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.

Architecture - advanced theory and methodology, ARK316

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-02-02 - 2010-03-01
Antal svar: 13
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 25%
Kontaktperson: Sten Gromark»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Arkitektur 300 hp

Goals and fullfilment of goals

The learning outcomes are given in the course programme, that is the knowledge, understanding, skills and perspectives you are expectd to reach. Notify for each outcome how well they have been fulfilled.

1. Learning outcome in general

The Course is designed as an initiation to the preparation and formulation of an advanced or strategic programme brief for a given architectural assignment in general and a Master’,s Thesis project in particular. This is done within respective Master Programme studios in relation to chosen active teachers, examiners and respective studio leaders and supervisors. On the basis of indicated literature students were requested to produce a Paper Outline on the general theme of Exploring Architecture, identifying and analysing specific components such as: A Theoretical Perspective, B Specific Methodology, C Professional Transgressive Practice Analysis and finally D Specific Project Analysis. The course comprised lectures, seminars and a final presentation and crit session where papers were critised by two teachers and two students after an oral and visual final paper presentation procedure. As a main result the exercise consisted in writing a Paper Outline in English about 10-12 pages intended for an architectural scientific conference. This was the first occasion to test this kind of course in the MPARC and MPDSD Master Programme curriculums.

The Course intended to provide a scientific context to the Master’,s Thesis preparation process, to introduce an overview of relevant literature, innovative projects and experimental approaches in contemporary urban architecture and to assist in advanced conceptual orientation while preparing a Master’,s Thesis.

How well would you say these ambitions were met?

13 svarande

Very insufficient»1 7%
Insufficient»1 7%
Sufficient»8 61%
Excellent»3 23%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3

- Sufficient of introducing a way to write about and expolre architecture and to analyse and be theoretic about architecture but insufficient to formulate a strategic programme brief for a master thesis. The course did not lead to that.» (Sufficient)

2. Learning outcome 2 : Support for the Master’,s Thesis Project Plan?

How well did the course, the brief for a paper outline and the seminar discussions help you in your final formulation of the Master’,s Thesis Project Plan?

13 svarande

Very insufficient»1 7%
Insufficient»4 30%
Sufficient»5 38%
Excellent»3 23%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.76

- There was no discussion about what a project plan should contain and how it should be carried out. However the course made it possible to go deeper into subjects that helped formulating theories for the theses.» (Insufficient)
- It gave me a new perspective on my thesis but it did not help me formulate the priject plan. That I did outside the course.» (Sufficient)

3. Learning outcome 3: Support from literature and other texts for the Paper Outline exercise?

How well did the suggested concepts, the literature and other texts help you to develop your Paper Outline?

13 svarande

Very insufficient»1 8%
Insufficient»2 16%
Sufficient»6 50%
Excellent»3 25%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.91

- There was really not much that I used from the course literature. » (No opinion)

4. Learning outcome 4: Support from lectures and dedicated guest lectures for the Project Plan?

How well did the lectures and guest lectures help you in your formulation of the Master’,s Thesis Project Plan?

13 svarande

Very insufficient»1 9%
Insufficient»3 27%
Sufficient»7 63%
Excellent»0 0%
No opinion»2

Genomsnitt: 2.54

- most of the lectures never happened. » (Insufficient)
- Nina Ryd was a good help with her lecture.» (Sufficient)
- There were not very many lectures, and some were cancelled. » (No opinion)

5. Are the aims and goals reasonable in relation to your pre-knowledge ?

13 svarande

No, the goals are to elementar»0 0%
Yes, the goals are reasonable»11 91%
No, the goals are too ambitious»1 8%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.08

6. Are the goals reasonable in relation to the scope and amount of credits?

13 svarande

Too small scope in relation to credits»0 0%
Reasonable scope in relation to credits»11 91%
Too wide scope in relation to credits»1 8%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.08

- But, because the paper wasn"t connected to the project plan I had to use time outide the course and write the project plan parallell with the paper writing.» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)
- The subjects were a bit irrelevant to our actual master thesis programme.» (Too wide scope in relation to credits)

Education and course administration

7. What support have you got for your learning process from indicated course literature and other written material?

13 svarande

Very little»1 7%
Rather little»4 30%
Rather big»7 53%
Very big»1 7%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.61

- the course could have started with som compulsary litterature and a litterature seminar. That would have given a good startup and help to choose subjects to study. » (Rather little)

8. How did the organisation, memoranda, direct information etc. function?

13 svarande

Very bad»1 7%
Rather bad»1 7%
Rather well»7 53%
Very well»4 30%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.07

- We got late information obout if the course should exist or not. During the course the information about dates for delivering the project plan and the planning for the master thesis term was really confusing and we did not get any clear directions. This makes it hard to plan and make a project plan.» (Rather bad)

Work environment

9. How do you rate the possibilities to get assistance and ask questions?

13 svarande

Very bad»1 7%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather well»4 30%
Very well»6 46%
I have not asked for assistance»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

10. How has the cooperation between you and students in your group been?

13 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather good»4 30%
Very good»7 53%
I have not tried to cooperate»2 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

- There was no group work, but the group seminars were good.» (Very good)
- Quite a few of us wrote about related subjects. This made the discussions rich and since all could understand the basics we could go more into depth.» (Very good)

Concluding questions

11. What is your overall opinion of the relevance of the course as an optional preparation course for the Master’,s Thesis spring term?

13 svarande

Very bad»1 7%
Bad»1 7%
Passed»3 23%
Good»4 30%
Very good»4 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- the thought of a preparation course before the Master"s Thesis is very good, but how the course was done didn"t help me with my Master"s Thesis at all.» (Very bad)
- It was very good in prepering us in the aspect of making us analyse, be more critical and theoretical. But the practical connection to the thesis did not exist.» (Good)
- I think it is excellent and should be mandatory.» (Very good)

12. What should be preserved next year?

- the objectives»
- The freedom to drown in a subject. »
- An external teacher in the end seminar as Beate H. Very good to get fresh eyes from a person outside. The inspiring attitude from Sten that made us explore new fields of architecture.»
- Semminars, inspiration materials »
- all the seminars and especially final seminar - presenting our papers»

13. What should be changed the next year?

- More clear information about how & when to write the project plan»
- perhaps I started with a preconception of the course as very dedicated to the task of being preparatory for the master thesis, but it could perhaps be made more clear beforehand that the course won"t automatically end in a synopsis document.»
- we could have more help about academic writing»
- see q 7 make subgroups that"s writing about related subjects. (see q10)»
- A bit more organised and a closer connection to the practical parts of the promgramme plan for the thesis. Maybe a seminar discussing and brainstorming different topics for the thesis. Don"t call it preparing for the thesis when it doesn"t do that. If you keep the course as now you should refer to the course as a way of opening your mind and find new perspectives on your thesis.»
- maybe more lectures...like guest lectures and such..but related to master thesis.»

14. Other comments

- no»
- This course gave me much value and I am positive about it. But it did not prepare me for my thesis in a practical way. If the information about the coming up thesis period was clearer it would have been better.»

15. To what degree –, if not native English language mother tongue –, did it present a problem for you writing in English as a foreign language?

11 svarande

not at all»10 90%
severe problems»1 9%

Genomsnitt: 1.09

- After two years (combined with the help of microsoft) it"s not a problem. some things would have been harder to formulate in swedish.» (not at all)
- important for improving academic language! » (not at all)

Kursutvärderingssystem från