Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Multimedia/Feedback

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
General feedback about
multimedia presentations

This page summarises general feedback about the 2021 multimedia presentations. Detailed feedback about each individual presentation is available on its chapter talk page.

Overall[edit | edit source]

  1. The overall quality of presentations was reasonably good, but there was a wide range.
  2. The best presentations have been tweeted in this thread.
  3. Some presentations went over time. Content beyond the maximum time limit was ignored for marking purposes. This often meant 0 marks for the Conclusion.

Overview[edit | edit source]

  1. Overviews were often missing or too brief.
  2. Narrate and show the title and sub-title.
  3. Provide some context about why the topic is important.
  4. Consider presenting focus questions.

Content[edit | edit source]

  1. Content was generally well selected.
  2. There was a bias towards definitional and theoretical material.
  3. Greater coverage of research and examples would be useful.

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

  1. Conclusions generally did a very good job of reinforcing one or more take-home messages.

Audio[edit | edit source]

  1. Audio communication was generally very good.
  2. Most presentations were well-paced. Some could have been improved by slowing down.
  3. Most presentations were well practiced and reasonably smooth.

Video[edit | edit source]

  1. Visual presentation was generally very good.
  2. Most presentations did a good job of providing a small amount of text in large font per slide, making it relatively easy to read and listen at the same time.
  3. Some presentations could have been improved by splitting content from a small number of visually busy slides into a larger number of slides each with less visual information.

Meta-data[edit | edit source]

  1. Less than half of the presentations used the full title and sub-title (or an abbreviated version that fits within 100 characters) as the name of the presentation.
  2. Informative descriptions of the presentation were rare.
  3. Almost all presentations provided a link to the book chapter and a link from the book chapter to the presentation.

Licensing[edit | edit source]

  1. Some presentations used copyright restricted images without permission - doing so violates copyright law.
  2. Most presentations indicated a copyright license for the presentation, but only some did so using the licensing field in YouTube settings.

See also[edit | edit source]