Slutrapport kursutvärdering, VTGN05

Basfakta

Sammanfattning av enkätsvar

På alla frågor utom den om närvaro kan poängen variera mellan -100 och +100, där -100 innebär att man "tar helt avstånd från påståendet" och +100 att man "instämmer helt i påståendet".

Närvaro vid undervisningen Andel av undervisningen Antal Andel 0-30 % 0 0 % 30-70 % 0 0 % 70-100 % 23 85 % Skalor & enskilda frågor Skala Poäng StdAvv God undervisning +71 30 Tydliga mål +44 42 Förståelseinriktad examination +57 27 Lämplig arbetsbelastning +30 33 Enskilda frågor Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning +78 35 Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen +76 40

Fördelning av svar på fråga 26: "Överlag är jag nöjd med den här kursen"        Antal Andel Missnöjda (<0) 1 4 % Neutrala (0) 2 7 % Nöjda (>0) 24 89 % Har ej besvarat frågan 0 0 % Medelpoäng +76 Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) 40 Män +86 Kvinnor +73

Fördelning av svar på fråga 17: "Kursen känns angelägen för min utbildning"      Medelpoäng +78 Standardavvikelse (StdAvv) 35

Kommentarer

Kursrepresentantens kommentarer

Kurslärarens kommenterer

Final comments (4 December 2025) from the main teacher of the course:
Groundwater Modelling and Contaminant Transport, 7.5 ECTS, 2025

In general, the course content, structure and communication between teachers and students seem to be very appreciated by most of the students in a similar way as last years. In addition to the CEQ answers (given by 27 of 30 participants, or “90%” of the students), these teacher comments are based on the answers of an additional course-specific questionnaire (filled in by the same 27 students), experiences from teaching contacts and feed-back meetings with the students (usually in groups of two students) and also two evaluation meetings with student representatives.

The students cover a large spectrum of background knowledge and experience and they express a wide range of opinions but are in total satisfied, in particular with the relatively realistic assignments with varied subjects covering the range of study programs, the detailed feedback, support and availability of the teachers also outside lecture hours. A substantial group of students feel underprepared for simulations of hydrogeochemical development and contaminant transport, but many students do also think that these aspects are very important to include in a couple of assignments in this course. Nevertheless, there are a few matters which still demand further improvements and we will try to consider at least a couple of them when planning for 2026:

a) We will try to emphasize even more that the analysis of the results is more important than a perfect calibration or presenting all aspects of the simulations. The teachers should try to develop the introductions of every exercise mentioning common mistakes and when the results are “good enough”.

b) The expected outcomes and conclusions of the work with the assignments, as well as assumptions and tasks related to assignments 1, 3 and 4 should be more clearly described and presented. We will also try to add information incrementally during the exercises and inform the students that we do so.

c) It would be better to give software instructions in a computer room, not in the lecture room, for all four assignments.

d) The combination of assigned and free-to-choose assignment groups are mainly appreciated. There are some drawbacks with both systems and none of them is a guarantee for well working groups. It will be developed further by encouraging the students to start all the assignment group works with at least five minutes discussing common expectations. The teachers should find a way to get an early warning regarding the need for supporting students who end up doing almost all the work of a group.

e) The peer review system is suggested to be improved and clarified by a development of the criteria and standards of the peer review grades. The teachers may also demonstrate how to act showing an example with review comments based on a “real” report. The teachers shall also try to give a brief feed-back to the reviewers.

CEQ-enkäten fylldes i