STUDENTS' COMMENTS ON MODULES (UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT FEEDBACK)



Faculty:  ARTS & SOCIAL SCIENCES Academic Year:  2002/2003


Semester:  1

Module:FILM AND HISTORY - GEM2005M

Q1.  Do you have any additional comments on this module in terms of its strengths, weakness or possible improvements?
1.I would prefer to have tutorial classes with human interaction and where we could ask the lecturers questions related to the film and have a face-to-face discussion rather than through the IVLE. Also, it is very hard to tell what kind of essay is actually preferred by the tutors.
2.the films were good! but i had a hard time answering to the fullest extent for the projects because of the 500 words limit
3.good use of the module in representing history. more transparency in style of marking.
4.grades awarded were not explained to students. how can a report put up on the web explain all the students' weaknesses in the writings? given the fact that some students might not have the writing skills of others, lecturers and tutors should have provided more constructive criticism to help us but they failed to do so. on the whole however, the course was very interesting
5.none.
6.It'll be a lot better if there were English subtitles when we watch the films.
7.The films shown were interesting and the lectures enlightening, the only weakness was it's workload, despite being non-examinable, the workload should be planned in such a way that doesn't tax students too much as it nears exams as we will have other exams to actually study for.
8.There is no personal comments on assignments for us to improve on. We do not know how to go about improving our personal report.
9.final essay should be after all the topics/ themes n projects are covered
10.Should give brief intro of the events covered in document format on ivle.
11.nil
12.no comments
13.can perhaps give more guide on how shld we answer the question on the projects since a lot of us tend to misinterpret the question. thanks.
14.as an engineeering student, i learn a lot from this module.
15.mayhap it would help the students in having a better understanding if there was tutorial classes. the tutors/lecturers seem to let the students roam free in the course, letting them known that they have reached the limits only through the results. so please, help the students get clearer directions by letting us know what they want.
16.interesting.. but its really unfair how the module is graded... sigh.. thats the drawback of not having an exam... then again, that was the entire draw of the module in the first place :)
17.nil
18.NIL
19.very fun module but quite difficult to know what the teachers actually want in the essays
20.interesting module
21.i think this module was very well planned; presentation waS Excellent
22.non exam more of a strength
23.Perhaps more hands on guidance 'cos at times there is some confusion over what direction are the projects suppose to head.
24.Great module to take. Very interesting. Perhaps allow for some leeway on project word limit.
25.the rlationship between studen and lecturer is very distant due to the absence of tutorials
26.It's a very interesting module that developes and enhances one's critcal analysis, as well as interpretation skills.
27.It involves critical thinking and analysing which are obviously helpful and vital in future.
28.It helps us to explore concepts that we may not have thought of before.
29.they should have a tutorial session after the lec
30.Tutorial sessions, felt quite lost. not alot of support from tutors or lecturers.
31.tell the history background in a simpler form as not all students know the history before hand that well
32.none
33.An interesting and fun module. Though the workload may be a little too much.
34.interesting
35.This module should carry a note that "writing skills are extremely crucial", the course is interesting and enjoyable, but the writing is tough. Science/Engineering students often lose out, and this is a main part of the module grading... Since its a GEM, lecturers should take into account which faculty the students are from when grading. Maybe if time/resources permit, the lecturers/TAs can give more personal feedback on our projects, it beats a general feedback in making improving our essays (ie point out where we've gone wrong/right in our scripts itself); this may be time/effort consuming, but it helps the students learn better.
36.too much emphasis on historical background
37.Should have more interaction and discussion between students of different groups.
38.i think the marking is not detailed enough, we usually expect more comments on each section of our projects, rather than a 'clean' proj returned to us with just a grade (kind of) on it. we wouldn't mind if you kept the projs for more than 2 weeks, because we know the number of students is quite large compared to the TA's and lecturers, but getting them marked in detail would be nice.
39.nil