What do you think about the course prototype?
Terje has set a few guidelines for grading our own work:
-give a grade to your work
-assess the grade as a group (for instance what is good or what didn’t work, etc.)
There are certainly good guidelines on this page Terje gave us.
Our group reached a concensus in the following matters:
We agree that our course is informative to middle-aged people, and also necessary in order to make them aware of modern technologies and adapt the old people to new environments. It is possible to learn from home which reduces cost of participation (room rent) as well as free learning schedule. There is e-mail support available. Students are given several understandable video tutorials in order to operate between different environments.
Students are able to understand instructions, because they are written separately in separate topics or columns.
Content has two major social networking tools, plus additional content for further studying some of the interesting networks. The course can be expanded easily, because the environment it is built in is very simple to use, easy to configure.
Presentation of the course is made clear.
There were some obstacles which were removed by testing the course with "outsiders", and they also gave the final result their good word, because the environment was nice to look at, easy to use, and full of information.
We agreed commonly that we would mark our prototype with an "A", having mentioned all the negative and positive points.
But concerning group work, we did not achieve the aims we set at the beginning as we tried to work with the group simultaneously, but later the work flow was still fluent in Skype, because there were active people who took care of doing the tasks by the end of the week. By the end we had to reconfigure the tasks, and group tasks were done a bit unevenly, thus we would grade our groupwork with "B".
Terje has set a few guidelines for grading our own work:
-give a grade to your work
-assess the grade as a group (for instance what is good or what didn’t work, etc.)
There are certainly good guidelines on this page Terje gave us.
Our group reached a concensus in the following matters:
We agree that our course is informative to middle-aged people, and also necessary in order to make them aware of modern technologies and adapt the old people to new environments. It is possible to learn from home which reduces cost of participation (room rent) as well as free learning schedule. There is e-mail support available. Students are given several understandable video tutorials in order to operate between different environments.
Students are able to understand instructions, because they are written separately in separate topics or columns.
Content has two major social networking tools, plus additional content for further studying some of the interesting networks. The course can be expanded easily, because the environment it is built in is very simple to use, easy to configure.
Presentation of the course is made clear.
There were some obstacles which were removed by testing the course with "outsiders", and they also gave the final result their good word, because the environment was nice to look at, easy to use, and full of information.
We agreed commonly that we would mark our prototype with an "A", having mentioned all the negative and positive points.
But concerning group work, we did not achieve the aims we set at the beginning as we tried to work with the group simultaneously, but later the work flow was still fluent in Skype, because there were active people who took care of doing the tasks by the end of the week. By the end we had to reconfigure the tasks, and group tasks were done a bit unevenly, thus we would grade our groupwork with "B".
RSS Feed