iLMS知識社群(Sites)師生部落格(Blogs)朝陽首頁(Homepage)TronClass教學平台Login
Thesis Writing & Publishing I-- Seminar--Alison's Presentation (1-05-2011)
by 徐碧霙 2011-01-05 15:42:28, Reply(20), Views(1159)
 
 
 
Reply(20)

Comments for Alison’s Presentation

Strength

1.      Your pronunciation always sounds like “Pure American”. So perfect!!

2.      Fluency presentation and easy to understand!!

3.      Well- organization.

4.      Look so pretty!!!(( not only today!!

Weakness

1. Except a little bit nervous, I couldn’t find weakness!!

Question

Due to the “ceiling effect” so the results had no significant difference, could you provide some of example question from this study to point out what kind of content of questionnaires cause those result had no significant differences.

Comments for Alison’s Presentation

Strength

1.      Fluency makes the lengthy article understood.

2.      The square effect of the slide from 17 to 23 is unforgettable.

Weakness

1. The words are covered in slide 23.

Question

1. This article provides grading rubric/peer requirement guidelines. So in your opinion, if we want to use RPT in teaching students English in Taiwan, how much of the guideline is suitable?   

Alison

 

Strength

Very clear explanation

Clear logic in your topic

Clear PPT

Weakness

The intonation and speed need to be noticed.

 

Question

There are no significance differences in the study; it proved that there’s no significant outcome to student when receiving RPT. Therefore, in future study, would you conduct other kinds of tutoring for student’s achievements?

Comments for Alison’s Presentation

Strength

  • A fluent speaking.
  • Introduced the key word at first.
  • Explained a lot in your words
  • PPT was well-organized and clear.

Weakness

  • Be careful aboutthe time controlling.

Question

If you do this research, what kind of participants will you choose?

Comments for Alison’s Presentation

Strength

l   You are very confident with eye contacts and good pronunciation.

l   Excellent presentations and good slide designs.

Weakness

l   Control your emotional expression on stage.

Question

l   No question for you; good job!

Dear Clement,
 
No questions at all?!
 
Teresa

Comments for Alison’s Presentation

Strength

1.          good formal dress

2.          pronunciation is good

3.          eye contact

Weakness

1.          the form is too small in slide 15

2.          little nervous

Question

Does the RPT appropriate in every age?

Comments for Alison
 
Strength:1. Good pronunciation
               2. Clear explanation
 
Weakness: 1. She speaks a little fast.
                   2. Lilttle nervous
 
Question: In you opinion, how to find a more challenging course that
                 does not induce "ceilling effect"?

Comments for Abi’s Presentation

Strength

1. PPT page 17, you use animation to explain clear concept of the 4 items.
2. The whole presentation is super fluent, cool!

Weakness

1. A bit nervous judging from your voice.
2.The speed of your speaking is a little bit fast.

Question

How about have the students use a harder software (like coredraw) to avoid the ceiling effect. Will it be better ?

Presenters

Alison

Strength

The content slide is cute!

The ppt is great.

Good pronunciation

Eye contact

Explain clearly

Use gestures

Weakness

Hard to see the slide numbers on the PPT

Speak a little bit too fast

The citation slide maybe need to “靠左對齊” > <”

Question

I just wondering are those 105 students in the same class or are taught with the same teacher? How to choose the group members? (ex: according to their grades? Or students choose members by themselves?)

Presenter

                  Alison                2011/1/5

Strength

In slide 5, it was simply and clearly to explain what the RPT is.

The last slide (Thanks for your attention), the picture of Alison was very meaningful ( everyone passes the exam like Joden).

Weakness

The handout was different from PPT of the presentation.   

Question

Did the study divide two groups (experimental and control groups)?

Strength

Eyes contact

PPT was clearly to be seen.

Weakness

When you end each sentence, the voice became lower.

Question

In slide 21, are there really 34 Likert-type motivational measure items? Can you show that?

Strength

1.      Fluency English, just like it’s your native! Great!!

2.      Cute PPT, especially slide 17 and 18.

Weakness

You might be able to pick better and fit suit!

Your voice could be louder.

Question

You are teaching English, and would you use RTP in your class or you are using the method already?

 
Dear Alison
 
Due to a popular demand from one your your fans, I NOW have a question.
 
As the results drawn from this study, there is no significant enhancement on
students' achievement or motivation, on the contrary, they do feel rather bored
with this uncessary work and extra time spent. 
 
It seems to me that prior to this experimntal design, students' level of competence 
on this computer assisted software was not well assessed. Hence, the selection of
mean was not suitable for students' benefits. 
 
So, if you were to conduct the same experiment in Taiwan, where most of the kids
are with good computer skills, how would you properly and precisely measure participants'
level and accordingly select a suitable mean for their benefits? What criteria would you take
into cosideration?
 
regards
 
Clement
My dear Clement,
 
NOW... you are "asking"!
 
Good!
 
 
Love you...
 
Teresa

Alison

Strength:

1.      very good pronunciation and speaking fluently

2.      a good creation at slide 25: drawing a square of a issue to introduce next page

3.      slide 27.28 very clearly

Weakness:

1.      sorry, your shirt was out of the coat

2.      It is more clearly that the research questions divide into 2 pages.

Question

I don’t know what is “one-credit hour”, could you explain that?

Strength

 Very fluent speaking

 PPT is great!!!

Weakness

Sorry, but I think your sleeves are too long, fold them a bit next time will make you look even more prettierJ

Question

How many groups did they divided into?

Dear Alice: 
       Thank you for the comments! Ceiling effect is when everyone gets high score with the course set at a level that was way too easy. When the course was too easy, it would be harder to tell who actually has the potential to perform better than anyone else. I don't really understand what you meant by "what kind of content of questionnaires cause those result", because it was the difficulty level of the course that caused ceiling effect. If I didn't answer your question, please ask me again and kill me later...

Dear Eleanor: 
       Thank you for the comments! I do believe that, by adapting a grading rubric/peer requirement guidelines, the teachers and the students both get a better understanding about what they need to accomplish and be more responsible for their action. Nobody has perfect ability to memorize things. (I have no such ability to memorize things, btw...) Therefore, having the rubric and guidelines with you sort of give you a constant reminder whenever you can not remember what to do. I hope that answered your questions!

Dear Catherine:
        Thank you for the comments~ There are no significant differences for students' total achievement, their achievement regarding to the different courses, and their total motivation. But there is a positive feedback regarding to students' attitude toward RPT. I would totally conduct a research that hopefully can better students' achievement. But sometime I don't think achievement is all that important. I hope this sort of research can get the students to understand the benefits of helping each other out. If the process also boosts their motiviation about learning English, my life would be complete...
 
Dear Joanna:
              Thank you for the comments~ If I were to conduct a similar research, I would probably choose the easy-to-get target: My students. And I would most likely choose the 4th graders, since they are still cute and innocent enough. They are not so ignorant like the 1st and 2nd graders who have no idea what the heck the teachers are talking about more than half of the time, and not so stuck-up like the 6th graders whom sometimes one (not me) may just want to smack some sense into them...

Dear Clement:
              Thank you for not having any questions at first and yet when under pressure came up with such a pain-in-the-XXX one... Okay, first of all, for what range of age do you mean when you said "kids"? If you mean kids like my students, then not all kids are equipped with good computer skills. I know that because I teach 4th graders computer at work as well. They are good at playing computer games ONLY. They still have no idea what Word or Excel is for. I guess in order to precisely measure participants' level, a pre-test may be carried out. As for the criteria, I guess that depends on what program or software the teacher or the researcher decide to conduct. I hope that answered your questions~

Dear Allen:
          Thank you for the comments~ What do you think? Do you think RPT is suitable for all age? Well, if you eliminate the babies, or the really really little ones who do not know anything well enough yet to teach/share with their peers, I do personally think RPT is suitable for all age. It is not just about students' achievement, but also their motivation and attitude. They can also learn how to relate, how to teach/be taught, and how to take up their own responsibilities in theprocess of RPT. 

Dear Peter:
           Thank you for the comments~ An (i+1) course content should be used as the teaching materials. It is something that is not too easy which provides no indicator for the researcher to divide the group into any smaller groups, but something with a little bit of difficulty. I hope that answered your question~

Dear Gary:
           Of course it'll be better, I think. But if this "coredraw" thingy you were talking about was way too difficult, that can not be good either, eh? As I was telling Peter (see above), an (i+1) course with just enough difficulty can be adapted. If the class is composed with pure devil genii, maybe an (i+2) for the course. Thank you for the comments and questions~

Dear Emily:
             The 105 students were from 4 different intact classes, and they were taught with the same teacher and same materials. They were assigned into their group randomly. Thank you for the question and comments~ I hope I answered your "wonderingment"... 

Dear 佳莉:
             Thank you for the comments! Sorry about the difference between my handouts and PPT. Yes. The 105 students were from 4 different classes. 2 classes were treated with RPT (the experimental groups) while the other 2 (the control groups) were not. 

Dear Livia:
           Thank you for the comments and questions! I'm sorry but I have no idea either as for what the 34 measure items were. The journal did not present this information... Do you want me to make some up? Well, I will say "No" if you were really going to ask me to make some up... Haha!

Dearest Mindy:
         Do you not know that we (the presenters) do not need to come up with questions for each other!!? Haha~ Well, but still, thank you so much for the comments and questions~ I adapt this method probably like all the time, but only asking the students with better grades to teach the ones with lower grades. Your presentation was great, btw. You looked sharp (and the picture looks HOT!)~

Dear Eunice:
           Thank you for the comments and question! I believe "one-credit hour" means the course they were taking lasted one hour every week, and it's only (worth) one credit for that semester...

Dear Lulu:
           Thank you for the comments and questions! I believe the experimental groups (2 classes treated with RPT) were divided into 16 groups of 3 students and 2 groups of 4, while the controlled groups (2 classes treated without RPT) were not divided into any group but only work on their own. 
HAHA....I have NO idea about that!!!  I am good o-ba-san student loh~
My dear Alison,
 
Great responses to the peers' questions/comments!
 
 
Love you...
 
 
Teresa
Reply