In the history of universities there are
always changes in the programme of a career. Actually my career suffered a
change recently. From the last year to this one, in my faculty the
directive changed all the programmes of all the careers in the faculty. In my
specific career they added some classes, like Chemistry and society, and more
maths, now I’m saying that I have from math one to one thousand. And that it isn’t
bad, mat is necessary in my career, but they also took out technical English from
the obligatory programme, and that worst thing that they did, because technical
English is very necessary to work outside the country, or to write papers.
There´re still thing to improve, all the
things are perfectible. For example the career duration is too extensive, and
it could be a little bit shorter without sacrificing an education of excellence.
Another thing that could be improve is the money repartition between different faculties,
is known that some faculties has more money to their disposal than other ones,
like our faculty. Also the directive should improve in infrastructure, like
building another building in an unoccupied building site, or making some roofs
on strategic places.
Taking about teaching methods, our
university has the conventional ones, a teacher making a face-to-face class to
a group of students, usually accompanied with a computer and a projector
device. And seminars with students from higher levels. A very good thing is that students can go to
the teacher´s office and ask him/her any dude.
I love our university, but it could change in some aspects.
ResponderEliminar