ENKÄTER
 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

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.

MPARC Architectural competitions, VT10, ARK151

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-05-31 - 2010-06-25
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 34%
Kontaktperson: Sten Gromark»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: 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 1. How well has the learning outcome been fulfilled?

- the student should become able to independently conduct an interpretation of a common brief or alternatively a professional advanced competition brief and complete the following delivery of requested material such as a poster presentation with appropriate drawings, illustrations and models from the outset of the formulation of an initial conceptual competition strategy

34 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»2 6%
Sufficient»27 84%
Excellent»3 9%
No opinion»2

Genomsnitt: 3.03

- The breif was incomplete. The Breif lacked of the criterias that the jury evaluated by. If the criterias would have been in the programme all the projects would have been better, of that I´,m quit confident.» (Insufficient)

2. Are the aims and goals reasonable in relation to your previous experience?

34 svarande

No, the goals are too basic»1 2%
Yes, the goals are reasonable»33 97%
No, the goals are too ambitious»0 0%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 1.97

3. Are the objectives reasonable in relation to the scope and amount of credits?

34 svarande

Too small scope in relation to credits»1 3%
Reasonable scope in relation to credits»29 87%
Too wide scope in relation to credits»3 9%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.06

- reasonable credits but the time was to concentrated. Spread the it over more weeks would be good, because of the collision with other courses. If you take two courses there´,s´,not margin in time left at all.» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)
- The actual time we got to work with the Schindler competition due to other tasks was too short» (Too wide scope in relation to credits)

4. How do you rate the Wernstedt Jury Prize Ceremony or The Schindler Final Session and following discussions from a learning point of view?

34 svarande

no opinion»3 8%
very bad»1 2%
rather bad»5 14%
rather well»16 47%
very well»9 26%

Genomsnitt: 3.79

- The information we were given (by Morten Lund) about what to deliver for the Schindler Final Session were, that it should be as a Mid-critique. But unfortunately we were criticized as if it were the final result... » (no opinion)
- "Tonality" remains a mystery to me.» (rather bad)
- For us who didn´,t get i prize the learning wasn´,t so good. We didnt get any response on our projects exept a figure. Numbers that I didn´,t agree on, but didnt really get the chans to question.» (rather bad)
- The ceremony was were quick and a bit unorganized. You could have for example get the winners time to explain their proposal. » (rather well)

5. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
A. Christer Malmström lecture?

33 svarande

no opinion»3 9%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»4 12%
rather well»22 66%
very well»4 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- .» (rather bad)

6. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
B. Christoph Schnoor, "Le Corbusier" lecture?

34 svarande

no opinion»4 11%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»6 17%
rather well»21 61%
very well»3 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

7. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
C. Joakim Kaminsky/Fredrik Kjellgren lectures?

33 svarande

no opinion»1 3%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»3 9%
rather well»23 69%
very well»6 18%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Because they didn´,t talk about the competition that much, it was more about the building it self...» (rather bad)
- Very good to hear young architects tell about there competition proposal» (rather well)
- The only lecture that was truly interesting, pedagogical and inspiring.» (very well)

8. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
D. Anders Holmer lecture show?

34 svarande

no opinion»7 20%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»4 11%
rather well»16 47%
very well»7 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- it was very short, it felt that we just heard the introduction but then it was it. sad because I think it would be a good lecture.» (rather well)

9. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
E. Per Kraft EuroPan lecture?

34 svarande

no opinion»4 11%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»3 8%
rather well»21 61%
very well»6 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- In my opinion the best guest lecture, because it was more about competition strategies and how the jury used to work!» (very well)

10. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
F. Katarina Nilsson SVA lecture?

34 svarande

no opinion»7 20%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»5 14%
rather well»18 52%
very well»4 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.35

- It was a bit hard for the foreign students to understand it, because a lot of the information given was in Swedish.» (rather well)

11. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
G. Johan Celsing, guest lecture?

33 svarande

no opinion»12 36%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»2 6%
rather well»10 30%
very well»9 27%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

12. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
H. Dorte Mandrup Poulsen Wernstedt guest lecture?

34 svarande

no opinion»8 23%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»1 2%
rather well»14 41%
very well»11 32%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- She is interesting and the lecture was good. But It would have been more helpful to have it in the begining of the course!» (rather well)
- Really nice lecture-booking!» (very well)

13. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
I. Jesus Mateo/Marco Pusterla Lecture?

33 svarande

no opinion»3 9%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»6 18%
rather well»14 42%
very well»10 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

- They also had some problems to get trapped in telling about the project it self instead of telling us about how strategies are being planned, but I liked the project and it was very interesting to hear their thought about it!» (rather well)

14. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
J. Magnus Rönn Lecture?

34 svarande

no opinion»14 41%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»3 8%
rather well»16 47%
very well»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

15. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures. K. Catarina Canas Guest Lecture?

- Wasn"t so much about competitions unfortunalety. Just about one single building.»
- Good.»
- Not concise enough. Interesting works but lack of humility.»
- Sorry, but she just made me nervous. I dont think the example was very helpful for us in the competition»
- she didn"t go through competition strategies, just a project which was interesting but not to the point...»
- rather well»
- very well»
- good»
- rather well»
- I really love Catarina, she is always very energetic and well spoken. Maybe that´,s the problem sometimes, I didn´,t leave the lecture feeling that much smarter... »

16. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

The course will present examples of architectural competition strategies, provide knowledge on the history of architectural competitions and clarify the overview of current types and conditions of national and international architectural competitions through a number of lectures and guest lectures.
L.Appropriate lectures, too many lectures, too few or wrong kind of lectures?

33 svarande

no opinion»1 3%
very bad»0 0%
rather bad»4 12%
rather well»20 60%
very well»8 24%

Genomsnitt: 4.03

- too few» (?)
- a few too many» (rather bad)
- The last one would have been maybe good in the begionning as the topic was the same.» (rather well)
- Interesting lectures, however not enough time to attend to all of them» (rather well)
- In my opinion lectures were very interesting. The amount of lectures were for me good.» (rather well)
- Think it was a good mixture of lectures.» (rather well)
- Appropriate lectures» (very well)
- A wide span of lectures which reached different type of contenders!» (very well)

17. How did the lecture programme fulfil its general objective?

M. Lectures were obviously and unfortunately not attended by all students as much as desired –, if you did not go to them –, why? Please give us a reason! Lectures are vital for the course learning process but quite expensive so we need an indication why you were not present in order to plan for the future of the course.

31 svarande

no time»1 3%
Wrong time - too late»7 22%
Uninteresting lecture»4 12%
Too occupied with competiton»11 35%
Other reason - comments»8 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- i did go to the lectures.» (?)
- I went to every lesson. I think it´,s stupid not to go, and can not understand why other doesn´,t take the opertunity. » (?)
- I attended all lecutres exept for one gues lecture. For me it was wrong time, too late. » (Wrong time - too late)
- Some of the lectures were too late.» (Wrong time - too late)
- there was some lack of time due to Schindler Award cmpetition, but actually many of the lectures (especially those general about competitions) was not that interesting. I mean for example lecture about number of competitions in Sweden and Denmark and Finland could last for a quater or so, but was strechedfor an hour.» (Uninteresting lecture)
- There was a lecture about how competitions work in Sweden. What you hand in etc and because i have participated in some swedish competitions i already knew that information. But it was ofcoruse a good lecture for those who haven´,t made any competitions.» (Uninteresting lecture)
- too occupied with the competition and other courses.» (Too occupied with competiton)
- unfortunantley there was an extremely large program in the schindler competition (5x as big) which made time very short. I did enjoy the lectures I did see though.» (Too occupied with competiton)
- Once I was occupied with other projects of other courses and their delivery.» (Other reason - comments)
- I went» (Other reason - comments)
- Timetable conflict with an other course.» (Other reason - comments)
- I did go on all, I see it as a matter of course to do so. I think it is sad for those who didn"t go that they missed the good lectures.» (Other reason - comments)
- i was there» (Other reason - comments)
- Some lectures repeated the same info» (Other reason - comments)
- If I did miss some lectures, I probably was too occupied with the competition or had to pick up my son at the Kindergarden(too late).» (Other reason - comments)

18. How do you rate the relevance of the given competition design task exercise, the Wernstedt Sketch ’,10 Children’,s House?

34 svarande

no opinion»1 2%
very low»1 2%
rather low»2 5%
rather good»20 58%
very good»10 29%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- feels a bit taken from the air» (rather low)
- I have not been participating, the only thing I have heard is that program was too big compared to amound of space at the site.» (rather good)
- Youth need somewhere to be on their spare time, since the youthhouses of the 80s and 90s in sweden were all torn down.» (rather good)
- Very interesting task to do.» (rather good)
- Interesting and challenging program. But of which the children aspect led mostly to overly consensual and "nice" projects.» (very good)
- I really liked the design task and the program» (very good)

19. Was the exercise too complicated or quite appropriate for the Master level or even too simple to your opinion?

- I have not been participating.»
- The task was good to manage within the given time. »
- Appropriate but to short amount of time.»
- Very apppropriate.»
- appropriate»
- quite appropriate for the Master leve»
- A good idea, good intentions. »
- it was appropriate but a bit too much for students who chose to work individually. That was not taken in concern by the jury and in the score evaluation it seems and rather unfair as it is much more work for one person and this should be acknowledged in the course grade rating.»
- Quite appropriate. But It was not much time for the task. »
- It was a good exercise.»
- appropriate»
- It was appropriate. The task was a big building to design in a short time.»
- it was a really good exercice, appropriate for the master level»
- Quite appropriate»
- The program was a bit to big for the time we got for the competition. »
- appropriate»
- quite appropriate for the Master level, it"s even very good in the organisation, like a real competition (in "real" I mean out of the school)»
- It was complicated due to the short time, but I found that challenging in a good way.»
- ok»
- Quite appropriate.»
- I think the exercise was appropriate for the time we had. I would have been too simple if we had had few months to achieve it.»
- ok a bit complicated to fit the whole program in a short time»
- From what I felt reading the program just once or twice it was quite appropriate and not as big as the Schindler task which took 2-weeks just to understand...»

20. How do you rate the quality of the programme brief for ‘,The Children’,s House’,?

34 svarande

no opinion»3 8%
very low»1 2%
rather low»5 14%
rather good»18 52%
very good»7 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- The info in the program was unclear. A lot of points you had to guess what they where.» (very low)
- Unrealistic space for some of the functions, like toilets for example.» (rather low)
- the function for some of the spaces was not clear,and there was not enough time for us to study about them.» (rather low)
- too large amount of square meters, it"s possible to create flexible spaces instead of having 3 theaters/cinemas» (rather low)
- I got a bit irritated by the exact description of which rooms should be located where.» (rather good)
- rather good BUT! the criterias for the evaluation would have made it so much better. During the prize ceremony when the criterias came on the screen i imedialty understood what kind of buildings that wouldnt meet your idea when you made the breif.» (rather good)
- The programm was appropriate.» (rather good)
- a bit to big for the site, hadn"t so much space to feel free, but in one way that is often the situation you will have as an architect.» (very good)
- Well done, like a client wishes given to architects.» (very good)
- Kort och konsist.» (very good)

Education and course administration

21. What support have you received for your learning outcome from exercise, lectures, discussions and course literature taken together as a whole?

33 svarande

Very little»1 3%
Rather little»11 36%
Rather big»17 56%
Very big»1 3%
No opinion»3

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- mostly from discussions in the team» (Very little)
- it seems that the students mostly used their previous knowledge and experiences, there was not that new things to learn in the course, I can say just a phisical attempt.» (Rather little)
- The biggest outcome for me is that I feel much more free and comfortable with my ideas then before. It felt very good to hear professionals talking about their process and how they made their leap outside the convention thinking by using the "concept" as an implement.» (Rather big)

22. How did the organization, programme, direct information, supporting material, web site routines etc. function?

34 svarande

No opinion»0 0%
Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»1 2%
Rather well»20 58%
Very well»13 38%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4.35

- why haven"t we recived any notice about the change of time of the last guest lecture?!?» (Rather well)
- We had al information we needed at the web but for the school submission which determines our grades we seemed to bin given the wrong information. We were supposed to see it as Mid-critique.» (Rather well)
- Schindler Award delivered us alot of working matherials. Also support from Morten and other studio tutors was rather helpful.» (Very well)
- Sten Gromark is an excellent organizer, and informer» (Very well)

Work environment

23. How do you rate the possibilities to ask questions and receive general assistance during the course period?

34 svarande

Very bad»1 2%
Rather bad»6 17%
Rather well»8 23%
Very well»9 26%
I have not asked for assistance»10 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- The answers on the questions came late» (Rather bad)
- very few opportunities in the MSS studio to recieve advice although some was ofcourse given.» (Rather bad)
- The teachers are very helpfull. Sten Gromark is always available, very good experience in teacher<->student communication this term ,-)» (Very well)
- Morten Lund gave us as much time as he presumably could!» (Very well)

24. How has the cooperation between you and –, if any other student –, in your team been?

34 svarande

Very bad»1 2%
Rather bad»1 2%
Rather good»6 17%
Very good»21 61%
I have not tried to cooperate»5 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- One of my team members showed up two weeks after we had began the course and the other one works half days only... But that´,s my bad choosing wrong team members.» (Very bad)
- We had some communication problems» (Rather bad)
- I did work alone but did discuss problems and questions with people around me and it went well.» (Rather good)
- At that step of the year, people know better each other, that make the teams more efficient...» (Very good)

Concluding questions

25. What is your overall opinion of the MPARC/MPDSD Architectural Competition Course ‘,10?

34 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Bad»1 2%
Passed»5 14%
Good»19 55%
Very good»9 26%

Genomsnitt: 4.05

- The schedule completely collides with the MPDSD spring studios. That just makes me mad because there was no way of telling so. It even passed through the administration with my choices of courses even though they collided.» (Passed)

26. What should be preserved for next year?

- Lectures with different architects showing their projects.»
- the lectures»
- The prizes»
- The type of challenge. Public buildings with a complicated program.»
- The lectures and the prizes.»
- Kjellgren&Kaminsky lecture»
- The amount of involvement shown by the jury makes this course rather unique.»
- The intentions of the breif and the delimitation of if. »
- It is good with a lot of prices, like the honorable mentions. More of that! »
- prize ceremony, creativity of the task, »
- The idea of this course. »
- well done organization,the prizes as a good motivation »
- A well written program.»
- the size of the task/brief, it was good.»
- Everything, moreover the final results day with the french champagne and cookies. More seriously, The organisation of the competition as a whole worked well this term.»
- the lectures concerning strategy»
- complex building programme»
- the cooperation between students and professional architects»
- Give the students the same grades until the submission is made, that was what we agreed upon with Morten but it seems that he made different deals with different students! And that´,s really annoying!»

27. What should be changed for next year?

- Other lectures. Although I find informations about competitions very useful, they could be presented in shorter time, leaving some time for other (lecture about some annual competitions? I am not sure if students are well informed about different competitions they can participate)»
- maybe more tutoriors»
- Maybe a lecture more connected to the topic..»
- Longer time for the task.»
- More wokringspace. »
- A better site. »
- We need brutality and accuracy. Both.»
- spread it over a longer period of time and a complete professional breif.»
- More feedback to all students. A chans to respond to the judges. It is after all a school competition, not a real one. I think it would be nice to know more about what the judges thought about all the projects. »
- the schindler competition should also recieve some type of ceremony, a whole class was excluded from being able to be acnowlaged.»
- But it could be better to organise reall competition when after it the design building will be built.»
- what is presented in the lectures, maybe it is better to present some practical aspects, techniques of presentation ,ways of decision making for competition consept... instead of just showing a project which could be found on the net or in the architectural magazins. »
- A smaller program.»
- Maybe more posters can be added, which means that people can produce more documents to show, for the good understanding of the project. But maybe it implies to have more time also...»
- remove some of the lectures not concerning strategy»
- no opinion»
- Nothing I guess.»

28. Other comments

- None of the winners fulfilled the area, roomconfiguration or how different activities where supposed to connect. I would say that no more than 3-4 proposals total did this right, and why is it not credited?»
- It´,s just unfortunate that the practical matters ruined an otherswise good course that I were looking forward to.»
- Thank you for a great course and sorry for a late reply!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från