1. Teams across both classes did not do much better on Assignment 7 than previous assignments, however, there is a sense that students know what key issues to identify and figures to check and are able to offer alternatives, given a scenario.
2. Justification of systems choices was often lacking in detail, although the detailing of the numbers and characteristics of the systems was often done well.
3. Many teams forgot to consider parking, vehicular circulation and the movement of materials.
4. Access points and egress points were often left out of the architectural analysis.
5. Some teams did brilliantly annotating diagrams and explaining them, while others just included a series of images of the various given sheets, which were often illegible and did not clarify much.
6. System Interactions was a section on which many teams could have expanded.
7. The different sections were put together and presented more uniformly than previous assignments.
8. Most teams still have a problem with citing images properly and forget to do so often.
9. Most teams attempted the extra credit section in Professor Mitchell’s section.
10. All of the students attempted the extra credit in Professor DaSaro’s section.
11. Some teams STILL forget to include their website identification information (names, dates, group number, assignment number, etc).
12. Overall there was a greater balance between text and graphics.
13. A few teams had blank pages (no information on them!). The grader opened the websites in three different web browsers in an attempt to locate the hidden information. In some instances, just the questions were provided, with no answers, or prompts from one student to the team member who was supposed to complete the section. Team-co-ordination ultimately suffered in a week where several other assignments were due.
