Overall a pretty terrible course with very little overall benefit; a waste of 2# in my mind.
Course content can easily be spread over other group work based courses (MECH2100 specifically), as lumping this in a single subject made everything feel drawn out. Personally, I did most of my learning in weeks 1-3, and the other 10 were spent nitpicking each other's practices and overanalysing everyone's roles in the group. The assessment was mildly interesting as I was on the technical side of the group.
Assessment-wise, the speeches weren't awful, but having 4x2 hour sessions must've been exhausting for the tutors considering everyone's speeches were nigh on identical. Reports were a challenge, however the latter felt almost exactly like a replica of the first report with some slight options for fleshing out ideas. The workbook was not too awful either, but the marking can only be described as catastrophic. Assigning 20% to a piece of assessment, but then instituting seemingly arbitrary caps to your final grade based on this (Fail < 9, Four = 9, Five = 10, Six = 13, Cap removed > 15 [All /20]). Combined with the uncertainty of which tutor you'd get (laid back or takes things too seriously, pick one), a lot of people have ended up either failing or with grades that don't accurately reflect their performance in the subject.
Regarding A/Prof. Martin Veidt's performance as course coordinator, I believe he conducted the course well, given the extremely small amount of content, and was clear with his directives to the teams as to what was expected and encouraged. Likewise with the tutors, however unfortunately their advice did not equate to an increase of marks (even while following their own advice to a T).
Semester 1 - 2014
Bachelor of Engineering
Well conducted given extremely broad yet sparse scope