Civil Engineering & Physical Sciences

About us

Our staff

Courses

Scholarships

Careers teachers information

Graduate outcomes

Contact us

Quality Assurance Survey Reports

This page contains summaries of Quality Assurance Survey reports since 2003 for units that are offered by the Department of Civil Engineering and Physical Sciences at Bendigo. A QA survey for any particular unit is not necessarily conducted each year, so reports are not available for every unit every year.

Civil Construction (CIV3CC) — survey: 2003

Five students out of ten in the class responded to the survey. The survey reflected students' satisfaction with the subject content, delivery and workload. One comment indicated that extra reading material apart from the printed lecture notes would be helpful for students who are interested to learn more. Since the subject is based on practical experience it will be difficult to give specific publications to read. However, efforts will be made to give all students a range of publications for further reading this year. This year it is intended to organize a workshop to address the perceived need for additional reinforcement of practical concepts.
(back to list of units)

Civil Engineering Materials (CIV2CEM) — survey: 2003

The QA survey responses from the class of 11 (out of 18) students were generally positive about the subject. The subject is shared between two lecturers using different teaching methods. Comments regarding perceived inconsistency indicate that closer collaboration to ensure a more uniform subject delivery (both lectures and lecture notes) would improve the teaching. The QA responses also indicated that most students do not spend sufficient time (five hours per week) studying in this subject.
(back to list of units)

Civil Engineering Materials (CIV2CEM) — survey: 2007

Civil Engineering Materials (CIV2CEM) — survey: 2008

Civil Engineering Materials (CIV2CEM) — survey: 2005

Civil Engineering Materials was shared between two lecturers. There were twenty four responses to the QA survey from the class of twenty five students. Students were generally positive about the subject and its delivery. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals. Students appear to enjoy them and regard them as beneficial to their understanding. The possibility of placing a copy on short loan will be investigated for 2006 in response to the students comment.

Civil Engineering Materials (CIV2CEM) — survey: 2006

Civil Engineering Materials was shared between two lecturers. There were thirteen responses to the QA survey from the class of eighteen students. Students were generally positive about the subject and its delivery. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals, which were considered beneficial to the unit understanding.
(back to list of units)

Computer Aided Drafting (CIV1CAD) — survey: 2006

This unit was surveyed via SET (student evaluation of teaching) survey. There were fifteen responses to the survey from a class of twenty students. Students were generally positive about the unit and its delivery. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals, which were considered beneficial to the unit understanding.
In response to students' comments the possibility of running some of the lectures in the computer laboratory is investigated.
(back to list of units)

Computer Aided Drafting (CIV1CAD) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this Unit were the lecture notes and the weekly assessment (drawings).
According to the student response, this Unit can be improved if the lecture delivery is done in the computer lab.
The following changes will be made the next time the Unit is offered: the possibility of delivering the lectures in the computer lab is investigated.
(back to list of units)

Discovering Science (SCI1DS) — survey: 2004

15 students responded to the Quality Assurance questionnaire. The response was overwhelmingly positive. Students indicated that they were satisfied with the content, the lectures and the assessment in this subject. No major changes are envisaged for 2005.

Discovering Science (SCI1DS) — survey: 2006

Discovering Science is a first year level unit for student undertaking a General Science strand in the B. Education. It covers a breadth of introductory science concepts. The unit is designed to challenge the students to work towards a better understanding of the concepts and to take responsibility for their learning. The quantitative and qualitative data indicate that the students appreciate the structure of the unit and the teaching and that they enjoy the challenge. Written comments suggest that the relationship between the lectures and the practical workshops is particularly beneficial.

Discovering Science (SCI1DS) — survey: 2007

This unit has been designed to encourage students to build their confidence in science and to reflect on their learning as it is occurring. The 2007 QA survey suggests that in general the students perceived that these objectives are being met. The students commented about the amount of effort that was required to complete the weekly reports, but generally agreed that the reports were worthwhile for their learning. In 2008 we will attempt to improve the guidance given in relation to how to use the classes and the expectations of the weekly reports.

Discovering Science (SCI1DS) — survey: 2008

This unit has been designed to provide a strong foundation in scientific principles for further studies in multidisciplinary sciences. The 2008 QA survey suggests that, in general, the students enjoyed the unit and believed that there was good connection across the unit and between the course work and practical exercises. In 2009 more emphasis will be placed on the development and use of a resource portfolio to support understanding.
(back to list of units)

Earth and Energy (SCI2EE) — survey: 2004

16 students responded to the Quality Assurance questionnaire. In this first offering of Earth and Energy, we were attempting to cater for students undertaking the General Science strand in the new B. Education as well as teaching out students in the B. Teaching completing the PATE strands. The response to the unit was generally positive with concerns arising from the mix of students in the class.

Earth and Energy (SCI2EE) — survey: 2006

Earth and Energy is a second year unit within the general science strand. The unit takes a multi-disciplinary approach to consider energy and its interaction within the world around us. The quantitative data indicated that the students continue to be generally satisfied with the structure of the unit, the teaching and the support given. Written comments suggest that the relationship between the lectures and the practical workshops is beneficial. There were some suggestions with regard to the clarity of expectations in the practical reports and assignments that will be considered for 2007.

Earth and Energy (SCI2EE) — survey: 2007

This unit is the third in a series of general science units designed to improve the confidence of non-science students to tackle and communicate scientific issues. The survey results indicate that the students perceive that their confidence has improved as a result of the unit. In general they are satisfied that their written communication skills have developed. Improvements planned for the unit in 2008 include clarity of expectations and feedback for reports.

Earth and Energy (SCI2EE) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best thing about this unit was the structure whereby the theoretical work was supported by practicals and workshops. Also according to the student response, the unit can be improved by clarification of the assessment. In 2009 the assessment and its role in developing understanding will be clarified.
(back to list of units)

Electron Microscopy (PHY3EM) — survey: 2003

This subject provides students with extensive hands-on experience in operating electron microscopes and interpreting recorded images with image analysis techniques. Responses from students indicate they particularly enjoy the multi-disciplinary nature of the course. A request for more time using the instruments during scheduled practical classes will be facilitated by the commissioning of a third electron microscope by June 2004.
(back to list of units)

Engineering Practice (CIV1EP) — survey: 2006

In this Unit, students are required to obtain information in appreciable depth on a specified, but not unfamiliar, topic from a variety of sources. This information is critically reviewed and discerned, and synthesised to form the basis of a cogent argument. In the past, students have found this to be a challenging experience that requires a high level of critical thinking and analysis.

Engineering Practice (CIV1EP) — survey: 2008

According to the responses of the students:
— the best things about this Unit were the site visit and working as part of a group on a large project.
— the unit could be improved by revising some of the smaller assessments and by undertaking more site visits.
The following changes will be considered next time the Unit is offered: Better defined boundaries and closer supervision on the project, and an additional site visit.
(back to list of units)

Environmental Science (SCI1ES) — survey: 2005

Positives
— "I loved opening up my mind to the world."
— Unit was found to be most interesting and relevant.
— "Excursions, both salinity and permaculture."
— Positive attitudes by both lecturers.
— Variety of assessment.

Problems
— "Friday morning classes."
— "Need a greater engineering focus."
— "More support for education students."
— "More feedback from assessments."
— Lectures and tutes need to be better linked.

It is intended to improve the linkage of lectures and tutes where possible.
(back to list of units)

Engineering Group Research (CIV2GR) — survey: 2005

In this unit, students were required to obtain information in appreciable depth on a specified, but not unfamiliar, topic from various sources. This information was critically reviewed and discerned, and synthesised to form the basis of a cogent argument. The students found this to be a challenging experience that required a high level of critical thinking and analysis.
(back to list of units)

Geotechnology A (CIV3GTA) — survey: 2006

This unit was surveyed via SET (student evaluation of teaching) survey. There were thirteen responses to the survey from a class of eighteen students. Students were generally positive about the unit and its delivery. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals, which were considered beneficial to the unit understanding.
In response to students' comments additional example will be covered for more difficult topics.
(back to list of units)

Geotechnology A (CIV3GTA) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this Unit were the very interesting topics covered, the practical sessions, which provided the students with new skills and developed their problem solving ability.
According to the student response, this Unit can be improved if the length of lectures would be reduced (blocks of 3 hours currently) and the assessment of group work would reflect individual contribution.
The following changes will be made the next time the Unit is offered: the assessment method will be adjusted to truly assess the individual’s contribution to the team work and the time table will be revised to assign blocks of only 2 hours lectures for this Unit.
(back to list of units)

Geotechnology B (CIV4GTB) — survey: 2007

— According to the student response, the best things about this Unit were the content, assessments and the lecture notes.
— According to the student response, this Unit can be improved by replacing the team work with individual work.
— The following changes will be made the next time the Unit is offered: one of the laboratory/field reports will be submitted as an individual work.
(back to list of units)

Geotechnology B (CIV4GTB) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this Unit were the content, assessments and the lecture notes.
According to the student response, this Unit can be improved by replacing the team work with individual work.
The following changes will be made the next time the Unit is offered: one of the laboratory/field reports will be submitted as an individual work.
(back to list of units)

Hydraulic Engineering 1 (CIV3HE1) — survey: 2005

Positives
— "Go to all classes and field trips."
— "Read everything that is handed out twice."

Problems
— More tutorial problems in class.

The intention is to find a single text book that contains most of the information and to consider the use of more tutorial problems.
(back to list of units)

Hydraulic Engineering 2 (CIV4HE2) — survey: 2005

Small class sample.
Positives
— Subject content and field trips working together.
— Load and assignments balanced

Problems
— Nil

No major changes proposed for this subject.
(back to list of units)

Investigation CIV4INV — survey: 2004

This Unit is under review in response to the recent accreditation report of Engineers Australia.

Investigation CIV4INV — survey: 2006

This Unit is the keystone Unit of the Project Learning Stream in the course. Working with minimal supervision and a high degree of independence, students are required to complete a substantial engineering task to a high degree of competency within specified time and resource constraints. Motivated students often place high demands on themselves as the project becomes the showpiece of their motivation and engineering abilities for potential employers.

Investigation CIV4INV — survey: 2007

According to the student response:-
The best aspects of this Unit are working with the Supervisor, readily available resources and no formal classes.
The areas that need improvement are the excessive workload, and to make the written submission more like a journal article rather than a large report.
It is noted that workloads vary widely according to the nature of the project and the enthusiasm of the student. The requirements of the written submission are prescribed at Department level consistent with that specified in approved Course Accreditation documents.
(back to list of units)

Measurement and Observation (PHY1MO) — survey: 2003

The QAS questionnaire indicated that the students were generally clear on the structure and found the lectures and practicals useful. There were significant requests for 'tutorials' and more questions and problems, which ran counter to the lecturer's experience of poor or spasmodic attendance of classes and non completion of the problem sheets provided. The subject is being revised to include some web-based support for 2004. This subject is a compulsory subject within the B. Applied Science, however the questionnaire results indicate that there is a serious lack of motivation amongst the class toward the subject, despite a variety of attempts to address this issue. The course coordinator has been requested to review the place of this subject within the Bachelor of Applied Science Course.

Measurement and Observation (PHY1MO) — survey: 2005

The 24 students who responded to the QA questionnaire responded positively to the questions: the aims of this unit were made clear, the workload in this unit is manageable, the amount and type of assessment is appropriate for this unit, the level of support, help and advice is appropriate for this unit and overall, the quality of teaching in this unit was high. They were less positive about the lack of printed notes and they tended not to do the set problems, but the majority of them would recommend this unit to other students.
There will be no major changes for 2006.

Measurement and Observation (PHY1MO) — survey: 2006

The 24 students who responded to the QA questionnaire responded very positively to the questions: the aims of this unit were made clear, the workload in this unit is manageable, the amount and type of assessment is appropriate for this unit, the level of support, help and advice is appropriate for this unit and overall, the quality of teaching in this unit was appropriate. They were less positive about the lack of printed lecture notes.
There will be no major changes for 2007.

Measurement and Observation (PHY1MO) — survey: 2008

In 2008 this unit ran in conjunction with Measurement and Instrumentation SCI2MI. SCI2MI was attended by 2nd, 3rd and 4th year education students. This caused some difficulties with the timetabling of the unit. Nevertheless students made comments similar to "A lot of topics that can be quite dry we livened up with a bit of humour and good examples." And generally students were pleased with the practical components of the unit and the nature of explanations given in lectures. There were reservations expressed by some students about the weighting of the various components of the unit (the examination amounting to 60%). However after completion of the unit, overall the students' grades were good.
There will be minor changes to the unit content for 2009 to coordinate with other units and to reflect current developments in instrumentation.
(back to list of units)

Mechanics of Solids (PHY1MS) — survey: 2003

Students were generally positive about the subject and its delivery. In response to student feedback, the textbook will be changed in time for the next offering of this subject.

Mechanics of Solids (PHY1MS) — survey: 2005

Several students suggested that less marks should be allocated to the examination whilst several others suggested another tutorial session. Some requested that notes and examples be put onto the intranet.
Most of the advice from present students to future students centred around keeping up to date with the Unit material and doing as many of the practice problems as possible.
The Unit co-ordinator notes that since knowledge that is fundamental to a number of areas in Civil Engineering is presented in this Unit, the breadth of application of the concepts has always posed a significant challenge to students and generated a workload above the median. The heavy emphasis on the final examination is designed to ensure that students commit these fundamentals to memory in preparation for later Units for which this Unit is a prerequisite.
The Unit is quite satisfactory and no significant changes are proposed for 2006.

Mechanics of Solids (PHY1MS) — survey: 2006

Knowledge that is fundamental to a number of areas in Civil Engineering is presented in this Unit. Consequently, the breadth of application of the concepts has always posed a significant challenge to students and generated a workload above the median, as students are strongly encouraged to undertake as many practice problems as possible. The heavy emphasis on the final examination is designed to ensure that students commit these fundamentals to memory in preparation for later Units for which this Unit is a prerequisite.

Mechanics of Solids (PHY1MS) — survey: 2008

According to the student response:-
The best aspects of this Unit are the real world/practical problems, the lectures and tutorials, and the tests during the semester.
The areas that need improvement include timetabling, that there should be more weighting on the tests during semester and less on final exam, and feedback.
Some students found four hours lectures and tutorials on one day to be too much. A request will be made to the Timetabling Officer to alter this. The requirements of the final examination are prescribed at Department level consistent with that specified in approved Course Accreditation documents. The heavy emphasis on the final examination is designed to ensure that students commit essential fundamentals to memory in preparation for later Units for which this Unit is a prerequisite.
(back to list of units)

Physics A (PHY1PA) — survey: 2003

Responses indicated that students were reasonably clear, both on the structure of the subject, and benefits of the structure for their learning. Comments suggest that the changes made in the approach to practicals continue to be appreciated by students. The QA survey responses provided evidence that the subject has not been successful, in general, in motivating first year engineering students to study physics in an appropriate manner. Probably related to this, results indicate that many students are not satisfactorily achieving the learning goals of the subject. Since an understanding of basic physics is essential for engineers, this issue needs to be addressed at course level.

Physics A (PHY1PA) — survey: 2005

The quantitative data indicated that the students are well satisfied with the structure of the unit, the teaching and the support given. There was some minor concern about the manageability of the workload which can be attributed to the unit being a first semester first year unit and hence the requirement for many students to adapt their study habits. It is a positive indication that the students are conscious of the work requirements. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals. Students appear to enjoy them and regard them as worthwhile. There was mixed reaction to the use of WebCT to support the unit, and some concern about the timetable (Friday 9am lecture).

Physics A (PHY1PA) — survey: 2006

Physics A is a first semester, first year unit designed to give students a conceptual understanding of a variety of elementary topics including motion, mechanics, heat, and waves. The quantitative data indicated that the students continue to be well satisfied with the structure of the unit, the teaching and the support given. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to the practicals. Students appear to enjoy them and regard them as worthwhile. There are some suggestions that the assignment procedure could be improved. This will be considered for 2007.

Physics A (PHY1PA) — survey: 2007

The QA survey showed that students are largely satisfied with this unit with over 85 % of respondents indicating that overall they were satisfied with the quality of the unit. Comments indicate that the practicals were enjoyed and well linked to the lecture material. The use of tests throughout the semester was appreciated and will become part of the formal assessment regime.

Physics A (PHY1PA) — survey: 2008

The QA survey showed that students are largely satisfied with this unit with over 85 % of respondents agreeing that overall they were satisfied with the quality of the unit. Comments indicate that the practicals were (mostly) enjoyed and well linked to the lecture material but that there was some confusion regarding expectations of the written report.
(back to list of units)

Physics B (PHY1PB) — focus group: 2008

This unit had a very small enrolment (under 15), hence a survey was performed via a focus group discussion. The discussion was facilitated by the Faculty Educational designer (Tony Gleeson) and investigated students' attitude to learning, resources and flexible ways in which the unit could be taught.
In keeping with suggestions from students, the 2009 offering should include improvements in the laboratory work. This will include improving the perceived connection between the theory and the practical works, with clearer explanations given at the introduction of a practical session during a pre-lab session.
(back to list of units)

Soil Science (GEO3SSC) — survey: 2003

Teaching in Soil Science was shared between the Department of Physical Sciences and Engineering and the Department of Pharmacy. There were eight responses to the QA survey from the class of nine students. The subject was well received. Although most commented that the workload was adequate, the majority commented that the balance of assessment between practicals (25%), field project and class presentation of same (15%), and examination (60%) was skewed. All agreed that the field project was a very worthwhile exercise, (and many did put in considerable time and gave excellent presentations and reports). The project weighting will be increased to 30% (including 5% allocated to the class presentation), and the examination component reduced to 45% in 2004. The lecture and practical class schedule will be rearranged to give better continuity of topics between lecturers, and a closer link between lectures and practicals in response to comments suggesting less than optimal cohesion.
(back to list of units)

Structures 1 (CIV2ST1) — survey: 2005

As a result of student feedback, more tutorials will be included and the assignments will be distributed throughout the semester.

Structures 1 (CIV2ST1) — survey: 2007

According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the printed notes, textbook and the lectures.
According to the student response, this unit can be improved by decreasing the workload, having more tutorials and fewer questions from the textbook.
The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: The workload and lecture/tutorial split will be reviewed.

Structures 1 (CIV2ST1) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the interesting content, practical applications, good notes, access to lecturers.
According to the student response, this unit can be improved by having more examples, more tutorials, and a reduced workload.
The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: The workload and tutorials will be reviewed

Structures 1 (CIV2ST1) — survey: 2009

Structures 2 (CIV3ST2) — survey: 2005

As a result of student feedback, the assignment workload will be distributed throughout the semester for the next offering of this unit.

Structures 2 (CIV3ST2) — survey: 2007

The students clearly recognize the enhancement of their analytical and problem-solving skills as well as an improvement in their ability to tackle unfamiliar problems, all of which are important attributes for a successful engineer. Whilst the Unit does not explicitly seek to develop their planning skills, such skills are an important pre-requisite for success in this Unit.

Structures 2 (CIV3ST2) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the software, lecture notes and the organisation of lectures and labs.
According to the student response, this unit can be improved by obtaining more help with the software, more examples and a better textbook.
The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: The use of software and textbook will be reviewed.

Structures 2 (CIV3ST2) — survey: 2009

- In this unit,
- According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the assignments, lecture notes, textbooks, worked examples, feedback and availability of lecturers.
- According to the student response, this unit can be improved by having more ore examples, more instruction in software and smaller assignments.
- The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: Review assignments and use of software.
(back to list of units)

Structures 3 (CIV4ST3) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the software, lectures notes and assignments.
According to the student response, this unit can be improved by improving the timetabling and with more assistance with software.
The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: The assignment schedule will be reviewed.
(back to list of units)

Structural Design (CIV4SD) — survey: 2008

According to the student response:-
The best aspects of this Unit are the real world/practical problems, and no examination (all assignment based assessments).
The area that needs improvement is feedback.
Feedback will be improved in future offerings of the Unit. Consideration will be given to introducing several field trips (where possible) to discuss practical structural systems. Also, students will be invited to bring photographs of structural systems for discussion during class.
(back to list of units)

Surveying (CIV2SUR) — survey: 2008

— According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the practical sessions, the clear notes and a clear understanding of the requirements
— According to the student response, this unit can be improved by improving the standard of the surveying equipment
— The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: the practical content will be reviewed and the effort will be maintained to get more surveying equipment
(back to list of units)

Sustainable Infrastructure (CIV4SI) — survey: 2008

— According to the student response, the best things about this unit were the field excursions and class discussions in class.
— According to the student response, this unit in the can be improved by finalising the schedule of speakers and field excursions before the commencement of the Unit.
— The following changes will be made the next time the unit is offered: Finalise where possible, the schedule of speakers and field excursions before the commencement of the unit.
(back to list of units)

Transport Engineering (CIV4TE) — survey: 2006

This unit was surveyed via SET (student evaluation of teaching) survey. There were six responses to the survey from a class of six students. Students were generally positive about the unit and its delivery. Written comments were particularly positive in relation to set assignments, which were considered beneficial to the unit understanding.
(back to list of units)

Transport Engineering (CIV4TE) — survey: 2008

According to the student response, the best things about this Unit were the content, assignment based on real world projects and the lecture notes.
According to the student response, this Unit can be improved by quicker return of the assignments and the use of software employed by the industry.
The following changes will be made the next time the Unit is offered: a criteria based assessment will be implemented in the future and the possibility of purchasing a software for pavement design.
(back to list of units)