Peer Recommendations

Photo by Christina Morillo on Pexels.com

Rational

Through the listed peer reviews in the section below we were able to access a variety of great suggestions and insights about what could make our learning resource better, and we discussed and applied the ones we felt would improve our final product.  These suggestions are explained in more detail in the next paragraph.

Some of the changes made included making the overview more detailed by adding the age group that this learning resource was designed for, as well as adding some examples of the type of art that students would be doing in the modules. Both of these changes were done to help clarify any questions that the reader may have as they encounter the overview and paint a better picture of what the learning resource is about. The learning theory section was also given more detail, and a specific example of one of our activities was added to more clearly express constructivism so that readers can see the concept applied. In the inclusion section, another hyperlink was added so if readers are curious they can access the referenced materials, as well as some confusing wording has been fixed. For the learning outcomes, one of the sub-outcomes was removed as it was too similar to the main outcome and became repetitive, and the main learning outcome was also given more detail. The last part that was changed was in the assessment portion, where a grading table was added that is based on our lessons, and a penalty system was created that would give consequences to students who misused or damaged art supplies. 

One suggestion that we chose not to include was the suggestion to move the description & rationals tab to be before the overview in the overhead guiding links. After discussion we decided that it was still best to first introduce viewers to the topic and it’s purpose with the overview, than the modules put in place to help achieve the aforementioned learning outcomes from the overview, then the academia behind it with the description, and then ending with the criteria used to determine the outcome as well as how to make sure every person is included with the strategies. We thought that moving the placement of the overview would make the flow from thought to thought confusing.

Links to Peer Reviews

Links will be listed here as they are obtained.

  1. Peer Review for Pod 4″ by JapaneseTeacher
  2. “Peer Review for Pod#4” by Zoey
  3. “Interactive Resource Feedback for Pod 4” by Sinead Swan
  4. “Peer Review EDCI” by Colton Van Camp
Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started