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.

ARK261 Healthcare Studio 2010

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-01-20 - 2011-02-07
Antal svar: 22
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 88%
Kontaktperson: Peter Fröst»
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

Knowledge, strategies, and methodologies to formulate visions for health care architecture, as well as practical skills to design and integrate an actual health care building.

22 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»0 0%
Sufficient»8 36%
Excellent»14 63%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.63

2. Learning outcome 2

Be able to work interactively with complex programming, combining aspects of spaces for care, patient experience, work environment, logistics and architectural systems think-ing.

22 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»0 0%
Sufficient»10 45%
Excellent»12 54%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.54

3. Learning outcome 3

Knowledge and applicable skills in designing flexible buildings. Applying modular planning and strategies for continuous change with unknown spatial typologies.

22 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»1 4%
Sufficient»9 40%
Excellent»12 54%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Several groups stated that their buildings were flexible because they used a modular structural grid (e.g. 9x9m, etc.). Actually, I think this is a given, a default, and doesn"t necessarily mean an especially flexible building.» (Sufficient)

4. Learning outcome 4

Understand, and be able to apply the concepts of healing architecture and Evidence Based Design.

22 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»0 0%
Sufficient»12 54%
Excellent»10 45%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.45

- Not sure that these concepts were fully grasped, probably due to a lack of time. Mainly, we just had the Ulrich lecture, and the course literature, and that"s it.» (Sufficient)

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

21 svarande

No, the goals are to elementar»0 0%
Yes, the goals are reasonable»20 95%
No, the goals are too ambitious»1 4%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.04

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

22 svarande

Too small scope in relation to credits»0 0%
Reasonable scope in relation to credits»21 95%
Too wide scope in relation to credits»1 4%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.04

- Although VERY hard work.» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)
- Nice to see how we handled such a complex project when compared to the simple (relatively) housing studio next door.» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)
- or to wide, expectations are very high» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)

Education and course administration

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

22 svarande

Very little»0 0%
Rather little»2 9%
Rather big»15 68%
Very big»5 22%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.13

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

22 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»1 4%
Rather well»8 36%
Very well»13 59%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.54

Work environment

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

22 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather well»2 9%
Very well»20 90%
I have not asked for assistance»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.9

- Great with frequent consultation! (keep it optional towards the end)» (Very well)

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

22 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»1 4%
Rather good»5 22%
Very good»16 72%
I have not tried to cooperate»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.68

- The group dynamics were among the biggest challenges in the course - trying to make unified decisions. In a professional project, actors are of different specialty and different experience levels, which helps to have a hierarchy in making decisions, especially with a PM.» (Rather good)

Concluding questions

11. What is your overall opinion of the course?

22 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Bad»0 0%
Passed»0 0%
Good»4 18%
Very good»18 81%

Genomsnitt: 4.81

- Great course! From the selection of topic to the workshops and consultation and presentation!» (Very good)

12. What should be preserved next year?

- Good communication and organisation, good possibilities to ask queastions»
- the encouragement of working together as a group and as a class.»
- one day of workshop only and the last workshop create by students with in their groups. »
- Cooperation between the groups in the studio. All workshops, they pushes you forward in the project more than you know. The lectures where really good to have in the beginning!»
- The workshops! »
- Study trip at the beginning of the course was great, because it really helped the group bond very early in the program. Also allowed to discuss and consider needs and requirements as a group with shared interests. »
- Workshops were ok, though presenting after one day maybe better than presenting the results after two days. The themes are good.»
- Workshops»
- The lectures and visting to existing hospital»
- Workshops, study visit, style of consultation.»
- I think it is an excellent studio. It has some very good studio environment, and the topics covered are very revenant. I would keep most of what we"ve done for next year.»
- work shops. study visits. »

13. What shuold be changed the nest year?

- Lecture about workshops in hospitals»
- maybe it would be good to have the theme of programing by design a little bit earlier. When students are working with programing. »
- Hard/little time to read the litterature but I do not know what to take away or change. »
- More input from students on the final presentation. Introducing the themes earlier. Hard to use the information from them when they are introduced to late. »
- The course should be longer because the hospital program is complex and requires one to think of both the logistic and well as innovative design. Otherwise there is the danger of compromising on the innovative design part in order to meet the criteria of functionality alone. »
- Presenting after a long winter break is not ideal. The introductory lecture on healthcare history in Sweden is a good idea, but the lecture could have been more useful. The 5 pages of reflections should be clarified earlier in the course. Many groups just wrote them at the last minute, which makes the reflection not as useful for the project.»
- the workshop could be organized related to the design process »
- I think the period of the studio should be a little longer that can finish well.»
- frustrating to have the important presentation after christmas. maybe an other part of the course could have been done then, as writníng about the themes etc. It is diffucult to really get a break over christmas when you know you have something left to do from last semester. many people start there master thesis emediatly after the presentation.»
- Perhaps a slight tweak in the schedule.»
- More literature, earlier.»

14. Other comments

- Very good»
- Very Good course! I learned a lot!»
- A very good course! »
- Nice studio nice experience»
- It was a really good studio, learnt a lot and everyone worked hard. We all got many things and good experance for future.»
- ambitious and good atmosphere»
- Thanks!»
- Thanks!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från