A2 - Grader's Comments

•  For teamwork evaluations: please remember to include meaningful evaluation of your own work and the work of your team members. Simply listing each member’s contribution does not evaluate the work produced.

• For teamwork evaluations: most students did not include their group number and/or the names of their team members.
• None of the teams submitted their information on BBVista? - This was due to Prof. Mitchell's error - points will be restored
• Architectural drawings exist but are not explicitly labeled or appropriately elaborated.
• a.      Floor plan ‘images’ are not architectural drawing plans
• b.      Section views are not perpendicular
• c.       Sources are not referenced- remember to always give your sources credit
• d.      Discuss drawings as they are presented
• Why did you select that image or drawing in particular?
• What does the image or drawing represent?
• What is important about it?
• Architectural discussion brief and lacking supporting details. Please try to use images and drawings in the discussion section.
• Structural section load path diagrams were vague and did not adequately represent how loads would be transferred throughout the building (not just the exterior walls!).
•   Calculations generally do not have correct sig figs and/or correct units.
• It was apparent that a few groups did not read the HVAC section assignment requirements.
• Every group attempted the extra credit.
• Evaluate accomplishments section was overall very good!

A1a–Revit–Grader Comments

1. Many students did not adjust the page size of their sheets from 11x8.5 to the required size of 30x42.

2. A few students did upload their revit files to the course database or to the BBVista assignment (I had no way to access their file).

3. Some students did not take care in specifying their dimension size to match the letters in their last name.

4. A handful of students did not include perspective views of their building.

5. PLEASE READ THE ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS! The grader does not like sifting through your work or searching to find elements that weren’t submitted!

A1 Grader Comments

1. Course understanding summaries were extremely short and lacking description. Most seemed to be paraphrasing the information provided on the AE 390 website and few presented the information from their perspective. As a result, the information did not come across clearly (half written from the perspective of a student and half written from the perspective of the professor).

2. Overall students neglected to comment specifically on the sequence of assignments. The sequence was provided, but often lacked speculation and insight. Provide examples and be specific! For example, why are the structural based assignments before the hvac based assignments?

3. Students seemed to favor the video.

4. Almost all of the students completed the extra credit (except the one who put in placeholder text –JEM).

5. Future skills section was lacking detail. A majority of students copied & pasted directly from the course syllabus.

6. Students forgetting to include required submission information (date, assignment, NAME….)!