21%
Around 30 hours/week»5 13%
At least 35 hours/week»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.4

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

37 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»1 2%
50%»4 10%
75%»17 45%
100%»15 40%

Genomsnitt: 4.24

- Like 95% really. Skipped two guest-lectures.» (75%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

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

3. How understandable are the course goals?

37 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»2 5%
The goals are difficult to understand»1 2%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»19 51%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»15 40%

Genomsnitt: 3.27

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

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

35 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»2 5%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»32 91%
No, the goals are set too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.97

- The course didn"t focus on the most important aspects of environmental protection, it focused instead on what the media is talking about but didn"t. Yes, all of the topics were very important, and yes solving these problems would make the world more sustainable, but there was no real glimpse of the overall problem or its complexity. Many people fail to see the implications of many developments, and this is the most important. People need to see an image of how things work, so then when they look at it, they see when there is a problem. Instead, it felt more like learning about the problems - yes, it did give very good points and we definitely learned, but the overall socio-techno-economic and political image was missing. People need to see why we"re doing this, the problems with air pollution and how it directly affects peoples health. Sustainable development isn"t about efficiency, it"s about sustaining life, and efficiency is a tool to achieve that. Achieving happiness and health around the world didn"t seem like the focus of this class, it seemed more like achieving higher yields etc... and it didn"t directly correlate to the core goals.» (No, the goals are set too low)

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

36 svarande

No, not at all»1 2%
To some extent»18 50%
Yes, definitely»14 38%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»3 8%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- The exam claims to have assessed understanding but instead it appears to assess how much minutiae can be memorised and recalled from the readings.» (To some extent)
- Good format for the exam. » (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

37 svarande

Small extent»1 2%
Some extent»13 35%
Large extent»16 43%
Great extent»7 18%

Genomsnitt: 2.78

- i would not pass it without the litterature» (Some extent)
- The course about discounting was a bit difficult to understand. More applications and calculations could be good to fully understand what it is about.» (Large extent)
- In general, the teaching was good and insightful. Mostly it was presented in an objective way with a focus on strong argumentation, which I found very positive. However, a few lectures I felt were dominated by the personal opinions of the professors (especially Maria Grahn and some of the guest lectures), which I did not enjoy that much.» (Large extent)

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

37 svarande

Small extent»5 13%
Some extent»12 32%
Large extent»16 43%
Great extent»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- The readings could have been more relevant to the topics. And the expensive compendium could have included all the articles it claimed to include.» (Small extent)
- articles are ok in compendium but the organization of them is very bad.» (Some extent)
- Man&Material flow var mycket bra!! » (Large extent)
- i had to use wikipedia for some understanding, it was quite hard to search for a certain topic in the compendium» (Large extent)
- The compendium is very good and useful, and it could be great with even more references for other, useful reading materials for the course.» (Large extent)

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

37 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»4 10%
Rather well»19 51%
Very well»13 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- It took time before the compendium was printed. And it took long time to put up the power points at the homepage » (Rather badly)
- Could not send in assignment, had to mail. And then at first it said I had not done the assignment. » (Rather badly)
- Give more information when new information has been handed out. » (Rather well)
- I would have preferred the use of pingpong though...» (Rather well)
- Please know that the web page interface is terrible in general. TERRIBLE. » (Rather well)

Study climate

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

36 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 2%
Rather good»13 36%
Very good»13 36%
I did not seek help»9 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- It was definitely a great place to be able to ask questions, but sometimes when I did, I got one side of the story - the corporate side instead of the real side.» (Rather good)

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

37 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»2 5%
Rather well»10 27%
Very well»22 59%
I did not seek cooperation»3 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- No group work!» (Rather poorly)

11. How was the course workload?

37 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»3 8%
Adequate»23 62%
High»10 27%
Too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- Seminar 2 took A LOT of time and we did not get ANY information about how well we did on the seminars, no feedback. And no credits for the hand-in, that is bad.» (High)
- dem två sistta semenare inlämningar var för nära varandra!! » (Too high)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

37 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»4 10%
Adequate»11 29%
High»14 37%
Too high»8 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- i did not have time to prepare a lot to seminar 2, but over all adequate» (Adequate)
- I read 3 courses this period, so that"s why it is too much» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?*

37 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»5 13%
Adequate»6 16%
Good»24 64%
Excellent»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.62 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Well was almost similar to other courses already taken! was like sustainable energy futures minus the calculations. Should NOT BE SEMI-COMULSORY CORUSE FOR STUDENTS OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS! was just repetation of previous courses.» (Fair)
- It was not very cohesive among all of the lecturers. I do not see how it is relevant to my course of study. Outside the box thinking was not encouraged.» (Fair)
- Overall I enjoyed the course. Especially the parts that were dominated by discussions (intergenerational justice, environmental ethics, limits to growth?). However, some of the more specifics, like energy futures and agriculture were too broad and too vague. Personally I would like to see more aspects of environmental economics and this focus, although it is of course very difficult to combine it all.» (Adequate)
- I liked it very much, just wish there was a more overall picture of the core issues.» (Good)
- Very interesting! It brings a lot more about sustainable development and shows many applications in the "real life"» (Excellent)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Jakobs lecture was nice!»
- the seminars and the lectures about ethics and Food production»
- the seminars»
- The guest lectures. I hope you will continue to find more interesting speakers. You could possibly incorporate these into the exam questions. »
- The seminars and the relative discussions where interesting»
- the seminars and all the guest lectures»
- seminars»
- The seminars and the handing in of pre-assignments is very effective I believe.»
- The seminar, all the differents subject treated.»
- The literature compendium and the man and material flows book»
- same compendium content so at least the next generation can save some money on purchasing it»
- The enviromental ethics point of view»
- Good range of topics, well rounded course- it seems like a solid amount of information, showing a good amount of important details (just wish it was put more into perspective)!»
- Subject and examination, guest lectures were really good»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Seminars, the actual seminars were good but the prepatory tasks for the second was difficult, took long time.»
- Hand in for seminar 3 was to time consuming and not relevant. Seminar 2 was to unstructured and should have had preparation so that the 2 hours could be used for qualitative discussions and not preparations and guessing arguments. Also, there was a lack of connection between lectures. Should have been more interactive activities on the shedule to open for discussion and understanding.»
- N/A»
- The calculations for SEMINAR 3 was to extended and in the end we didn"t had the time to discuss all the questions at the seminar! Why on earth make us do all of those calculations and discussion hand-ins when the time-limit at the seminar is not near enough to discuss the matter? In the end of the seminar my group had just time for one or two comments from the students (because the time was to short!). - That is NOT an discussion! And it an insult to us students -to force us to do those calculations when there are not time to even discuss it properly! Cut down on Seminar 3 - make it just one part (not two) to solve!»
- Some of the seminars were poorly formatted or just lacked the ability to get students involved in the discussion. I enjoyed the seminars although I believe that they could be set up better so that there is more participation and better preparation from the instructors. »
- I think there are too many general concepts to learn by heart»
- nuthin»
- compendium was so so»
- Put out the power points before the lecture begin»
- Maybe try to make the discount chapter more clear and more interesting. Try to change the exam into less "by heart questions" such as: the 7 different levels of substitutability etc.»
- The goals of the seminars should be made clearer to the students, to allow them to prepare appropraitely for them»
- Homepage »
- content»
- I and others extremely disliked and disagreed with how GMO seemed to be portrayed as a good development for mankind, while organic was not as good. Only corporate tests show this kind of result, while all independent tests show that organic is far healthier, higher yielding, and better on the environment (and safe)!»
- Some lectures were quite non rewarding. Seminars could be more in depth.»

16. Additional comments

- Should be credits and feedback for the seminars!»
- It seems like, even if we are given the opportunity of discussing in the seminars, we never get to a reasonable conclusion to the questions proposed, it might be better to have a teacher that clarifies the most important points developed in the discussion»
- It would have been good if you got the grade three just for doing the hand-ins and exam for the grade 4-5. It was quite large hand-ins for just being mandatory and preparation for the seminars»

17. Which programme do you belong to?

37 svarande

Industrial Ecology»11 29%
Sustainable Energy Systems»10 27%
Erasmus student or else»16 43%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.62

To those of you that have also read the course sustainable energy futures (FFR170):

18. Did you experience an overlap between the two courses?

12 svarande

Yes»5 41%
No»7 58%

Genomsnitt: 1.58

- sista semnare uppgiften var med i FFR 170, » (Yes)
- For me as student of both courses (Sustainable Energy Futures in 2011) there were many unnecessary overlaps. Obviously the aspects of energy were very redundant, and I could gain almost no new knowledge for that part. Also the parts of accounting, debate on the interest rate and so on was overlapping. I felt the seminar 3 was overlapping as well, although the lectures on the related fields were not identical.» (Yes)
- The sustainable energy futures also talked about discount rate, it was good to repeat it and understand it deeper» (Yes)

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.62
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.65

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från