Business Administration, Environmental Management, Second Cycle, HT25, FE431A

Antal respondenter: 32
Antal svar: 10
Svarsfrekvens: 31,25 %

1. Course representatives’ overall assessment of the course

The course in Environmental Management was perceived very differently by students. Overall, most students perceive it as strongly meeting the course goals and appreciated the practical orientation, guest lectures, and real-world case work and integration of theory. However, one student experienced a clear misalignment between lectures, workshops, the group assignment, and the examination. This was unfortunate as all areas covered during the course material were also covered during either the hall examination or the group assignment (as inspiration to environmental management tools that could or should be used). Overall, the course was regarded as ambitious and relevant in intent, but the workload, assessment design and pedagogical coherence raised concerns, while teaching engagement and exposure to real organisations were highlighted as strengths.

2. Comments regarding feedback from the students

Several students valued the practical elements of the course, such as the Epiroc case, guest lectures, and workshops, describing them as useful preparation for future professional roles and an opportunity to apply theory in practice. However, one student felt that these elements lacked clear connection to the learning outcomes, the group assignment, and especially the written exam, with another raising similar concerns. As will be later described, a grading protocol should have been sent to students upon the grade being reported. The course coordinator must address this for next year with the responsible teaching staff. At the same time, communication and support from teachers during group-related difficulties were positively acknowledged, as was the overall fairness of the examination by several students which contrasts the negative opinions.

3. Summary of the free-text answers in the course feedback

As can be seen the same positive aspects are experienced as negative by some students:

Positive aspects

Highly appreciated guest lectures and study visit at Epiroc
Practical exposure to real sustainability challenges
Strong engagement and pedagogical clarity from individual lecturers
Relevant and well-structured literature
Opportunity to work with real company data and reports
Critical aspects

Perceived weak alignment between lectures, workshops, assignments, and the exam
Workshops seen by some as promotional rather than educational
Large workload relative to the number of credits, particularly the group assignment
Limited or missing feedback on the written report and unclear grading criteria
Stress caused by overlapping courses
Exam questions perceived by some as overly detailed or focused on wording rather than understanding
Challenges related to mixed groups with exchange students
Very dense PowerPoint slides and a fast lecture pace
 

Regarding the critical aspects, everything covered in the lectures was covered in the exam, course objectives and/or group assignment examination. So, really unclear where this critique stems from. Further, it must be made clear that the base powerpoint slides were only 20-30 long and the additional ‘pages’ were for effects. This was a deliberate pedagogical strategy not to have slides full of text and to distract the listeners from the main messages. The exam issues only appear to relate to the multiple choice component of the exam and not the other parts, which form the majority of the exam. This suggests that overall the exam was well suited to the course goals, even if the student prefers writing essays. The intention with the multiple choice was to give students ‘easy points’ if they read carefully and know the topics of the course, they were not intended to trick and that is why the exam also included extended answers and a case (2/3 of its content) so that if any student scores badly in any part that they had opportunities to do better in other sections. As teachers, we have to be careful now with written assignments not in a formal exam hall situation and must design our exams accordingly in the age of AI. 

4. Comments regarding examination results

Most students passed the examination on their first attempt, which indicates that the learning outcomes were, overall, met. Several students described the exam as fair, relevant, and well-designed, particularly appreciating the case-based and extended-answer questions. While multiple-choice questions were perceived by some as unnecessarily tricky, these constituted a limited portion of the total score. The exam format allowed for individual assessment and differentiation of grades, which is increasingly important given the broader context of academic integrity and the use of AI-based tools.

5. Other

Students expressed mixed views on the balance between theoretical depth and formal examination. Some argued that written exams limit deep learning in a complex subject such as sustainability, while others acknowledged the necessity of individual examinations. There were also reflections on structural issues beyond the course itself, such as uneven credit-to-workload ratios across advanced courses and the challenge of managing multiple courses simultaneously.

The workload expectations and timings were outlined in the initial lecture of the course. The group work should have been split between every member of the group, meaning that 20 hours a week would equate to 80-100 hours. The beginning weeks of the course should have been dedicated to reading and attending lectures and seminars. 

6. Planned changes to the course

Based on student feedback and course evaluation, the following areas are recommended for review and development:

Clearer communication of learning outcomes and expectations for each course component. This was communicated in the introductory session but must be repeated throughout the course in different ways. 
Ensure that all course teachers send feedback. Grading protocols were shared with the students earlier in the course should have been sent to all groups on Blackboard messenger. The course coordinator reminded teaching staff to do this but must make even more effort next year.
Evaluation of practical seminars.  It is sad that some students did not value these as it takes great effort and expense (sometimes personally) to get these professionals to come and speak during courses. 
These adjustments aim to preserve the course’s strong practical orientation while improving coherence, transparency, and perceived fairness for future course instances. It is the pedagogical best strategy that the teacher forms groups. This has various reasons but also to get students used to the challenges of working life, as well as the diversity that multicultural working groups brings to practice. 

I vilken utsträckning har kursens innehåll och upplägg (t.ex. läraktiviteter, kursmaterial och examinationsuppgifter) hjälpt dig att nå kursens mål?

Vad tycker du har varit särskilt bra i kursen? 

Finns det något som bör förändras eller utvecklas i kursen, i så fall vad?

Vilket omdöme vill du ge kursen som helhet?