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.

ARP058 Design Porcess vt2011, ARP058

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-03-25 - 2011-05-01
Antal svar: 16
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 69%
Kontaktperson: Inga Malmqvist»
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

16 svarande

Very insufficient»0 0%
Insufficient»6 40%
Sufficient»9 60%
Excellent»0 0%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- I didn"t realy got the feeling to be manage» (Insufficient)

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

16 svarande

No, the goals are to elementar»3 18%
Yes, the goals are reasonable»13 81%
No, the goals are too ambitious»0 0%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 1.81

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

16 svarande

Too small scope in relation to credits»3 20%
Reasonable scope in relation to credits»11 73%
Too wide scope in relation to credits»1 6%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 1.86

- To compare to the quantity to the work it"s good.» (Reasonable scope in relation to credits)
- This course was asking a lot of work and it was difficult to deal with the two courses at the same time (management plus architecture studio)» (Too wide scope in relation to credits)

Education and course administration

4. What is your opinion on the lectures?

16 svarande

Not sufficient»9 56%
Sufficient»4 25%
Good»3 18%
Very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.62

- I would like to have a little bit more of theory at the beginning of the course» (Not sufficient)
- too elementary for the architects» (Not sufficient)
- Quantity was sufficient, but it seems that many students did not find them interesting (and therefore not have motivation to learn much). This may be because the lectures were too elementary, or were too boring. For example, the lectures by the architects had a lot of potential, but some of them basically "showed us what a drawing looked like".» (Not sufficient)
- the knowledge diference between civil engineers and architects is big» (Not sufficient)
- i would have expected more examples from "real" life, ex how does one manage to be a successful design manager - ie practical learnings from someone who has been on the job. same goes for the lectures from architects, they only mentioned briefly how they had managed a project. I lacked the description on how they had managed to keep the design idea the whole way in spite of economy, construction issues etc. The lectures should have been more into case processes, what are the main learnings from the professionals - and what is the future? Or is the truth that not even the professionals do know how to manage the process the best possible way?» (Not sufficient)
- Some of them are really too basic» (Sufficient)

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

16 svarande

Very little»1 6%
Rather little»8 53%
Rather big»6 40%
Very big»0 0%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- I did learn from the literature reflection assignment, but it wasn"t that helpful directly to our project.» (Rather little)

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

16 svarande

Very bad»2 12%
Rather bad»4 25%
Rather well»10 62%
Very well»0 0%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- Not in accordance with the Architecture schedule» (Very bad)
- Lots of last minute changes. Information sent out one or two days ahead etc. » (Rather bad)
- It was unfortunate that the schedule had to change so often. I know the instructors did the best they could for the situation. It would have been easier for us to learn updated news if we just got an email, instead of having to log in to the student portal.» (Rather bad)

Work environment

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

15 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»0 0%
Rather well»9 60%
Very well»5 33%
I have not asked for assistance»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- good relation between the teacher and the students» (Very well)

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

16 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Rather bad»3 18%
Rather good»6 37%
Very good»7 43%
I have not tried to cooperate»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.25

- To combine the schedules of the engineers and architects has been difficult and created a bad ambience» (Rather bad)
- Sometimes it was diffucult to meet because we belonged to different master program with different schedule» (Rather good)

Concluding questions

9. What is your overall opinion of the course?

16 svarande

Very bad»0 0%
Bad»4 25%
Passed»5 31%
Good»7 43%
Very good»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- The problem is rooted in the lack of coordination between the architecture schedule and the ingenior schedule. Some weeks I got two presentation or two work group the same day. It was quit difficult for me to find some compromise. Moreover, the lecture was too basic for the architecture students I think. » (Bad)
- I have already been working with an architecture company for four years, so I feel like nearly all of the material presented in this course I already knew. I feel like I regret taking the course because I learned very little.» (Bad)
- People who where not a contact person did not learn so much from the project part of this course regarding design process managment» (Bad)
- you should improve the management value in the course» (Passed)

10. What should be preserved next year?

- Different task fot evry group, it was good to have a precise task, and together with the communication with a real client the course felt real»
- Introduction and information from the start.»
- The possibility to have a client to exchange ideas with»
- the capability to the teacher to listen to the student and share is knowledge»
- working on a real project.»
- real life clients»
- The diversity of work between the groups»
- The fact that we can work in group was good but i think there was not so much interactions between all the groups»

11. What shuold be changed the nest year?

- Find a way to involve all the student in the pm meeting, because the student who were contact person they experience more than the othr students»
- If it´,s possible only, one course at the time sens its hard to coordinate anyway.»
- The schedule needs to also be in accordance with the architect students since it has been rather dissicult for them to combine studio-work scheduled sometimes on the same day, at the same time. Since group work occur in both this course and the studio at the same time, it is truly difficult for the days where the schedule is overlapping. »
- The scedule of the course. »
- probably the course schedule as there are both architecture and engineering student...it was difficult due to different other courses running simultaneously.»
- In my opinion there should be less groups in which the project is devided, in order to have better cooperation and communication between the groups.»
- way all students aren"t involved with decision making»
- Better communication and more even workload between the groups»
- Talk more about management in the course»

12. Other comments

- Furthermore, the course could integreate like a attendance list for each course, and each group work. Like that some students couldn"t skip the meeting group.»
- i am fairly satisfied with course and our work as well.»
- none»

Kursutvärderingssystem från