Tries Ctrl B to see if it will give him more brainnnnnssss...Just makes 'em B-cups, try Ctrl E. :)
Man boobs on a zombie....no thanks.
Good night, Moorluck! Good night, Solnes!
I'm done for the night, myself. I'll be back tomorrow.
Good night, Moorluck! Good night, Solnes!
I'm done for the night, myself. I'll be back tomorrow.
G'nite Taig....guess were out for just a bit. :D
Good, the craziness continues.
Hey, hoping I can get some feedback regarding an in-class review presentation rubric.
Last semester, I used this rubric:
Preparation 0-20
Accuracy 0-20
Comprehensiveness 0-20
Clarity 0-20
Creativity 0-20
For a total grade for the group between 0 and 99.
I'm playing with the following revision:
Knowledgeable/Accurate 0-20
Explained 0-20
Covered Material 0-20
Clear 0-20
Engaging/Creative 0-20
For a total grade for the group between 0 and 99.
Thoughts?
Hey, hoping I can get some feedback regarding an in-class review presentation rubric. ** spoiler omitted **
Ummm, I'm not sure knowledgeable and accurate are the samething. What subject matter does this pertain to?
|
Hey, hoping I can get some feedback regarding an in-class review presentation rubric. ** spoiler omitted **
To be honest buddy, I didn't even understand what you were showing me. Solnes did though. She said as a student she prefers the first one, but both look decent to her. Have you thought about maybe combining the two?
Well, some elements of two are just one reworked. What does Solnes prefer about the old one?
I started to make knowledgeable and accurate two different categories, but in the end, they both boil down to: did you get the material correct?
You should add Wiki-fu 0-10
:D
|
|
Well, some elements of two are just one reworked. What does Solnes prefer about the old one?
I started to make knowledgeable and accurate two different categories, but in the end, they both boil down to: did you get the material correct?
I think she, from a students point of view, felt the first example was easier to interpret. From that she would know exactly what the teacher was searching for.
I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
I think she, from a students point of view, felt the first example was easier to interpret. From that she would know exactly what the teacher was searching for.Well, some elements of two are just one reworked. What does Solnes prefer about the old one?
I started to make knowledgeable and accurate two different categories, but in the end, they both boil down to: did you get the material correct?
I must have dumb students. I thought the first one was simpler, but they seem to not get it.
I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
*recorded for blackmail purposes*.
|
|
I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
Wiki makes a great starting point for research. But hell even Solnes couldn't use it as a reference source for any of her classes. Since she had to include her references with each assignment she turned in, she tended to avoid telling them that she used it. She always followed it up with more reliable sources though.
|
|
I must have dumb students. I thought the first one was simpler, but they seem to not get it.I think she, from a students point of view, felt the first example was easier to interpret. From that she would know exactly what the teacher was searching for.Well, some elements of two are just one reworked. What does Solnes prefer about the old one?
I started to make knowledgeable and accurate two different categories, but in the end, they both boil down to: did you get the material correct?
How many students....
EDIT: And gone. ;)
|
|
*recorded for blackmail purposes*.I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
Don't forget to back up your recordings. The Green One is a tricksy one, his intellect is great and he holds power over the forces of nature.
Don't forget to back up your recordings. The Green One is a tricksy one, his intellect is great and he holds power over the forces of nature.*recorded for blackmail purposes*.I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
*eeep, runs scandisk on HDD, backsup to external USB drive, etc.
Good evening to everyone.
are we ditching this one yet?
I think she, from a students point of view, felt the first example was easier to interpret. From that she would know exactly what the teacher was searching for.Well, some elements of two are just one reworked. What does Solnes prefer about the old one?
I started to make knowledgeable and accurate two different categories, but in the end, they both boil down to: did you get the material correct?
Yes, i believe in the KISS priciple.
|
Wiki makes a great starting point for research. But hell even Solnes couldn't use it as a reference source for any of her classes. Since she had to include her references with each assignment she turned in, she tended to avoid telling them that she used it. She always followed it up with more reliable sources though.I tell my students they are welcome to start their research with Wikipedia, but never use it as an academic source. Never mind that some of it articles are better than the crap spouted by some of my colleagues...
Whoops, did I just say that?
I think that that's the appropriate way to use it. It's a great start, but ideally it leads one to other, more thorough sources.
Mairkurion, I think the second rubric may produce better results, primarily because it adds the "explained" category to encourage students to give more analysis to their points, and removes "preparation", which would largely reveal itself in the other categories anyway. My 2cp.
How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /Creative
Damn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
KEWL. TWO threads to camp.
How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
Making a living off dealing with the public, I can honestly say that ANY categories are open to misunderstanding. Instead of 'quality of communication' how about 'good grammar?'
Nuts Nuts Nuts... 11 Pages is not fun to read through... :/
I still have 8 to go...
Let them go young padawan. Nothing to be seen here. Move along ...
Nuts Nuts Nuts... 11 Pages is not fun to read through... :/
I still have 8 to go...
3 of them are "mine" spam.
I won't tell you which 3, though. :)
How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
Maybe Clarity/Quality of Communication?
Nuts Nuts Nuts... 11 Pages is not fun to read through... :/
I still have 8 to go...
Yeah you can skip mine, he he.
Nuts Nuts Nuts... 11 Pages is not fun to read through... :/
I still have 8 to go...
Yew kin do eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!!
Goodnight guys. I'm out for the evening, I think.
How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
Maybe Clarity/Quality of Communication?
Yeah, I replaced Clear or Clarity with QoC. I can't put both: the columns are already stretched to the limits.
Good night, Thing.
Yeah, I'm outta here as well. Wife'll be home in a few, and that alarm clock goes off at 445 am. Cya!
*blink*
Goodnight guys. I'm out for the evening, I think.
Good night, Thing!
Making a living off dealing with the public, I can honestly say that ANY categories are open to misunderstanding. Instead of 'quality of communication' how about 'good grammar?'How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
We're not assessing their written work (except to the extent they have slides, handouts, etc), just their overall presentation, which is largely oral.
Yeah, I'm outta here as well. Wife'll be home in a few, and that alarm clock goes off at 445 am. Cya!
*blink*
Good night, Patrick!
We're not assessing their written work (except to the extent they have slides, handouts, etc), just their overall presentation, which is largely oral.
*blink*
Ah, then yeah that would make more sense.
*blink*
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2012
|
Yeah, I replaced Clear or Clarity with QoC. I can't put both: the columns are already stretched to the limits.How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
Maybe Clarity/Quality of Communication?
I wasn't thinking separate categories. I was thinking of combining the two. Unless you mean the columns won't fit the actual number of letters if you use both. :)
|
We're not assessing their written work (except to the extent they have slides, handouts, etc), just their overall presentation, which is largely oral.Making a living off dealing with the public, I can honestly say that ANY categories are open to misunderstanding. Instead of 'quality of communication' how about 'good grammar?'How about:
Knowledgeable/Accurate
Quality of Communication
Covers Material
Organized
Engaging /CreativeDamn, I want five separate, equally important categories that are clear and not open to misunderstanding.
Professor? Are you ready for my oral presentation yet, or should I wait under the desk?
I wasn't thinking separate categories. I was thinking of combining the two. Unless you mean the columns won't fit the actual number of letters if you use both. :)
That's it.
Man, every time Colin McComb posts, I expect it to read, "Mmm...roadkill."
Goodnight, Pat.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2012
|
I wasn't thinking separate categories. I was thinking of combining the two. Unless you mean the columns won't fit the actual number of letters if you use both. :)That's it.
Man, every time Colin McComb posts, I expect it to read, "Mmm...roadkill."
Goodnight, Pat.
<Tilts head>
Huh?
I wasn't thinking separate categories. I was thinking of combining the two. Unless you mean the columns won't fit the actual number of letters if you use both. :)Taig: That's it.
Everybody: Man, every time Colin McComb posts, I expect it to read, "Mmm...roadkill."
Patrick: Goodnight, Pat.
<Tilts head>
Huh?
Too much multi-tasking?