Visa resultat

LP2 12/13 ARK121 Matter, space, structure 1

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

15 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		0		0%
Around 20 hours/week»		0		0%
Around 25 hours/week»		3		20%
Around 30 hours/week»		6		40%
At least 35 hours/week»		6		40%

Genomsnitt: 4.2

- It was badly divided over the whole course. For example, the first tasks where given the same amount of time as the final hand, which I consider bad. I think one should have more time for the final hand-in (although one had the opportunity to change afterwards.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- It was less to do in this course than it usually is in the architecture courses actually! But the time spent felt fine.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- at least...» (At least 35 hours/week)

2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

15 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		0		0%
50%»		0		0%
75%»		3		20%
100%»		12		80%

Genomsnitt: 4.8

- maybe 95%» (100%)
- Perhaps 90%. It was rather ther teachers" attending that wasn"t god. The ran back and forth during sessions and showed upp very randomly. This shows great lack of respect towards stundents or lack of time.» (100%)
- There wasn"t so much teaching offered» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		3		20%
The goals are difficult to understand»		6		40%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		6		40%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.2

- The different goals changed during the course. The course we applied for wasn"t what we got. Two weeks before hand in on final assignment, we got the different compulsory objectives. The only thing I could somehow relate to as goals and learning outcome was the outspoken studio "spirit" that the teachers spoke about.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- I can not remember whether these goals have ever been presented to us, or not.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- The course concept was not 100% clear. In the first few weeks we did something unrelated and did not contribute to the end result of the course. While the end result itself focused on experimenting with material that was later contextualized, the first few weeks (films, analysis of the slope, westlink project) did little to help the process, while they took away several weeks of valuable time. In the end, many people were unable to finish the assignment because we ran out of time.» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- The outspoken goals was in my opinion fuzzy. What you did you shouldn"t do but when you did it it was fine. It feels like the course has a little bit of an identity crisis, we are preparing for the master thesis, but we are not allowed to prepare for the master thesis. Hower, I"m very happy I took the cours, it helped super much so it was a great opportunity. But FUZZY!» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- Assignment and the goals kept changing.... No organization at all. The worst course I have ever taken at Chalmers.» (The goals are difficult to understand)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

13 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		1		7%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		10		76%
No, the goals are set too high»		2		15%

Genomsnitt: 2.07

- It was very easy to get the points and my bar was set much higher. It was only process oriented not by result.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- But I don"t know since it wasn"t clear about the goals.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- Very subjective opinions. Difficulty in communication between students and teachers.» (No, the goals are set too high)

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

No, not at all»		2		13%
To some extent»		9		60%
Yes, definitely»		4		26%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.13

- Since the examiners were bareley interested in looking at my project when I presented it (they were busy talking to each other and checking their cell-phones) and hadn"t had any time to study any of the projects in advance, the examiners gave me almost no response what so ever.» (No, not at all)
- Crit was good, but too little guidance and different opinions only the assignment was confusing.» (To some extent)
- In relation to the poorly stated objectives.» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		7		46%
Some extent»		5		33%
Large extent»		2		13%
Great extent»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 1.8

- As process oriented It was quite good. The discussion about feasability and real life apply could be very long...I guess many others have written about this.» (Small extent)
- Teachers/tutors were almost only there for tutorials and assignment intros/critiques, and disappointingly did rarely arrange other activities like lectures, workshops etc.» (Small extent)
- In this course we had only one lecture and two appoinments with the tutors so I must say the tutoring in the studio was below poor.» (Small extent)
- This is a fuzzy thing and I think it is difficult to handle fuzziness. » (Some extent)
- When we had tutoring it was good until teachers gave us different assignments and did not speak to eachother.» (Some extent)

7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		14		93%
Some extent»		1		6%
Large extent»		0		0%
Great extent»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.06

- We got the literature like 1 week before handing in the project.» (Small extent)
- We had no course litterature. We had no material except a 1h lecture about foam milling and prototypes. The tutoring was good but short.» (Small extent)
- We only had couple texts as reading material that was handed out a couple weeks before the christmas holidays, which is too late in my opinion.» (Small extent)
- The only reference-litterature that was presented to us the teachers brought up one week before the hand-in and was to no use for anyone.» (Small extent)

8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?

Very badly»		9		60%
Rather badly»		4		26%
Rather well»		2		13%
Very well»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.53

- We didn"t really have a schedule. And we got different information from different people. The course assignment changed considerably from the first week to the last. One teacher gave us the assignment and another teacher was there when we presented it. The teachers didn"t seem to communicate with each other and all of them had their own idea about what the course was about. Very badly administered.» (Very badly)
- No webpage, everything via handouts and sometimes via mail. All the information should be distributed via the student portal, so that it can be found. They also need to make a scheduele and not make it the night before class. Planning needs to improve and a scheduele should be made before the course starts.» (Very badly)
- The organisation of the course has been very poor. There is no schedule overlooking the whole course. No information on Studieportalen. The big assignment of the course was not properly described from the beging so there were some missunderstandings about it"s purpose. Before the final hand in, an information meeting about the requirements for the hand in were held "spontaniously" resulting in that student that missed the meetings did not get all the information. Also at this meeting, handouts we"re not so many so all students did not get the information-handout. » (Very badly)
- The teachers didn"t speak to eachother. What was a goal wasn"t for the other teacher.» (Very badly)
- The tutors and the head of the studio barely talked to each other, and gave very mixed messages concerning assignments, which caused misunderstandings at critiques and general uncertainty among the students. Except for the last two weeks, we never knew more than one week in advance what we were supposed to do, which was very frustrating. We did not know when we were to present our final project (ie. when we had our last day before the holidays) until 4 weeks before. We were supposed to have a portfolio exam now in january, but did not get a specific date until two days before. In addition the teachers didi not investigate before the course started how many who wanted to do the two different projects we could choose between, that resulted in everyone taking one of the alternatives and making a mess out of at least the three first weeks (of a 8 week course..).» (Very badly)
- Three main teachers that seemed to have no communication between each other what so ever, that were constantly contradicting each other, changing the task all the time, and never giving us a schedule. That is a summary of the "administration"...» (Very badly)
- Nothing was planned in time. It was impossible to for example book an appointment with the dentist since you didn"t know if you was suposed to be on lecture on by your own some times. » (Very badly)
- I took until december I think until everyone was on the mailing list. The meetings almost always lasted too long. I mean it works, it ok, but it would be nice with more structure here! Plan ahead, make a small information sheet with all the times to meet up and all the exercises. Stick to it and that it.» (Rather badly)
- Planning is needed, maybe an course assistent? Structure and communication between the teachers is also needed» (Rather badly)
- didn´,t use it at all» (Rather badly)
- They were not distributed digitally, and could have been planned more.» (Rather badly)

Study climate

9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

Very poor»		1		6%
Rather poor»		5		33%
Rather good»		6		40%
Very good»		3		20%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.73

- When the teachers were in the studio there was no problem asking. But since we almost never saw them and trying to get in contact with them was close to impossible (I sent maybe 5 or 6 emails and didn"t get any response from either of the teachers.) I must say that the opportunities to ask them was VERY poor.» (Very poor)
- Too few opportunities to ask questions which was the best part of the course when there was a dialogue between students and teachers.» (Rather poor)
- Teachers were in the studio only once or twice a week.» (Rather poor)
- The teachers were very helpful and had a lot of knowledge when they first were there (maximum two days a week) but otherwise very hard to get in touch with if you had questions at any other time as they rarely answered emails.» (Rather poor)
- It was weird to spend so much time on a group critique only to have the tutoring the next day because you got a lot of double information with no time to make progress between the critique and the tutoring. But it was good that we had many different tutors.» (Rather good)
- It was rather good compared to the other things.» (Rather good)

10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		0		0%
Rather well»		6		40%
Very well»		9		60%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.6

- We could not sit in the studio because there were only 3 computers for 30 students.» (Rather well)
- As always, without my friends I would have drowned in this school many years ago» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

Too low»		1		6%
Low»		3		20%
Adequate»		9		60%
High»		2		13%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.8

- None the first three fourts, much the las fourth.» (Low)
- Too low in the beginning and too high in the end» (Low)
- It was what you made of it. In my case quite a lot. And for most people the same I think. It´,s a difficult process. » (Adequate)
- It felt low, but I guess that was only becuase we worked during reasonable hours than we usually do. We worked from 9-17, and that feels low but is actually adequate. » (Adequate)
- Too low in the beginning, it just seemed like we wasted the time. Time I would have rather spent on the last few weeks experimenting more with the foam or perfecting the concept.» (High)
- Too low in the beginning, insane towards the end.» (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		1		6%
Low»		4		26%
Adequate»		9		60%
High»		1		6%
Too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

Summarizing questions

13. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		8		53%
Fair»		1		6%
Adequate»		1		6%
Good»		4		26%
Excellent»		1		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.26 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The teachers in this course are all very good, however, the organisation of the course is very bad! As said before, there is no clear schedule for the course and the big assignment was not described clearly enough. At presentations, the teachers does not have a good time planing, resulting in students getting unequal presentation/critique time and the presentations have always gone over time, and gone in to lunch time. The teachers didn"t seem to have agreed about/discussed some part in the course which led to confusion for us student when they themselves we"re not clear on certain things. » (Poor)
- The organisation is extremly bad. Already filled in one of these course evaluations during the course but nothing happend? Morten is the most inspiring teacher in the school but he was not there verk much. Also as you known for a long time now, he cant organise around the course, someone else must do that. The other teachers talked in phone while presenting, didnt vare about the timeschedule.» (Poor)
- Not at the right level to on a master. Not enough advancement. It achieved good estetic results but showed lack of much other things, but overall the communication, goals and objectives was the worse things.» (Poor)
- Interesting topic and teachers with a lot of knowledge, but my general impression got tinted by the bad organisation of the whole course.» (Poor)
- The overall summary for the course is that it from now on should be called Matter, Space, NO Structure. It is of great importance that the persons organizing a master level course is able to organize and act professionally. Especially since there are exchange students coming here to study and learn something and they are met with such arrogance (not on the personal level though, everyone is very kind and polite, but coming to a new country, to a technical university and being met by teachers that are not able to communicate or give instructions is far from acceptable.) » (Poor)
- The assignment could have been great, but all the mess with administration and the feeling of that many details and demands about the assignment was made up during time, contributed to a bad course that i whish I wouldn"t have chosen. » (Poor)
- It was a fun assignment in the end, but it was not the assignment I signed up for. It was not a course about sustainability and new kinds of living connected to the specific site where we analyze the concept of rind. It was a course on how to use foam as a building material (something that was not entirely motivated) to build a thick wall. The administration of the course was disastrous with mixed and lackluster information from all the teachers, which was sad because it had potential to be so much better. » (Fair)
- Its good, I am very happy I took it. I has helped me greatly. It unstructured and fuzzy and in a bit of a identity crisis as well.» (Good)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

16. Additional comments