Urbanism and Architecture in Context7XWX0
In general, the course scored quite well. The organization of the course was very clear and the good communication, done by the student assistant, was very appreciated.
For the seminars, new programs like Adobe Illustrator had to be used. Because some students did not know how to use them yet, it felt like being “thrown in at the deep end”. But this forced them to learn these new skills very quickly.
Unfortunately, there were also some improvement points.
There was not always enough time for each group at the seminars. At the final meeting before the presentation, there was only time for a short 10 minute talk. Perhaps it could be an idea to join groups with the same neighbourhood, as they sometimes have the same questions.
The seminar part of the studyguide was also not always clear, as it did not explain what was meant with each layer or subject. A small explanation would be useful.
For both the lectures and the seminars, the teachers were very enthusiastic and helpful. The lectures were experienced as interesting and clear. Also the explanations underneath the slides were very useful.
The connection between the lectures and the seminars was very good. The theory given at the lectures could almost immediately be used in practice at the seminars.
The examinations for the seminar part were fine, as it was clear what had to be delivered and the deadline and workload were doable.
The examinations for the lectures on the other hand were not. The midterm assignment was a bit unclear and felt unnecessary. It had little cohesion with the total course. It also had a very short deadline. Perhaps the assignment could be hand out a week earlier, so students can put more effort in them.
The questions on the final exam were a bit unclear. There were many spelling and grammar mistakes in the questions. This made them harder to read and sometimes even not understandable.
The questions about the books were quite literal. They required little insight but more specific knowledge and memory of the book itself.
Especially the seminar part was quite labour intensive. Almost every student spent more hours than the corresponded 140 hours. For some students this felt unfair, as the seminar only counted for 50% of the grade.
AUDE Project 37OO6X0
It was a very interesting and challenging project. This was especially due to the fact that you had to think about elements like light for the art pieces and routing. Another nice thing was the openness of the project. You could really make it your own project.
The tutoring was of a sufficient level and you were always welcome to ask questions. However, one supervisor was more specialised in the B direction and could not always give immediately answer on questions related to architecture. This caused a delay in the planning. For the tutoring, it might also be a more effective way if the tutoring is done in smaller groups of 3 people instead of the whole group. By doing this, you still learn something from other students but you also have a chance to make some changes to your design already.
The amount of drawings that needed to be delivered at week 8 were sufficient and achievable.
The workload was equally distributed through the quartile with the normal peak moments before the deadlines.
The importance of the reference project is different interpreted by the tutors. Some small guidelines of the use of it for next year could be an improvement.
The course was generally very interesting. The project was very nice and dealt with many issues that are important in many building projects. The site visit gave nice additional insights in the location. A very big compliment needs to be given to the flexibility and the adaptability of the course during the corona times. Generally the quality of the course was not reduced because of corona and the modifications of the course caused a lot of stress relief among the students. The large changes that needed to be implied were difficult for everybody (both students and teachers) but were reduced by the flexibility of the course. Generally talking about the course, some tutors are better than others in terms of providing feedback and clarity of the project (1). Furthermore the peer review was very nice. When performed adequately a good insight was given in the workload of a student which resulted in a fair assessment.
The lectures that were given were very interesting. Maybe a little bit more insight towards the shown projects could be given. Sometimes the stories of the lecturers were a bit wordy and not very clear which could make it difficult to be concentrated during the lectures. Some information that was provided in the last lecture could maybe be provided in an earlier lecture.
The project was structured very good. It was clear what kind of drawings were expected. The tutors were always available and in my group the communication was very good. The models that needed to be produced were very interesting and helped with decisions for the final design. I would like to mention that the second model was quite large in workload (2). The communication about the project could have been better. Among the different tutors, different communication was provided which caused a lot of chaos resulting in some unpleasant situations.
A large compliment needs to be given towards the new examination. Of course it was a pity to lose the possibility to present your project, because this an important learning skill, however the new way examination was beneficial for most students. Because most students had difficulties adapting to the new schedule and the new learning environment therefore this was a great solution. The communication around the examination was different among the tutors which caused a few problems that need to be addressed.
The workload was probably slightly higher than the expected workload (around 20 hours a week). This workload was during the entire process the same with the deadline as exception. However, the workload was different among each tutor group.
A very pleasant thing about the course was the logbook that needed to be tracked. Maybe it is an idea to implement this in all the other projects as well. This will give an insight about the amount of work that students put in a project and where most students have the biggest problems. There are large differences among the students, an indication about the biggest struggles can give insight in the correct ways to support students during their process. The time schedule is also a positive way of providing feedback
BPSD Project 37TT6X0
The students were positive about this course, it was well organized and everything was explained clearly. The interim presentation was moved from the usual week 4 to week 3, this was beneficial for spreading the workload more evenly over the quartile, and it gave more time to work out the final concepts. Students found it relevant for their education, for example because theoretical knowledge from the previous course ‘Dimensioning of Structures’ could be applied. The studyguide was also very useful, with a clear description of tasks per week.
The group size was good for this project. Students could learn from each other, while still getting sufficient personal feedback from the tutor. The feedback sessions were overall quite positive and well organized. However, they could sometimes be a bit long, so the time could be used more efficiently.
Between the two supervision groups, there were some differences in materials that had to be delivered for the presentations. This caused some confusion, and could have been communicated more clearly. It is the intention that different tutors expect similar deliverables, so this could be improved next year. Furthermore, the professional skill presenting was implemented in this course. It was quite unclear how this would be assessed, and what the feedback from the interim presentation was. A point of improvement for next year could be a short explanation on how this will be assessed. Lastly, a positive thing was that the assessment forms for the interim and final presentation were included in the studyguide. This made it clear what deliverables were needed for the presentations.
The workload was a bit high for this project, but certainly not more than for other projects. As a result of the clear week planning in the studyguide, the workload was spread evenly throughout the quartile. The interim presentation being in week 3 also helps in spreading the workload. This gives students more time to work out their ideas, and also creates the opportunity to work everything out in depth.
USRE Project 37PP6X0
The students were very enthusiastic about the course and graded it with a 7,5. Especially, the specific case of the project was a large advantage. De location and the building were very interesting to work with. Besides, there was a lot of freedom to choose your vision. The communication was excellent. A very fast responds on emails with a clear answer.
The project had enough tutoring moments and the tutoring was of a sufficient level. There was enough time to discuss all the questions and problems of the project. However, sometimes the tutor hours seemed more to be a question hour instead of a feedback hour. Tutors should give more tips or point the students in a direction for further research.
The workload for this project was normal and equally distributed through the quartile. Most students spend around the indicated 140 hours on the project.
An advantage but on the other hand also a drawback of the project was that every week an assignment for that week came online. With this structure, you stayed exactly on schedule. However, it takes away your own influence and interpretation of the project. You only see the assignment for one week so you don’t really know what to do for next week.