Avis et commentaires pour d'étudiants pour Rendre l'économie plus verte : villes durables par Université de Lund

Little new information is presented. As a basic survey course, that would be find except for ---> The quiz questions are irrelevant. Nobody should memorize these useless facts designed to check if the videos were watched or reading completed. e.g. Does it matter what in order bicycle riders cite their reasons for choosing said mode of transport in Copenhagen?

La seule activité réellement intéressante est l'exercice sur les solutions vertes dans les villes. On apprend peu de choses, les documents proposés sont des brochures publicitaires de WWF et des programmes européens vulgarisés à travers des notions marketing. Pas de techniques concrètes d'aménagement et de planification. C'est dommage

Rather than an organized, professional course, this course is a collection of repurposed content from many uneven sources that gets repetitive, academic and fuzzy. Not worth wasting your time on a topic deserving of serious study.

Information was very high level, not very detailed. Quizzes were more about just memorizing statements that were opinions or frameworks or statements by specific people, rather than true facts.

Seems a bit like too much talk about irrelevant things. Let´s not beat around the bush

I hope you had stated earlier that this was just a one, long ad for WWF.

Too much theory, I'd like more practical information

broad overview on

Hi,

I'm sorry to say that this course wasn't really useful. I had the impression to see dozens of INTRODUCTION videos about sustainables cities. Because:

1. In 5 weeks you have time to cover in details all the aspects of sustainable cities: energy, transport, waste, building, sharing economy. The condition is to focus each week to a topic.

2. It is too much based on powerpoint presentation and not at all on example. Concepts stay concepts: we didn't visit one single town, a connected building, an innovative waste management system. You quote 300 living labs, let's go !

3. Pictures from the powerpoint are at least for half of them taken from pictures bank. Synthetic images, not concrete. Desapointing.

4.. Always the same example: Malmo, Copenhagen... What about the rest of the world ?

5. Videos from WWH and ICLEI are clearly revolting. Is it some publicity for them ??? This is not the place for that.

In contrast, congratulations to Yuliya Voytenko, for her speech about sharing economy: it was clear, precise, focused.

Please do your best to improve your courses: you have the knowledge, let's spread it.

Mostly fluff with little substance. The videos seemed loosely tied around a common subject, but it might as well have been a YouTube playlist on overall concepts of cities needing to be aware of climate change. The week 4 videos were the same as the week 1 with very vague statements about cities needing to experiment with sustainability to approach the challenges of the 21st century. Only the week 2 video on Copenhagen was actually educational beyond the most superficial concepts.

The platform and the course may be very bad, but the platform fails a lot, they assign me very distant dates, I pay to study now, immediately, and I have to wait two months, they postpone me two months and the platform does not respond and Neither does the university, they blame each other and nobody answers, very bad investment, lack of seriousness, nobody answers, bad experience,