Rowland's COMP4040 Blog

I thought that the session went well and was a good example of how some activities e.g. reaching a concensus are better done face to face.

In this session we looked at the grade criteria for the first learning outcome and spent some time agreeing it and making sure that it was sequential in the sense that similar ideas occured at all levels so that we could see a progression through the grades.

This gives us a useful pointer about setting up the other learning outcome criteria in that it looks as if it is best to start at the pass levle and then build from there, that way we can set up a progression through the grades more easily. However we might want to add additional points at higher levels.

The final version was placed on the wiki and we all made our own copy to work with.
We agreed that the assignment would be done as a series of web pages which in themselves could illustrate good design but they would also need a rationale which could be comments in the code.

The claim for a grade might take the form:

* select parts of the assessement criteria
* link from them to the argument for getting that grade
* link to the evidence to support that argument

I need to look at the criteria against the generic Master's criteria to check compatibility.

It would be useful if you could continue with your claim for a grade over the next week.

Next week we will look at LO2, start on putting together a web site and loking at the issues of useability and accessibility.

Please feel free to comment on your perceptions of how the session went.

Rowland