All in all the process went well, although the student needed continuous encouragement, read push, to keep working with focus. The presentations for external parties, that is Chris Haarmeyer, and later Dennis Reidsma were well received. Later, focus seemed to be a bit lost, in the sense that in the eyes of Gerrit van de Hoeven, the reflection and comparison with set goals was inadequate.

I was generally satisfied with the final results, that is the installations presented in smart xp, although I found that the results did not meet my intial expectations as a spatial installation, since apart from a lack of (truly) compelling context, there was also not sufficient (visual) drama and aesthetic impact. All abit too quick and nerdy, so to speak. But then again, it is a process, and as such not only one with sufficiently satisfyinh results, but also providing a good start for conrinuing work in the new media track on persuasive technology and serious games.

So far, no students submitted feedback on the course. A pity, since it is still worthwhile to know how such a course is received.

As a final remark, overall the representation of the work, for this course but also for other courses, in the individual students portfolio is/was inadequate, and this should be improved! Regrettably, this seems not to be important in the eye of most of the creative technology staff. Nevertheless, the credo was and is: the creative industry is a portfolio industry!

(C) Æliens 2014