|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär 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.
Architectural Competitions ARK151, ARK151Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2012-06-19 - 2012-08-15 Antal svar: 27 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 30% Kontaktperson: Sten Gromark» Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Arkitektur 300 hp Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Arkitektur 300 hp
Goals and fullfilment of goalsThe 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 1After completion of this course, the student should be able to independently conduct an interpretation of a common brief or alternatively a professional advanced competition brief and the following delivery of requested material such as poster presentation with appropriate drawings, illustrations and models. How well has this learning outcome been fulfilled?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.11 - brief was extensive in terms of what to deliver, how and when but not providing all the information about the project program itself » (Insufficient) 2. Are the aims and goals reasonable in relation to your pre-knowledge ?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.96 - If the grades are supposed to reflect how well you acomplished the goals, then absolutly not. Talking to others in the course it seems to me that the grading was unfair.» (No, the goals are too ambitious) 3. Are the goals reasonable in relation to the scope and amount of credits?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.07 - If the grades are supposed to reflect how well you acomplished the goals, then absolutly not. Talking to others in the course it seems to me that the grading was unfair.» (Too wide scope in relation to credits) Education and course administration4. What do you think about the lectures?26 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.96 - Repeated material... The best were hearing about competition winning proposals (ie the boys win in Norway)» (Insufficient) 5. How did the occasions for the critic function?24 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.04 - What critique? There Was none» (Very insufficient) 6. What support have you got for your learning from course literature and other material?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 1.85 - Föreläsningarna var bra, men passade kanske inte ihop med uppgiften som vi tilldelades i år.» (Very little) 7. How did the organisation, memoranda, direct information etc. function?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.96 Work environment8. How do you rate the possibilities to get assistance and ask questions?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.62 - Svaren på mailfrågorna kom ut lite i senaste laget för att de skulle kännas relevanta att ta hänsyn till.» (Rather bad) 9. How has the cooperation between you and the students in your group been?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.88 - the structure of the course tends to create a competing atmosphere rather than a collaborative. i didnt see much of my classmates during this period, which i think is bad for the creation of a generous attitude in the proffession. » (Rather good) Concluding questions10. What is your overall opinion of the course?27 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.33 - To only receive a grade and not a SINGLE critique or opinion about the project is totally worthless! And to give 90% of the course a 3 in grade when the ambition and work effort varies it just shows that the teachers is lazy and have not reviewed all the projects. I am very disappointed, like many others about the conduction of the course and the grades. The teachers have absolutely not used the general grading criteria which they are supposed to. Grade 3 is given to those who has just passed with minimal effort and that is NOT the case for 90% of the students! The teachers should use their summer to review all projects again and give a fair grade according to the general grade criteria (the one which is translated from engineering courses and is used in grading the master thesis project)» (Very bad) 11. What should be preserved next year?- everything»- Lectures of winners AND loosers of some competitions. Lectures from foreigners architects» - Time for the project» - The Norway boys.» - Guest lectures.» - Upplägget på kursen med föreläsningar i början och sedan tid för tävlingen» - the lectures» - very nice jury, exhibition in the atrium, positive atmosphere during the final result ceremony, Göteborg site» 12. What should be changed the next year?- make the conferences mandatory»- The subject of W13 competition could be more in relation with the development planning of the municipality than the Naturum was this year.» - More fair grades or just change to passed/not passed. Many people were worth a higher grade than 3.» - Ser inte poängen med att ha kursen som obligatorisk, om man som jag inte är intresserad av tävlingsdelen inom arkitektur känns inte kursen så motiverande..» - more discussion afterwards about the projects» - Att ni faktiskt betygsätter varje projekt enskilt och inte klumpar ihop alla ICKE-nominerade i en kategori där de bara får en trea för att ni är alldeles för lata!» - More support (perhaps introduced a compulsory critique midway)» - Doesn"t need to be a lecture after the competition entries were submitted.» - Move the last lecture ( after the award ceremony) to the early stage of the course.» - Tillkännage inte uppgiften förrän efter föreläsningsperioden. Ge tydliga omdömen till varje förslag så att man förstår vad som hanterats bra/ mindre bra. Som det var i år gav inte kursen så mycket rent pedagogiskt då man aldrig fick någon feedback, inte ens de 1-5 poäng som utlovades för de olika bedömningskriterierna!» - The grading system. It"s wrong to first say that the quallity was very high this year and then give 80% of the designs the grade 3 = passed» - describe more the program in the competition brief including details in the area table (communications included), answer question earlier that one week before the delivery, » - This course would have fitted better to have in the beginning of the year, when everyone had a lot of energy. This one could have been switched with some of the theory courses in the autumn. » 13. Other comments- Bra uppgift, intressant! Bra föreläsningar.»- I think it is really bad that we didn"t get the points in the different categories as we were told. Big fail in the course! It is arrogant and indefensible. » - the grading was disappointing - for this much workload the grades in general are quite bad» - Is it so that this is a way for the university to save money? We had no tutors, no critis, no comments. I dont see what it adds to a master level of university studies. »
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3%