Talk:RM analysis Anna Kokkonen: Difference between revisions
(Exercise evaluation) |
|||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
Score: 3/4 | Score: 3/4 | ||
'''Summarizing''' | '''Summarizing''' | ||
* wrapping-up of the individual evaluations and tying them into the context described in the exercise description | * wrapping-up of the individual evaluations and tying them into the context described in the exercise description | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Score: 2/2 | Score: 2/2 | ||
'''Bonus points''' | '''Bonus points''' | ||
* e.g. value adding extra work done | * e.g. value adding extra work done | ||
'''Total Score: 9/10 | '''Total Score: 9/10 | ||
Latest revision as of 07:08, 25 May 2011
Exercise evaluation
Analysis vs. object of analysis
* ability to differentiate between the analysis (knowledge creating process of studying real-world phenomena) and the phenomena that the analysis looks into
←--1: . Focus of evaluation is on the analysis and the knowledge it creates/is intended to create. --Mikko Pohjola 09:28, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Score: 2/2
Analysis-use relationship
* ability to consider the possible meaning/value of the knowledge intended to be created by the planned analysis in different uses by different users
←--2: . The evaluation grasps well how the planned analysis and its results show in different light depending on different use/user perspective. --Mikko Pohjola 09:28, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Score: 2/2
Usability of evaluation
* identification of major strengths as well as possible points of improvement * critical and constructive remarks to help develop the analysis (plan) further
←--3: . Major strengths identified. Some points of improvement identified. Some good remarks guiding further improvement. --Mikko Pohjola 09:28, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
⇤--4: . Perhaps a bit too "kind" evaluation. Some more constructive criticism would be helpful for those who further develop or apply the analysis plan. --Mikko Pohjola 09:28, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
Score: 3/4
Summarizing
* wrapping-up of the individual evaluations and tying them into the context described in the exercise description
←--5: . Good concise wrap-up and tying into the given context. --Mikko Pohjola 09:28, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Score: 2/2
Bonus points
* e.g. value adding extra work done
Total Score: 9/10