Illustration 2
| Structure Type: | Course |
|---|
| Code: | KH14BAGR20 |
|---|
| Type: | Compulsory |
|---|
| Level: | Bachelor |
|---|
| Credits: | 4.0 points |
|---|
| Responsible Teacher: | Savola, Esa |
|---|
| Language of Instruction: | Finnish |
|---|
Course Implementations, Planned Year of Study and Semester
| Curriculum | Semester | Credits | Start of Semester | End of Semester |
| MK-2013 |
2 autumn |
4.0 |
2014-09-01 |
2014-12-31 |
Learning Outcomes
The student is able to choose the illustration technique and way of production for an extensive, multi-page or otherwise large, compact illustration task as required by its content/the nature of its manuscript/purpose of use
- The student can handle a multi-part illustration task in such a way that the illustration forms an integrated whole
- In their work, the student exploits things learnt on other courses (e.g. Illustration 1, Image Information, Journal Graphics, Book Graphics)
- The student is able to make an illustration taking into account the service requirements and the production requirements of the product
Student's Workload
guided exercises 72 h, independent study 32 h
Prerequisites / Recommended Optional Courses
-
Contents
Extensive illustration task, preferably done for a real customer, 3D modelling
Recommended or Required Reading
teacher’s lecture material
Mode of Delivery / Planned Learning Activities and Teaching Methods
lectures, assignments, exercises, independent study
Assessment Criteria
0 FAILED
1 SATISFACTORY (POOR)
Design process develops poorly with different stages unclearly defined, personal achievements and counselling in unbalance, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) not clearly organized and analyzed, background work for design commission minimal, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively poor, routine like, mechanical) barely acceptable compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) only moderately (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and mechanically developed by student.
2 SATISFACTORY (FAIR)
Design process develops satisfactorily with different stages at least partially defined, personal achievements and counselling still in some respect unbalanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) satisfactorily organized and analyzed, background work for design commission in most respect satisfactory but with little source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively modest, routine like but with some personal traits) satisfactory compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) satisfactorily (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with some personal traits developed by student.
3 GOOD
Design process develops fairly good with different stages clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in most respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in main respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is good with adequate source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively good, fairly innovative and with clear personal traits) good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with clear personal traits developed by student.
4 GOOD (VERY GOOD)
Design process develops very good with different stages very clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in all respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is very good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively very good, clearly innovative and with strong personal traits) very good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) very good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with very personal traits developed by student.
5 EXCELLENT
Design process develops independently with different stages sharply defined, personal achievements and counselling are excellently balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects excellently organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is extremely good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively excellent, very innovative and with artistic personal traits) excellent compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) excellent (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with strong and artistic personal traits developed by student.
Assessment Methods
outputs of workshop activities and independent assignments 100 %
Back