Example+Feedback

Criteria-based Feedback:
All of the paragraphs have relevant information in them and they do not have any irrelevant information in them. Also all the websites listed can clearly be identified as user created content. || Will the older generations like it if or accept it if user created content pages become more liked by the student body and are used frequently for various reasons? How is user created content better than actually physically having the object with you (e.g. you have written up an assignment, and just printed it off, then your computer crashes and everything on it is lost, only you have physically got the assignment with you.)? ||
 * Criteria Descriptors || Student Reviewer Feedback ||
 * **Quality of Content** ||  ||
 * Does the content (writing) make sense? || The content of this page is extremely well written and very easy to read, all details are expressed easily as well as understood well by anybody.
 * Can you identify any areas which need clarification? || Everything makes sense. No clarification is needed. ||
 * Pose three questions that arise from your reading || How will people in the near future use these user created content pages if half the world is in poverty, and hardly any of the schools in those areas have computers?
 * **Communication** ||  ||
 * Look at the Discussion pages of the wiki pages - effective communication? || It communicates with the writers (which is good) only it doesn't give them enough information for them to make changes or realize what could make the pages better. ||
 * Do they need more? || The communication amongst themselves is good, but could be so much better, as they could all give them more detailed hints. ||
 * Are they clear in their messages to each other? || They are clear because their feedback as it is very basic, and is understood easily. whereas if they could make it more detailed it would seen a lot clearer. ||
 * Is there a sense of negotiation and collaboration? || There is a sense there but it could be more powerful. ||
 * **Collaboration** ||  ||
 * Does the work appear to be equally shared? || Yes, you have equally shared your work as your discussion page is filled with people who have seen your work. ||
 * Does there appear to be any difficulties by one or more members of the team? || No, it looks like you collaborate very well together, and everyone has done everything and chosen the best outcome from that. ||
 * **Presentation - Layout and Design** ||  ||
 * Amount and relevance of graphics and media - comment on that || There is a reasonable amount of pictures graphics and video each one related to it's underlined title. ||
 * Recommendations? || Put more videos on as they give more details, and also they entertain the audience. ||

Summary of Feedback:
For each of the questions below consider including information about:
 * Content - clarity, quantity
 * Communicaiton - between the students as collaborators
 * Wiki Presentation - design, use of graphics, layout

//3 things that are very good about this wiki project.//
 * The content of this page is very well written and easy to understand. All of the paragraphs have relevant information in them and they do not have any irrelevant information in them. Everything made sense and no clarifications are needed. The page was well balanced with images and text.

//2 suggestions for improving the wiki page.// //1 piece of new knowledge our group has obtained thanks to this wiki page.//
 * The discussions seemed to be quite basic and easily understood by the participants. However, if the discussions were more detailed, it would have resulted in more evidence that effective collaboration took place and perhaps the content would have been even better.
 * We did not know about Animoto which creates short animations and we gained a better appreciation of a web 2.0 technology.