In order to be able to evaluate the laboratories, questionnaires tailored specifically to the PRAMECO laboratory at the HAW were developed. The evaluation forms include questions about the content and quality of the various laboratory components and stages. The new questionnaires include rating multiple choice questions as well as comment boxes to suggest changes, improvements and to give general feedback on what they liked and what not. Student evaluation is conducted via online forms. This simplifies not only the survey but also the evaluation of the results. After each semester students will evaluate the laboratory event with the following questionair. After each semester, the laboratory is re-evaluated in order to take into account the students' wishes and to constantly improve the lab. The following PDF file contains the bilingual student evaluation questionair.
The evaluation of Wintersemester 2022/23 at HAW was conducted in mid-December. At that time, the laboratory courses had already been completed. The newly designed course was rated as good by the students. On a scale of 1 (very bad) to 5 (very satisfied), the results were always good. There were also many good evaluations in the comments on the laboratory. However, the students' wishes included simpler videos on demand to avoid duplication in the lab, more technical literature so that they could also prepare with books, and possibly additional cameras to show more angles of the weld in the digital live laboratory. The evaluation rating on the PRAMECO laboratories on the HAW is also shown in the figure below.
many students appreciate the advantages of the new laboratory. More freedom in learning and time management, as well as the possibility to do the digital labs at home, were all rated highly. questionnaires for teachers were prepared together with the project partners. These standardized questionnaires are intended to make the teachers' experiences comparable across all project partners. As mentioned earlier, they deal with the teaching staff's view of the lab and are primarily used to compare the conventional labs with the newly developed ones, to reflect on advantages and disadvantages, to reflect on the workload of the newly developed lab events, to evaluate student interactivity from the staff's point of view and to consider the future development of the labs based on the observations and feedback. There was also a great improvement among the teachers in the reduction of repetitive labs. However, the workload did not decrease, since the labs now have to be prepared and followed up more extensively. In addition, the PREAMECO lab framework now offers the possibility to react quickly to changing situations and to keep the lab constantly up to date. Student interactivity shows variable results. The number of students actively participating in discussions has not changed significantly. Despite significantly improved interaction through the PRAMECO labs at HAW, it is often difficult to encourage students to participate in online discussions. The student learning activity however has increased. The students now prepare themselves on their own. They can collaborate and study together to reach better learning outcome in preparation of the final Exam or the stage tests.