All in all, as clearly indicated in the evaluation(s), the course was technically far too demanding for the majority of students, even though many made an effort to get their portfolio(s) online. Also many students showed reluctance to submit an essay, and, as can be read in the comment(s), by the end of the course only a minority of the students were readt for grading, some with excellent result though. As a consequence, I will lower my requirements to the minimum of having a portfolio online, showing a basic level of skill(s).

It is only in the course of the NM1 course, that I came to realize that another approach must be taken to deal with the diversity of talents of our students, an approach that somehow takes into account the difference between creatives and technologists. This, again, was made painfully clear by some of the dropout(s), that indicated a preference for a more design-oriented approach, and not an enhanced computer science curriculum.

For the NM2 and CA3, as well as later, courses, these observations led to the motto it's all in the game. Luckily from a personal perspective, the contributions of the students during the course helped in getting some papers published, around the (emerging) CTSG.

In the future NM1 course(s), the focus should rather be (again) on storytelling, but then from the perspective of non-linearity and interactivity, as supported by the (increasingly expanding) web.

(C) Æliens 2014