Trans RINA, Vol 155, Part C1, Intl J Marine Design, Jan -Jun 2013
The same activity is repeated at the end of the intensive week, where students present their progress and discuss future work they intend to undertake in the post-school period.
Midway through the course each student is given a sample ship taken from a publication or media (journal, marketing material, etc.) to critique. Based on high-level specification and layout each student prepares a brief presentation on specific aspect of that design (e.g. safety systems, payload, arrangement, firefighting, accommodation, etc.). This allows the students to gain a broad appreciation of how other designs address these issues. As students are typically focused upon specific challenging aspects of their own design this exercise allows them to re-examine ship design issues that they might have overlooked. This activity reinforces the importance of overall synthesis in ship design to achieve a successful solution. Importantly, by asking each student to present on one aspect of design, peer discussion highlights and reinforces the most important aspects that are applicable for all designs.
6. REFLECTION ON MODULE DESIGN
One should measure the success of the module against the learning objectives; this is not easy. However, staff have the overwhelming impression that the students gain a great deal from the module in terms of its learning objectives and this is confirmed by student feedback.
6.1 STUDENT ENJOYMENT AND FEEDBACK In
general student’s feedback, collated
“All agreed that the school met their expectations and
was relevant to their own working
environment. The breadth and depth of the material covered related well to the students’ needs and the material was industrially relevant.”
“The assignments represented the material
covered during the intensive school or in the distance learning material, and the instructions were clear.”
However, some concerns were raised:
The access arrangements and time allocated for completion of the distance learning material were rated “fair” to “good” which improvement.
gives room for
Some students felt that there was insufficient time during the intensive week to get to grips with the software and complete the assigned task. However, the students acknowledged that it would be difficult to find a readily available alternative to integrate into the project that would be of similar value.
from 2006
onwards, was very positive. It can be summarised in the following quotes:
6.2 FOCUS ON WARSHIP DESIGN
The majority of the students who have undertaken the module have come from a naval/military environment, with a smaller number from the commercial sector. There was a concern over whether these “commercial” students would find a warship design to their liking. However the feedback has always been positive in terms of student satisfaction.
6.3 SHIP DESIGN OUTCOMES
It has never been an objective that the designs should be “high quality” in themselves, as suggested above it is far more important
that the students learn from the
experience in order to be best placed to produce high quality designs when working as part of a design team in the future.
While it is not an objective to produce high quality designs, it is clearly desirable. This is an area where almost without exception the results have
proved
disappointing. Students are able to undertake the initial sizing and cost-capability trade-off’s well and generally conduct the technical analysis of their designs to a good standard.
However, the real ships hull form and general
arrangement of the final designs often did not reflect that of
(despite module documentation which
attempts to guide students towards a sensible arrangement and an example of a good layout).
6.4 OVERALL MODULE DESIGN The MTEC C17 module was originally
conceived
through applying a constructive alignment approach. Outcome-based learning and teaching principles were applied to the module design to allow it
to cater for
students’ diversity to maximise opportunities for deep learning by all students. This is achieved by constructive alignment of all elements of the module to help students achieve intended learning outcomes (see Figure 5).
A core of good course design is well-defined intended learning outcomes (stating the abilities the student should gain during the module), taking consideration of the tools required to
satisfy them. Furthermore, a suitable
environment needs to be created to facilitate learning. Finally, appropriate assessment methods should be used to evaluate the student’s achievements.
For this module, a blended format combining long- distance and face-to-face learning to a set timescale also had to be considered. While all material for long-distance learning was extensive and carefully prepared, it could be argued that the effectiveness of self-learning was not maximized for all students. More advanced use of virtual learning environments could provide better support for students and allow teachers to monitor student progress during long-distance learning phases of the module.
C-40
©2013: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98