Guide for courses evaluation and upgrading
Although the project main actors, tutors and learners, have reached the envisaged work targets, and the global experience within this group has been positively evaluated, there is always a need of analysing and improving, if necessary. In this context, the Guide for courses evaluation and upgrading, synthesize the relevant aspects and conclusions drawn after each partner evaluation.
4. Analysis of the information provided by the partner institutions
4.6. Average grades for individual modules
The configuration of the average scores received by the participants during the online training activities at the consortium level presented in Table 5 is graphically depicted in Figure 13.
Table 5. Average grades for individual modules
|
|
|
Average grades for individual modules |
|||||
|
Modules |
Max grade |
INCDTP Buc.1 |
INCDTP Buc.2 |
Uni. Minho |
TZU Brno |
Uni. Maribor |
TU Iasi |
|
Advanced knitting technologies (AK) |
10 |
8.80 |
7.40 |
9.03 |
6.99 |
8.93 |
8.68 |
|
Virtual prototyping of garments. 3D scanning. clothing for people with special needs (VP) |
10 |
8.11
|
7.40 |
9.63
|
8.18 |
8.69 |
8.96 |
|
12 |
6.70 |
8.5 |
9.75 |
10.25 |
8.04 |
9.73 |
|
|
12 |
6.40 |
8.125 |
9.49 |
8.35 |
8.62 |
10.28 |
|
|
Entrepreneurship (E) |
12 |
7.43 |
9.20 |
9.23 |
6.96 |
9.70 |
10.14 |
|
12 |
6.38 |
10.5 |
9.92 |
7.17 |
10.52 |
11.32 |
|
|
Standardization of textile testing (STT) |
12 |
7.10 |
7 |
9.25 |
8.38 |
8.44 |
10.02 |
Analyzing the data in the Table 5, two important aspects can be highlighted:
- Grades may reflect the heterogeneity of the target groups in the consortium, in terms of categories;
- Grades can reflect different interests of the participants for a certain learning module, within each target group.
Figure 13