Date:
Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:07:24 -0400
To:
Siddiq167@aol.com
Hi Siddiq.
I'm glad to hear that you're still ambitious and want to keep doing TQNYC projects. We will be posting the judging results some time next week. But, since you've demonstrated great sportsmanship and a winning attitude towards this whole process, I'll be happy to give you some pointers.
I read through the judges' comments and looked at your site again. This is what I can say kept you from being a Finalists (only by a few points). First of all, the front page is very busy and it is not clear what the site is about. It is difficult to navigate since most of the information is in powerpoint and does not allow the user to jump around. There are too many ideas (like the photography unit, the art quizzes) and they take away from your main theme. If you had stuck to the first amendment and school dress-code issue, it would have been more powerful.
Next year, I would choose your topic and build a site around that. Keep it simple and clear and do not stray from that topic. Look at some of the Finalists' sites for a better idea of how that can be done.
You and your team really did a wonderful job and I look forward to what you do next. I'm glad that you're not too discouraged. When you get the judges' comments back you will see many, many wonderful compliments. Practice building sites over the summer and get started early next year. The TQNYC server will open on October 15th.
Have a wonderful summer.
Mickie
Team Judging Feedback
NYC040609 - A Collaboration of Ideas
Judges were asked to write comments but not obligated, so the number of comments may vary. This does not reflect on the judging of the site.
Educational Value
Fair to Average The Entry has some educational value and a set of educational objectives that have relevance to students.
Content Quality
Fair to Average The information is presented in an accurate way and errors are very minor. It is organized in an average manner and the illustrations help students understand the concept better. There are very few spelling errors.
Technical Quality
Fair to Average Visitors can navigate easily throughout the Entry but not all pages work. Some links are broken and fail, but the multimedia areas of the site work well.
Internet Style of Learning
Fair to Average The Entry provides a moderate opportunity for the user to actively participate in the site. It does not fully exploit the interactive nature of the Internet.
Comments
Comments from judge 1.
Your site is really interesting and I love that you tie in a school from abroad and their point of views. Bravo on that!! I love the collaborative and supportive style you engage in and think your site is very different from some of the other TQ sites I've reviewed.
I admit though, your site is a little difficult to navigate and it doesn't quite have that "flow" that many sites have. However, I think the creative idea of tying the point of view of another school is very, very good!
All of your links seem to work and the way you presented your idea through a power point slide is very easy to use.
When I clicked on "Godwin Opara," Microsoft prompted me to install an application; however I didn't have the software handy, so I wasn't able to see that part of your site.
I think your team made a FANTASTIC first start on your site. I'd like to see it organized a little differently and much clearer about your intent from the beginning; I found myself just clicking on random hyperlinks without a clear and concise reason.
I hope you continue your hard work and collaborative efforts; again, your site is a fine first start and I would love to see you take it a step further in terms of interactivity and substance.
Congratulations on a job well done. Good luck with your future TQNYC projects.
Comments from judge 2.
Good work! This is a wonderful collaborative effort between different cultures tackling the same issue. You provide lots of interesting information on freedom of speech and dress codes -- I especially like the pictures of the Ukraine students. You also do a good job of making it interactive with surveys and other participatory elements. However, your main page is a little too "busy," making it initially difficult to identify exactly what the subject and objective of the site is.
Comments from judge 3.
This website is an exciting collaboration between the students and their faculty mentors in Ukraine, Camaroon and New York City. It's primary strength is the degree of interactivity that it allows for among visitors (guestbook, polls)and possibly between visitors and the creators of the site (email addresses and requests for collaboration).
Another strength is the clarity of the Power Point presentations in terms of making a topic like Freedom of Speech that otherwise may seem abstract to many young people
be very compelling to them and relevant to their daily lives in terms of dress codes and ability to share their views openly in their school environments.
Also, the lesson on photography (as an independent unit) is very interesting. However, when taken as a whole, the information presented by the three groups can seem fragmented and show limited connections between them.
Also, because English is not the primary language of the students in the Ukraine and Camaroon, it is impressive that they even took on this task. However, it would have been beneficial for their American (J.F.K.) partners to have reviewed the site for spelling and grammar errors.
Team Judging Feedback
NYC040688 - Acupoint Detector
Judges were asked to write comments but not obligated, so the number of comments may vary. This does not reflect on the judging of the site.
Educational Value
Fair to Average The Entry has some educational value and a set of educational objectives that have relevance to students.
Content Quality
Fair to Average The information is presented in an accurate way and errors are very minor. It is organized in an average manner and the illustrations help students understand the concept better. There are very few spelling errors.
Technical Quality
Fair to Average Visitors can navigate easily throughout the Entry but not all pages work. Some links are broken and fail, but the multimedia areas of the site work well.
Internet Style of Learning
Fair to Average The Entry provides a moderate opportunity for the user to actively participate in the site. It does not fully exploit the interactive nature of the Internet.
Comments
Comments from judge 1.
Acupoint Detector is a fascinating subject, that is of interest to a diverse audience; patients, professionals, scientists. I personally enjoyed the site but would suggest minor improvements in the following areas
1. provide references and details where to get more info about the subject or the product (i.e where to buy/test acupoint detector)
2. green font on black background makes is difficult to read the content for a long time
3. link to Leonardo DaVinci site could confuse the visitor, need a bridge page or the explanation why it's included
4. Since the site could appeal to a large audience a bulletin board would be very useful
Comments from judge 2.
Accupuncture is a fascinating subject, and I especially was interested in the 'Description' and 'Timeline' sections of your site. I would like to have seen more interactive elements, to make the viewer feel more involved. I also don't think the information on the web site sufficiently explains the importance and function of the Acupoint device. The info needs to be better organized so that there is sufficient differentiation between the device and the historical/medical explanation of accupuncture.
Comments from judge 3.
This site feels unbalanced. While the title is Acupoint Detector, much of the content is about the general subject of acupuncture. The timeline contains references to events the are not explained anywhere on the site. There are links to pages that seem irrelevant to the material being communicated. Overall, the site contains some enlightening material but suffers from a lack of thorough organization and interactivity.
As an educator and an advocate of technology generated , inquiry based , student centered and rubric/informed learning, I am appalled by the reviews my teams finally received over two weeks after the judging,
Firstly these reviews just pasted parts of the rubric to the sheet without accurately referencing them.
Collaboration of Ideas and Acupuncture Detector did not have dead links.
The actual comments of the judges which were pertinent to the individual student projects developed over several months time were: terse, general, lacked detail to support students in expanding upon their investigations, and asked tasks of the students that were never mentioned in the rubrics or in original project guidelines.
Of course, the collaborating international students did not spell correctly in English; but that was their authentic collaborative contribution to a rich site that had several diverse cultural, special needs, and ethnic school systems reflect on a broad spectrum of student centered issues. This was critiqued, while a site focused on Standards, obviously educator and administrator centered was honored!! Isn't Thinkquest NYC about enfranchising students as empowered web designers and critical citizens of cyberspace.
How ironic that that the feedback these hardworking students received was so unresponsive to their efforts and so non specific.
As an educator, I offer each student among my 125 plus a detailed critique and guidance for enhancement of his/her projects, one would think that ThinkquestNYC would provide at least that for students who labored and generated creative web resources.
These reviews get failing grades as models for evaluation and proactive feedback.
