Because I can't fit this into 4000 character space on the Catei form, it's here instead. Feel free not to take any notice.

Curiously I was discussing CATEI form that we have at university with another lecturer yesterday. From my point of view, they can be a useful source of information, the problem is, whether it's useful or not, whether you can filter out the unbiased information as well as the irrelevant. Uni always either hassles us or gives us incentives to do it, but do we really give back useful info.

For example, do we give feedback such as:
-We would probably be better designers if Design Fundamentals actually taught us Industrial Design – Design Fundamentals instead of the type of course we would go to COFA for.
-With design studio, when trying to resolve the materials, manufacturing, technology, form etc, it's still a mish-mash as opposed to an elegantly resolved product
-Design Studio still feels like a lecture to a student as opposed to a studio, sure you can bounce ideas within a few friends, and possibly a tutor might give you one view, which naturally contradicts with all the other advice you've been given
-When your project/idea is slaughtered, sure you can turn that into positives by taking the critical elements that actually work for you, but you can bet your bottom dollar that if we had a PROPER design process taught to us that we could follow, we'd churn out better design and the whole grade would lift as opposed to having, still, a massive gap between what we do and what's expected
-When you're dropped into the deep end of the ocean, without any support, naturally you're going to grope at a straw, so when you throw us into a brief with no design process as a support, expect us to come up with fabulous design, are disappointed when we don't, and throw us a few ideas, you should realise that we will take those ideas literally, and you will be disappointed the next week when you see that we've done that. Give us the support we need, don't waste our first year. Heck, some courses in England are 3 years and they dive right into it. Don't ease us in with the first year, you're wasting our time, you're not giving us the true fundamentals of design that we need for INDUSTRY because ultimately, that's where we want to be.
-Studio needs more debating, questioning of what design really is and why we want to be designers. People do lose their confidence, and that's the core thing you need when you want to fight for your design. We need to refine what design means to us. Lecturers say we're not as enthusiastic as the previous generation. So if one side isn't, the otherside should lure us, to inspire us into designing, not grabbing a blob and shaping it.
-Oh and industrial design is also about the engineers, this degree loses a lot of good engineers. Just because techies may not be the best form designers doesn't mean they don't hold a place in design. Who do you think translates the engineering to design and vice versa. Sure, for some it might be form before function, or function before form, best of all it should be form and function, for the function you need techies, don't dismiss us.
-From what I've heard, 4th years had their first experience of what form designing is about from a tutor who teaches Advanced Rhino. You don't teach PhD material to Undergraduate, you teach them Undergraduate material. So teach us the real basics, not the COFA basics. If we wanted an art degree, we'd go to COFA.
-Many of us are fresh out of high school, others have had other a few years at Uni, others are mature age students. Teach us the basics, heck hijack, the Form Foundation Studies from Pratt University's ID Degree, at least that would be more help.

Yes we're probably doing something right with the awards we win and the success of our graduates, but if you don't want want only 'a handful of students who aren't “shit designers”' by the time they're in 4th year, start by doing something in the 1st year. A good foundation is the basis of success.