Visa resultat

SP4_12/13 Life cycle asseeement, VTM081

Your own effort

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

24 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		4		16%
Around 20 hours/week»		9		37%
Around 25 hours/week»		5		20%
Around 30 hours/week»		6		25%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.54

- I would be more willing to put in an above-average amount of time into this course if content about LCA and LCA software was actually taught. As it is now, I was not happy about spending most of my time with Microsoft Excel, a program I am already quite familiar with. I would rather learn about Life Cycle Assessment.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

24 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		3		12%
50%»		3		12%
75%»		7		29%
100%»		11		45%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- The pace at the lectures was worthy of elementary school» (25%)
- After 4 complete lectures i was so dissappointed about the course that i didn"t attend regulary anymore» (50%)
- Close to 90%» (75%)
- annoying to listen to the guest lecture from SCA..» (75%)
- Missed only the guest lecture on LCA software due to illness.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		4		17%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		5		21%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		14		60%

Genomsnitt: 3.26

- I do not know now what the goals were, but that does not mean that you did not show them in the beginning of the course, I just don´,t remember, sorry.» (?)

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

21 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		2		9%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		18		85%
No, the goals are set too high»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 1.95

- The goals are very based on the LCA methodology. I would like to see stricter goals regarding development of LCA studies and life cycle thinking» (No, the goals are set too low)
- The LCA report is by far too much work if one really wants to learn something. The exam is useless and should be canceled.» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

No, not at all»		1		4%
To some extent»		9		39%
Yes, definitely»		12		52%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- Useless exam. The project only gives 30% and has by far more work load!» (No, not at all)
- pity that it was the same structure of the questions as the last years! » (To some extent)
- The questions are more or less the same every year. It is possible to pass the exam simply reading the past exams.» (To some extent)
- I think the examination assessed what was handled in the course.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

Small extent»		11		45%
Some extent»		10		41%
Large extent»		2		8%
Great extent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 1.7

- The teaching was awful. Not one of the teachers created her own slides. So when a question was asked, the answer was often, "I don"t know. These aren"t my slides." What are you doing teaching the class, if you don"t make your own slides? Or even take a SECOND to understand the slides you are presenting? It makes me uneasy when I feel like I know more about LCA than you do, and you are TEACHING the class.» (Small extent)
- It gave the impression that the teachers do not prepare their class in advance. They do not use their own slides and are not prepare to answer to eventual questions about it. » (Small extent)
- Could not really help with difficult questions. » (Small extent)

7. Did you find the lectures and exercises well-structured and easy to follow?

- Would have been nice if we were better prepared about lca databases before Ciroths lecture.»
- AkzoNobel is the best company and clearly does a lot of real LCA work. They should always be asked back to speak.»

Maria Ljunggren Söderman
24 svarande

No»		5		20%
Somewhat»		10		41%
Yes»		9		37%

Genomsnitt: 2.16

Jutta Hildenbrand
24 svarande

No»		5		20%
Somewhat»		7		29%
Yes»		12		50%

Genomsnitt: 2.29

Andreas Ciroth
21 svarande

No»		3		14%
Somewhat»		10		47%
Yes»		8		38%

Genomsnitt: 2.23

Christel Cederberg
20 svarande

No»		1		5%
Somewhat»		3		15%
Yes»		16		80%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

Björn Spak
20 svarande

No»		1		5%
Somewhat»		4		20%
Yes»		15		75%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

Johan Widheden
16 svarande

No»		2		12%
Somewhat»		6		37%
Yes»		8		50%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

Kristian Jelse
19 svarande

No»		2		10%
Somewhat»		6		31%
Yes»		11		57%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

8. Was the software exercise instructive

No»		7		29%
Somewhat»		13		54%
Yes»		4		16%

Genomsnitt: 1.87

- the time was limited for the tasks we had to do, the software was difficult to use and had lots of gaps at the data section (most of the data were "dummy").» (No)
- The software was really messy and there was not enough time nor incentive to do it properly» (No)
- The software exercise was cursory and brief. I do not feel like I have a good grasp of the software. There should be multiple sessions and students should be accountable for what is done with the software during this time. The project should include a software component, in order to become more familiar with the software to be able to apply its use. I want to be able to go to a company and use a software so I can help them with their goals, rather than slow them down by being software-illiterate.» (No)
- ... What was the aim of this software exercise? » (No)
- The lack of very clear directions made the task slow and boring.» (Somewhat)
- It would br more interesting to use a software that is actuallt use in industry.» (Somewhat)
- I do think it is good that we see a software but I think you can have a look at the exercise instruction since it was partly quite hard to follow. Also, please book a larger room next year since the air quality was bad after 10 minutes without the abillity of keeping a door/window open.» (Somewhat)
- There could very well be more time allocated to working with the software!» (Yes)

9. The project

- We were only 2 group members »
- My group fellows wanted to achieve a 3 on the report, I wanted to get 4 or 5. Was hard for me to do extra work on my own in order to get higher grade»
- The project was to large, and it was more time consuming than learning efficient. Too much time was spent just making sure the data in excel were right than actually learning the different LCA procedures. So, too much time was spent on the data in the inventory part and little time was left for the more important impact assessment etc.»
- Maybe it would be better if the students chooses the groups themselves. As it is now some students take the course as serious as others, (for ex it is often more important to students in the master programs to get good grades). This year it also was a lot of students that dropped out which also maked everything more difficult.»
- A good way of learning LCA, hands on.»
- The project was really instructive, but I would suggest to put the first hand-in a little earlier so one is forced to get started earlier»
- Doing LCA by hand is fine on a small scale but much of the project time was spent messing around with Excel. Time could be better spent learning concepts. This must stop. Asking if extra time in addition to the scheduled hours for the course is ridiculous. Countless hours were sucked up in order to learn how to manipulate Microsoft Excel, rather than to learn LCA. This is surely not the goal of the course.»
- The project was very good for learning. It set the tempo rather high, maybe could have been one more final review with supervisor. The supervisors comments where very general and sometimes abstact, would have wanted more specific. »
- One of our group members dropped the course so we ended up being only two people. I do not feel that you took that into consideration at all when grading the report as you said you would. But we haven´,t seen the final grading of the course yet and from what I understood you will take it into consideration in the final grading,»
- Both good and less good using the examples in the book. Could be nice to chose a subject you interested in instead. But the project were very easy to understand because of the book too.»

Did you learn much?
23 svarande

No»		3		13%
Somewhat»		6		26%
Yes»		14		60%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

Did you receive sufficient support from supervisors?
23 svarande

No»		2		8%
Somewhat»		9		39%
Yes»		12		52%

Genomsnitt: 2.43

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

No»		1		4%
Somewhat»		7		30%
Yes»		15		65%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

Did you need extra time in addition to the scheduled hours for your course?
23 svarande

No»		1		4%
Somewhat»		2		8%
Yes»		20		86%

Genomsnitt: 2.82

Did you think that the number of students was well adjusted to the task?
23 svarande

No»		5		21%
Somewhat»		2		8%
Yes»		16		69%

Genomsnitt: 2.47

Were there enough hand-ins?
23 svarande

No»		3		13%
Somewhat»		2		8%
Yes»		18		78%

Genomsnitt: 2.65

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

Small extent»		4		16%
Some extent»		4		16%
Large extent»		10		41%
Great extent»		6		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- The slides followed the book to a very large extend so they were almost sufficient. The book feels a bit out of date so maybe looking alternatives could be good.» (Small extent)
- It"s funny to sell a book that is written by the lecturer...» (Small extent)
- Lecture slide somewhat helpful.» (Some extent)
- The book would probably have been enough» (Large extent)
- my learning came completely from the previous ESA class and the book. » (Large extent)
- grate book, but really needs to be updated» (Great extent)
- The course book is simply very good. » (Great extent)
- Great book with a lot of examples - makes it easy to understand» (Great extent)

11. What did you think about the textbook Hitch Hiker’,s Guide to LCA?

Bad»		3		12%
OK»		4		16%
Good»		11		45%
Excellent»		6		25%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- Not recent enough And to talkative and repetitive Too expensive for what it was worth reading it.» (Bad)
- It"s funny to sell a book that is written by the lecturer...» (Bad)
- The book is not stuffed with information like some course books are, not as hard to read but sometimes takes time to find the information you want.» (OK)
- I felt that it was made compulsory when it wasn"t needed. Given that it was so expensive I can"t help but feel that it was made compulsory for the financial benefit of the authors at Chalmers.» (Good)
- The book is outdated. It needs an update.» (Good)
- needs to be updated, especcially the projects» (Excellent)

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

Very badly»		0		0%
Rather badly»		2		8%
Rather well»		11		45%
Very well»		11		45%

Genomsnitt: 3.37

- A bit unclear in the beginning how to send in the reports» (Rather well)
- wouldn"t hurt to upload the previous exams :)» (Very well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		1		4%
Rather good»		9		37%
Very good»		12		50%
I did not seek help»		2		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

14. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		1		4%
Adequate»		11		45%
High»		9		37%
Too high»		3		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- I think generally it is not very much workload. But in my case, because of the complete disinterest of one of my groupmates, teh workload for the project was rather high.» (Adequate)
- The project work involved far too much work for the 40% percentage. My task had at least 14 pages in the LCA book while some tasks were two or three pages. Although we did have four group members, I don"t feel this was a fair distribution of work.» (High)
- it should be high work load» (High)
- The project is ridiculous and unnecessarily tedious. This isn"t a course about Microsoft Excel. It is a course about LCA. So teach LCA. Please.» (High)
- The project was time consuming, probably even more since we were only to people in my group.» (High)

15. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		2		8%
Adequate»		12		50%
High»		9		37%
Too high»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.37

Summarizing questions

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

Poor»		4		16%
Fair»		2		8%
Adequate»		7		29%
Good»		10		41%
Excellent»		1		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.08 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- This class is hardly an introduction to LCA. The teachers did not teach anything and the students are not prepared to enter a company and do LCA.» (Poor)
- This class should be the diamond point of the Industrial Ecology course, but it delivers the same information of the ESA class and in a worse way. In addition I found the ESA"s project more challenging than the LCA class (in that case we had also to find the data), that is a paradox! The guest lectures are very interesting and I recommend to keep them for the next year. It seems a class of 10 years ago. PLEASE UPDATE IT!» (Poor)
- new lectures..» (Poor)
- most of the information at the lectures has already be presented at anthoer course (Environmental System Analysis). Exrsice C wasn"t very well explained and the calculations from the exercise E of the book are different from the ones presented at the class (although the problem is exactly the same with the same data, the results are different.So, the exam question on the allocation was responded differently by each student (because some of them read the exercise E of the book and some the exercise fromt the power points).» (Adequate)
- I have increased my understanding of life cycle thinking but did not think when I took the course that it would be so methodology-based.» (Good)
- Very much varying teaching quality. » (Good)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

19. Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor