Urban environment CVET – EASCM (Spain)
- This topic has 1 reply, 1 voice, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Partner: Escola d’Art i Superior de Ceràmica de Manises
Dates of implementation: 25, 28, 30 October and 4th November
Place of implementation: Escola d’Art i Superior de Ceràmica de Manises
Topic chosen: Urban environment
Target group chosen: C-VET
RESULTS OF THE COURSE
At the end of the course, students have answered a questionnaire about their
employment situation, motivation for their participation and results of the training
received. A summary of answers is presented below.1. Typology of students
The group was composed for 14 students most of them professionals of handcraft
(7), art( 5) and design (9). The rest of them are teachers on schools of art and/or
design, an architect and an unemployed.2. Reasons to participate in the course
The most selected reasons are: acquire new skills (79%), personal interest (43%)
acquire new attitudes (36%) and refresh or improve knowledge (30%).3. Achievement of the objectives
The achievement of the objectives is considered high (> than 50%) or very high (50
– 30%).4. The teacher’s performance
The general opinion about the teacher can be defined as very good. All aspects we
asked about (clarity of speech, ability to motivate, ability to establish relationships,
openness, accessibility, and ability to fostering teamwork) are qualified as high (21-
28 %) or very high (71-79%).5. Contents
More than 75% of participants have considered the contents of the course with high
or very high clarity, concretion, structuration and possibility of practical use, and less
than 10% has considered them low.6. Methodology
About the methodology, less than 21% has qualified as medium the presentation of
theories and concepts, practical activities, learning material and reflection on the
results. The others have considered them high (57%) or very high (20-40%)7. Usefulness
The contents of the course have been seen for the participants as useful or very
useful (72%)8. General valuation
All participants have rated the course as good (64%) or very good (36%)Comments and suggestions:
From the open questions of the questionnaire, value the most the teamwork, the
interdisciplinary composition if the group, the use of a real example as project, the
personal relationships.
As point for improvement the general opinion is that the duration is too short for so
ambitious objectives.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.