Assessment assessment - part 4 May 5, 2005
Posted by Andy Roberts in : ultraversity, learning , trackbackPeer Reviewers
“I’d be interested in how your very capable peer reviewers found reading your work.”
Comment One - Linda Hartley
Hi all
In Andy’s feedback Gina suggests that this might be the start of a discussion:
Ability to relate theory to practice.
Excellent – I can see clearly how you have absorbed the reading you have done into the work you carried out in creating a wiki. I can appreciate the time you have spent in expressing your thoughts and emerging ideas in different media
I am not aware of Andy using a wide range of media to explore his ideas, just the blog and 43Things in this instance. These are just web sites - one form of media or am I missing something? Personally I used blog, 43Things, and quicktime movies stored on my FC web space. Eve what do you think?
– I find this at times a challenging way for me to piece together your thoughts- I’d venture to say it’s easier for a reader to take in an author’s ideas if he or she doesn’t have to visit many places to read those ideas.
Perhaps you have a different view of the internet to mine. I am not so aware of a sense of movement between spaces when I click a link as you seem to be. I find it easy to thread the whole together and follow Andy’s meaning usually.
Having said that, when I come back to your work for the second time, I come with a sense of seeing your ideas unfold and develop. I’m always going to waver on this point – should your ideas be in one place with clear headings in a more conventional format, or is your work a valid way of using media in a fresh and more accessible way? I can’t answer it. I’d just like to work less hard sometimes when taking on your ideas.
Is it wrong to make the reader work hard? Should we be considering this in our presentation of the work? I’m not so sure. Maybe the reader needs to concentrate and stretch their mind to understand the work, does this make it a bad piece of work? Is easy better?
I may have to concentrate to understand Andy’s meaning sometimes. I have to do that when I read anythng serious. I hope people give my work similar sort of attention.
It would be good to have a continuing dialogue about this- perhaps assessment ought to be more of a dialogue that a one sided judgement. I’d be interested in how your very capable peer reviewers found reading your work.
So what do we think on this point?
Personally I’m not sure that there’s a qualative difference between Andy’s work and mine and Eve’s. We all tend to use a ‘patchwork’ from various sources or spheres where we are active on the web (blog, 43Things, stuff stored on FC webspace, even sometimes comments on other people’s blogs.)
Does it make our work harder to mark? Quite possibly, certainly you can’t easily print off our work and read it. or copy it to cd. But then we are doing a ‘100% on-line degree’.
However read on-line, with reasonable attention paid I usually understand what Andy’s meaning is. I dont’ find it any harder or easier to follow than Eve’s work usually.
I know that Gina won’t feel able to look at my work or yours Eve but perhaps the knowledge that we got 79% and 78% respectively and used not disimmilar methods to present our work might be of interest.
Linda Hartley (Cohort 1)
Comment Two - Eve Thirkle
Linda Hartley on 29 April 2005 at 22:09 +0000 wrote:
Hi all
In Andy’s feedback Gina suggests that this might be the start of a discussion:
That’ll teach me to check in here while printing off directions! Some quick feedback and more to follow whenI’ve had a think!
Ability to relate theory to practice.
Excellent – I can see clearly how you have absorbed the reading you have done into the work you carried out in creating a wiki. I can appreciate the time you have spent in expressing your thoughts and emerging ideas in different media
I am not aware of Andy using a wide range of media to explore his ideas, just the blog and 43Things in this instance. These are just web sites - one form of media or am I missing something? No I’m with you there on that - all websites - but perhaps with a different ‘utility’ they appear to be different media? Personally I used blog, 43Things, and quicktime movies stored on my FC web space. Eve what do you think? I used blog, referrred to 43 in the peer bit and also the movies plus pictures.
– I find this at times a challenging way for me to piece together your thoughts- I’d venture to say it’s easier for a reader to take in an author’s ideas if he or she doesn’t have to visit many places to read those ideas.
Perhaps you have a different view of the internet to mine. I am not so aware of a sense of movement between spaces when I click a link as you seem to be. I find it easy to thread the whole together and follow Andy’s meaning usually.
I’ve done the whole of my LIWPS2 as a website - there are many links and pages and also ‘back’ referrering links to present a coherent whole - any links that are external to my work I have put to open in a new window so that it doesn’t detract from my main presentation - possibly something to think about? Andy’s work is fine as far as I am concerned.
Having said that, when I come back to your work for the second time, I come with a sense of seeing your ideas unfold and develop. I’m always going to waver on this point – should your ideas be in one place with clear headings in a more conventional format, or is your work a valid way of using media in a fresh and more accessible way? I can’t answer it. I’d just like to work less hard sometimes when taking on your ideas.
Is it wrong to make the reader work hard? Why is it hard work? Should we be considering this in our presentation of the work? Possibly - if the hard work puts people off - I found it hard to follow the pdf you sent recently for peer review - but I find lots of words hard work. - perhaps the answer is to have a different option to choose and present it three ways but … probably not at this level.I’m not so sure. Maybe the reader needs to concentrate and stretch their mind to understand the work, does this make it a bad piece of work? Is easy better?
I may have to concentrate to understand Andy’s meaning sometimes. I have to do that when I read anythng serious. I hope people give my work similar sort of attention.Ditto
It would be good to have a continuing dialogue about this- perhaps assessment ought to be more of a dialogue that a one sided judgement. I’d be interested in how your very capable peer reviewers found reading your work.
So what do we think on this point?
Personally I’m not sure that there’s a qualative difference between Andy’s work and mine and Eve’s. We all tend to use a ‘patchwork’ from various sources or spheres where we are active on the web (blog, 43Things, stuff stored on FC webspace, even sometimes comments on other people’s blogs.) I can’t understand the differences sometimes - we’re all working at a similar level - the whole idea of the La’s was to avoid writing a 4000 word report - we weave the LA’s together to form a coherent whole - is the problem in the weaving or are we following the wrong pattern altogether?
Does it make our work harder to mark? Quite possibly, certainly you can’t easily print off our work and read it. or copy it to cd. But then we are doing a ‘100% on-line degree’.
However read on-line, with reasonable attention paid I usually understand what Andy’s meaning is. I dont’ find it any harder or easier to follow than Eve’s work usually.
I know that Gina won’t feel able to look at my work or yours Eve but perhaps the knowledge that we got 79% and 78% respectively and used not disimmilar methods to present our work might be of interest.
Gina’s welcome to loook at mine if she wants to see a comparator - not for comments obviously as we’ve had that discussion before.
I will look with interest on Monday to see how full my inbox is!
Eve
[Cohort 1]
“Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only that the cat died nobly.” — Arnold Edinborough
“Research is what I do when I don’t know what I’m doing.” — Wernher Von Braun
http://firstclass.ultraversity.net/~eve.thirkle/
http://evet.blogdrive.com
http://www.furl.net/members/EveT
I am quite happy to be quoted and for the quote to be attributed to me. Please do not anonymise me.
is an online professional who initiated DARnet 
Hi Andy - I notice in the comments from me that I mention another name who may not wish to be identified here - could you possibly blank those bits?
My e-mail appears here with my full permission.