Not bad. But not good either.
We could say differences between Team Designs have enlarged. We have some very good designs in the Unit; and some others that are still on a very primitive stage of development. We must say the difference is basicly related with the amount of work and effort each team has put in their proposal. It's not that much a matter a quality but a matter of quantity. We have a little more than a month left until the end of the semester so we encourage teams that are a bit asleep to work really hard and to have a look at what design groups that are doing better are capable of producing.
For this step we've assessed each student twice: Once for their team work and the second time for their individual task. We must say that teams that, for whatever reason, haven't handed in any of the documents required, haven't been penalised in their global assessment for this absence. Our assessment for global Team Proposal has been mostly supported on the global attitude and characteristics of their Design, independent of qualitity of individual documents. On the other hand, Individual assessment has regarded just the effort and the degree development of the document and task assigned to each one of you.
Here you have our global assessment for each of the eight designs and a brief comment on some individual documents:
Team 1:
Excelent work. If something should be said, we found both your enviromental approach and your plans a little less accurate than sections and elevations. Anyway, very good work all of you. Continue this way.
Team 2:
Good work. Particularly your enviromental approach. Pity you had no sections but we are sure you'll be able to update your proposals' documents with this next step.
Team 3:
Just enough. Obviously your plans, although not completely correct, demostrated and amount of work higher than the rest. You have and excellent initial model that you must turn into a real project. It's really pretty easy. It only requires work and compromise. Come on!
Team 4:
Just enough and great differences between the work developed for each task. Good enviromental approach. Good program study but no real design associated to it. And very insufficient sections and elevations. Two advices: Work as a team; and each member must do his/her individual task at each stage.
Team 5:
Strange and slight step back of your proposal from your initial model. Perhaps you've simplified it too much. Nice enviromental approach but plans and elevations didn`t explore the real possibilities of the model. It certainly didn`t help you hadn`t sections. Mend it on this next step!
Team 6:
Good work. But again, too large differences between effort and work demostrated by each member. Great new model and interesting plan approach that should be completed. Suggesting sections. But most disappointing elevations and no enviromental study at all. We encourage those members with less compromise with the team to quickly join the main stream which in running on the correct direction.
Team 7:
Good (and difficult) work. We understand difficulties. And you must know although you've worked hard, your proposal hasn't yet arrived to a good end. But we feel you'll make it if you continue trying. You must all continue your effort to understand the enormous possibilities of this kind of slighly more complex geometry. All of you, but speacially sections and, most of all, elevations.
Team 8:
Very close to the edge. Perhaps just enough and properly drawn but you really must increase your compromise with the proposal. You must introduce in your design decisions obvious aspects as topography, existing structure, built environment, etc... You've shown us you know how to draw, specially with elevations and plans, but the global degree of compromise of the proposal must be higher. Go for it as a team!
As you can see, four team have done a good job and the other four increase their speed on next stages. We want to close the gap between the two groups in the Unit and I imagine the four teams in front are not going slow down. So the other four realy have to accelerate right now.
Estoy de acuerdo en todo y no es una queja lo que voy a decir... Pero como antiguo... o actual lider de grupo 1 creo que el trabajo de las plantas estubo muy a corde con el periodo de tiempo dado. Ya que se estubo bastante tiempo haciendo modificaciones leves y aveces radicales para la mejor contxtualizacion de la propuesta, y en horas aplicadas y noches sin dormir para mi ha sido un gusto que el equipo respondiera asi de bien :), y que acatara mis consejos de presentacion y esquemas explicativos en cada documento (en mi opinion los mas unitarios) Por lo tanto soy conciente que las plantas y el entorno no llegaron a un nivel de lucirse pero hay mucho fondo ahi detras y se materializo en camino a seguir para la fase 7 al que le toque. Por ello agradecer al equipo que con su trabajo hicieran mi desaparecer mi desconfianza al trabajo en grupo un excelente para los tres y en la proxima seran 4 excelentes ;) jeje ahi lo dejo
ResponderEliminarWe know, David, we know. I personally agree with most you said and I'm particulary glad you've lost some of your mistrust on Team Work. Great news.
ResponderEliminarPerhaps we should have written down on the text of this entry that, of course, the difficult task assumed by all team leaders has also been assessed. In your case, certainly excellent.
Gracias Diego, pero me referia a jesus jeje no era para buscar reconocimiento en mi parte que coincido al 100%
ResponderEliminarCon lo dicho en el blog (Insatisfecho con 1 de los 3 doc. Entregados y con ganas de mejorar en la siguiente entrega) Y la verdad se aprende
Ya que te complementas con los integrantes del equipo ya que ser bueno en todo es complicado o casi imposible jeje bueno mañana nos vemos no doy mas la vara.