Page Comparison

Mentors teams

Dr. Joëlle Bitton / Luke Franzke
Dr. Björn Franke / Clemens Winkler
Dr. Antonio Scarponi / Verena Ziegler
Prof. Jürgen Späth / Mona Neubauer

...

• Deliveries and deadlines
• Monthly group presentations
• Thesis focus workshops
• Calendar Overview
• Fall 2017 Courses
• Presentation Guidelines
• Review and grading

Anchor
deliveries deliveries

Deliveries and deadlines

All document deliveries should be made on the IAD server. See screenshot.

...

• Thesis Colloquium 
  Each student meets the theory mentors together for a 20-minutes session. The student explain briefly what their findings are (max. 5 min) and then we have a discussion (mentors ask questions) about the work and the process (15 min).
  
  

28 May 2018, 17.00

• Full BA thesis and project documentation (part A and part B) delivered (including updates and rewrites, with final reflection on practice) as a digital copy on the IAD server by 17.00.
  
  

4 June 2018, 14.00 - 18.00

• Visit through Exhibition with mentors
• Please hand in your two hard copies of your thesis to Karin Luginbühl, IAD office room 4C.01, until 17.00.

...

• 14.00

...

• .

...

• Visit through Exhibition with mentors

7 June 2018, 16.00 - 22.00

...

• Practice session for BA Finals
  
  

13 June 2018, 0908.30 - 1516.00, in exhibition space (afterwards discussion for mentors room 5T.07, 16.00 - 17.30)

• BA FinalsFinals 
• Mentors and Jury discussiondiscussion 
  
  

14 June 2018: 10.00 - 16.00, room 4K.22.1

• Final mentors and jury discussion (10.00-12.00)
• Thesis Students feedback session (13.00-16.00)

Anchor
presentations presentations

Monthly group presentations

Presentation of advancement of project as well as theoretical research, together with all students and all mentors.
Presentation should all be 5 minutes long with 10 minutes for feedback and discussion.
Format is free - although slides are most useful to structure your presentation. See below for more oral presentation guidelines.

...

• Present your final exhibition concept 
• Final Observations from user studies
• Present 3 main lessons learned from your process
• Present your contribution to the field

Anchor
workshops workshops

Thesis focus workshops

1 March 2018: Thesis structure review workshop, 09.30 - 12.30, room 4T33

...

24 May 2018: Video and Sound review with mentors, Timetable with Daniel Hug and Nicole Foelsterl (optional - only for those who will make videos), room 4K.22.1

Anchor
calendar calendar

Calendar Overview

Anchor
fall fall

Fall 2017 Courses

• Free Flow seminars
  21 Sept 'Urban Walk'
  10 Oct 'Nature Walk/Teaching exchange'
  22 Nov 'Train Ride'
  18 Dec 'Time travel' 
  
  
• Academic Writing Workshop 
  29 Sept, 5-6 Oct, 13 Oct, 18 Dec
  
  
• IAD Theory Course : 'Positions & Rhetorics'
  28 Sept - 14 Dec
  
  
• BA Thesis Concept Seminar 
  8-19 January 2018

Anchor
guidelines guidelines

Presentation guidelines           

 
Oral Presentation style

• 5-minutes presentation time - unless specified, for monthly group presentations  / BA Finals: 10 minutes
• Present in English for monthly group presentations / BA Finals: English or German
• NO reading cards 
• Think of your presentation as a performance: try to not learn your text by heart, but rather practice enough that you can present with a natural conversational flow
• Slides are recommended - other formats are possible - please check with us beforehand
• If you do use slide, don’t read all the text that is present on the slides, summarize your thoughts
• Go to the point, be concise, cut the non-essential parts in your speech
• Don’t lose time describing what is presented on the screen (we can understand by looking at the slides)
• Respect the time - don’t be afraid by the “short” time - it’s plenty enough if you keep to the essence of your ideas.
  If you use these minutes well, you won’t have to rush through what you have to say. Don’t think that all you have to say matters, you can always be more concise.
  
  

...

• First slide should feature: Your Name, Project title, School, Department, Mentors, Date
• Second slide is stating in 1-2 short sentences: your project summary (what is it?) and why it’s ground-breaking
• Third slide: describe your project a bit further to explain how it is operating (from a technology perspective or other): what are the interactions within the project, how do users experience it? You can present here as well a very short demo of your project if relevant.
• Related work: in 1-2 slides, present works that are precedents or related.
  Related work can pertain to various categories: for instance, related work in technology you’re using, in the aesthetics, in the concept, in literature/science-fiction, in history, in art, in design, etc… It could be many categories, pick the ones that are most relevant to show on your slides and mention up to 1-2 important ones in your oral presentation. Mention how your project pushes the topic further.
• Decision-making process
  How did you make the decisions you made?
  Define the 2-3 key moments in your process.
• User-studies
  Who are your users, how did you involve them and how their input helped you make decisions for your project?
• Reflection
  Challenges and pitfalls: what you didn’t manage to do or what you could have done better
• Potential impact & future directions

Anchor
review review

...

Review and Grading

The official study guidelines of the BA in Design at ZHdK provides broad lines for the diploma evaluation (see § 15).
The BA thesis counts for 22 ECTS points and is graded between letters A-F.

The criteria for the final grade are :

• Project (50%)
  Generosity: How the research was conducted with ambition, commitment and responsibilty.
  Relevance: Relevance of the topic for the design community, society, design discourse.
  Execution: How diligently, creatively, precisely the outcome is showcased.
  Academic Position: Evaluating the maturity of the position within the research discourse.
  Transversality: Considering the different fields in which the project can have an impact. 
  
  
• Documentation and reflection (25%)
  Quality of the process and research
  Experimentations conducted
  Adequate design tools / Adequate evaluation 
  Plausibility of the result in regard to the initially formulated research question

• Final presentation (15%)
  Ability for Synthesis
  Range of Overview given
  Addressing questions asked
  
  
• Mediation via exhibition (10%)
  Quality
  Precision
  
  

The grade is decided after each mentoring team provides their assessment (the student mentors provide a consultory assessment) and a discussion leads to a consensus.
The two external guests provide their assessment for the project itself and for the mediation via exhibition.

Additional criteria:
Depending on the angle undertaken for the project, some aspects will be particularly relevant: ie. interface design for apps and platforms, methodology for field studies, evaluation for education services, etc..

Grading details:

A hervorragend (6) = ausgezeichnete, hervorragende Leistung
B sehr gut (5-6) = deutlich überdurchschnittliche Leistung
C gut (5) = insgesamt gute und solide Arbeit
D befriedigend (4-5) = mittelmäßige Arbeit
E ausreichend (4) = Leistungen entsprechen den Mindestanforderungen
FX nicht bestanden (3,5) = es sind Nachbesserungen erforderlich
F klar nicht bestanden (<3,5)
Abstufungen: 3 = ungenügend, 2 = schwach, 1 = sehr schwach bzw. keine Arbeit geleistet – die Arbeit ist zu wiederholen, in der Regel keine Nachbesserung möglich.