jump to navigation

Protected: Marketing project: Investigation feedback Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Posted by D in assessment, myp comp apps 10, myp comp apps 9.
Tags: , , , ,
Enter your password to view comments.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Evaluation: Common mistakes Sunday, 30 November 2008

Posted by D in myp comp apps 10, myp comp apps 9, myp comp studies g1, myp comp studies g2.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

This is a brief compilation of the common omissions in the Evaluation section of the MYP Computer Technology projects:

  • Some students forget to implement the ways of testing the product compliance to the Design Specification. Remember the last part of your Investigation? The tests you designed there (the ones to check that your final product contains all your Design Specs.) should be done when you finish your product, and the results should be published in the Evaluation.
  • Don’t forget to suggest improvement to these ways of testing. More testers? More questions? Better questions? More ways?
  • Most students evaluate their performance at each stage of the project (Investigation, Design, Plan, Creation), but forget to suggest improvements at each stage. Do this for a better level of achievement.
  • Many students forget to comment on the impact of your product/project in the local and global community. This, in a few words, means: how do you think your product could change things in your immediate community (people close to you) and globally (the world)?

Hope this helps you!

Check the rest of the “common mistakes” entries under this tag: mistakes

Creation: Common mistakes Sunday, 30 November 2008

Posted by D in myp comp apps 10, myp comp apps 9, myp comp studies g1, myp comp studies g2.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

InĀ  nutshell, these are the common mistakes students do in the Creation stage of their MYP Computer Technology projects:

  • The journal entries are not dated. Each journal entry should start with the date, as this will make things easier for you when you evaluate the plan and your personal performance.
  • The screenshots are small, generic, and show you doing some work on the computer. Your screenshots should clearly show how you created your product. Therefore, the screenshots should show your work with the specific application(s) that you used to put your product toghether.
  • The screenshots show how you do the same things over and over. You do not need to show the same simple procedures more than once. Say, you show in three screenshots how to insert an image into a web page. You may later say that you used the same steps shown in journal entry xx/xx/xx to insert the other images as well.
  • Some students forget that the journal shows the implementation of the plan. Check back with your plan and compare your progress. Any differences between what you planned to do, and when, should be shown somewhere. Justify them and (if appropriate) say what you will do to keep your deadlines (interim and final).
  • Did you make any modifications as you were creating the product? Document any modifications to your (design) product. Justify them clearly.

I hope this helps you improve the quality of your work.

Check the rest of the “common mistakes” entries under this tag: mistakes

How to do good research (and have fun too!) Saturday, 15 November 2008

Posted by magicpockets in comp apps 11/12, myp comp apps 10, myp comp apps 9, myp comp studies g1, myp comp studies g2.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

After the first few sections of the project were submitted, it became painfully clear that a large number of students are unsure about how to approach the research aspect of their project.

It seems that many people think “research” means logging on to Google and typing in a couple of words and then hoping for the best. This reminds me of a joke that was popular when I was growing up:

Two men rent a boat and go fishing at a lake and have a fantastic day – they each catch several large trout and agree they must return the following day to extend their luck.
One man, lets call him Jacques, says “Hey Henri, did you mark the spot where we caught all those fish?”
Henri nods his head and says “Oh yes Jacques, I put an X on the side of the boat!”
Jacques is angered by this and says “You idiot…how do you know we’ll get the same boat?”

Using very general search terms on Google is the academic equivalent of this silly behaviour, and will likely result in the same level of success.
To do GOOD research, you need a strategy. Here‘s a good place to learn more: http://www.lib.monash.edu.au/vl/www/wwwcon.htm

Check the rest of the “common mistakes” entries under this tag: mistakes

Common mistakes in Design and Planning sections Saturday, 15 November 2008

Posted by magicpockets in myp comp apps 10, myp comp apps 9, myp comp studies g1, myp comp studies g2.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

After collecting and commenting on the student work recently, there were a variety of problems that cropped up fairly regularly.

Design issues

A large proportion of the projects were missing important elements critical to achieving the higher levels of the criteria. Specifically, it is recommended that all of you check on the following:

  • Improve the quality of the sketches and screen snapshots for EACH of the possible modes – include details about functions, colours, fonts, layout, etc. (Your basic requirement is to offer the impression that you have seriously considered using all of the possible modes and chosen one mode for a logical reason). When you make sketches, use a ruler and make them look as good as possible rather than messy and incomprehensible.
  • Improve the way you display each modes relationship to the design specs – a good way to do this is to build a simple table that has specs on one axis and the modes on the other. Then, simply check off the negatives and positives of each possible approach. (Please note,however, that just because one mode satisfies all the requirements of the design specs doesn’t necessarily make it the best choice. In some cases, there may be factors that render the mode unusable. Eg. Too expensive, etc)
  • Improve the detail of your justification of one mode over the others. Offer clear examples that show you have put some strong thought into this process.


Planning section

Many projects had weak planning sections. Specific issues were as follows:

  • The resource lists were lacking detail or missing completely! A good resource list should clearly display all materials used in the project and also explain why / how they will be used. Eg. It is not suitable to say “I will use a computer” as not all computers (hardware/software) have the same capabilities. It would be better to offer a bit more information, such as the clock speed, size of hard drive, multimedia capabilities (i.e. dvd player / burner, etc) that suggests you have assessed the hardware requirements to make a good product.
  • The Gantt charts were missing key elements; try to add a minimum of at least three sub-categories for each criteria listed, and underneath the Gantt chart, offer a brief but focused analysis of why you have allowed a specific amount of time to complete each criteria required.
  • Try to evaluate your plan carefully and add a section that explains your modifications (changes that occur after you realize that your plan might need to be improved) and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of your plan (called Evaluating the plan in MYP speak)

Hope this helps a bit!

Check the rest of the “common mistakes” entries under this tag: mistakes