Background: This study shared top prize in the graduate division
of the 1998 Vital Signs Student Case Study Competition. Comments from the competition jury
included:"This is the best study we've
seen at going beyond just findings and taking the next step of moving towards design
solutions."
"Great models! They've conducted tests to design
improvements to the building."
"They revised their hypothesis as the study progressed.
Other competition entries would have been stronger had they done this as well."
"They don't summarize their findings of the existing
building. Yet the fact that they tested design changes suggests that they question the
claims made for the building. The comparisons of possible design revisions are the best
part of the study. I would like to see more analysis of the data collected on the
building's actual performance."
"Nice Graphics, but where's the data?"
"The data is there, but I would agree it could use more
explication. And the data graphs could be better. Many of them aren't clearly labeled. And
the Y-scale range is often inappropriate. If your data is in the range of 50 to 150, why
have a scale that goes up to 1000? It makes the graph difficult to read." |