Slideshow Peer Review
Carl Roach
Begin by watching/listening to your partner's slideshow.
1. What is the main point that your partner is making in the
slideshow?
2. At any point during the slideshow, were you bored by an image; that
is to say, did an image stay on the screen for too long?
3. How are the images working with the spoken text?
4. Comment on your partner's delivery. All of you have composed and
written a podcast and received an
evaluation of that podcast, so you know what to listen for when your
partner is practicing (tone, intonation, speed of delivery, etc.).
5. Review the script. Compare the References and "for more
information" in the script. Is s/he double-dipping the References or
“for more information” (known as the Recommended Reading in the
Webtext) to the Webtext and Podcast. All of the References, for more
informations, and
Recommended Readings must be unique to each component. If your
partner hasn’t double-dipped, tell me here in this discussion, and if
your partner has double-dipped, tell him or her that s/he needs unique
References, Recommended Readings and “for more informations,” and also
post here what your partner needs to change about these sources.
Delana McCarroll
1) For the government to somehow provide health care and benefits for
small businesses in the United States.
2) No, the images are all good.
3) I feel that since we are only supposed to have 10 images for our
slideshows, the images are too repetitive, but the ones that Jorge has
selected cover the overall text for this slideshow.
4) The tone, intonation, speed of delivery and everything was very
well addressed.
5) Jorge has not double-dipped, but there are no references. The
further reading section is unique to his slideshow.
Kayla McCoy
and as a result children are getting overweight. She is also coming
up with a few ways to help parents overcome this epidemic.
2. Although there was a little lag in the photos, overall what she
had to say went with the picture so it really didn't make it boring to
look at.
3. The pictures she chose went along really well with what she was
saying. I think that there could have been a few more pics so that
there could be more information to get out of it, but overall the
pictures worked really well.
4. The only thing that i noticed when she was talking was that she
would get loud and then out of no where get really quiet. Also you
didn't seem like you were very happy in it either. A good thing that i
noticed was that you talked like you were educated about and you
didn't stumble over yourself or mess up at all.
5. Your sources are all unique to each section of your work. You
didn't double-dip at all.
It was a really good slideshow.
Julia Vander Wal
age need to learn about sex ed.
2. I think that the way that she timed her images was effective. I
never really got bored at any given image and all the images she chose
were interesting to look at and related to what she was talking about.
3. The images that Kayla chose really brought to life what she was
saying. A few of the pictures made me laugh to myself but also made
me think that kids definitely should be learning about sex and the
consequences that come with it if it is used inappropriately.
4. Her overall tone during the piece was good and it wasn't monotone
so it wasn't boring to listen too. A couple times she tripped over
her own words and one time she kind of giggled which took away from
what she was trying to convey. Also, at the end of the slideshow it
cuts off abruptly. I think that if she had rerecorded it a few more
times she would have had a great audio. Also, I would say to take
your time while recording.
5. She has used all unique sources and has not double dipped with
anything. Her script is moving because she has first hand experience
along with an interview of someone else who has had a first hand
experience. Besides the few kinks in the audio I think that her
script is very compelling and proves a great case.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jorge Campos
programs like DARE but, also advancing them with new programs like
Youth to Youth.
2. No, the images coincided great withe the script recording.
3. The images do a great job to build on the message instead
distracting from it.
4. The podcast delivery is outstanding aside from the occasional
stuttering (normal for anybody that does not do this regularly) the
podcast sounds very professional as well as energetic.
5. Yes, her suggested reading is Y2Y International which is also one
of her references. The only other issue is that one of her sources is
from wikipedia, which is considered an unreliable source.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote:
Kayla McCoy
Maria Chavez
cursive is becoming obsolete. She mentions how newer generations are
becoming more technology-reliant and prefer to type in normal
handwriting rather than in cursive. She explains the importance of
cursive and how it is something useful that should not be left
behind.
2. After watching my partner’s slideshow, I will say that most of her
images are interesting. There were two images that were somewhat
‘boring’ but not because they were on the screen too long but because
the images looked old and had a lot of writing in them.
3. Most of my partner’s images worked well with the text except for
the two first images. They are not at all out of place but I didn’t
really see how the text was being related to the images. With that put
aside, I think that my partner did a good job!
4. My partner’s tone and intonation are good for the most part;
however I noticed some issues. I think that she should be more
‘exciting’. Also, she mumbled a little and made some mistakes. Maybe
some more practicing would have helped. Other than this, her speed of
delivery was good and she had good information.
5. She had references on the bottom of the page but she did not have
any ‘further reading’ links or anything of that sort. I do not see any
problems with her references, so she does not need to fix or add
anything to that area. The only thing that my partner needs to do is
add some ‘further reading’ sources.
Note: My partner’s slideshow is longer than 3-4 minutes.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sarah Addington
1. The main point that Jorge is trying to convey in this slideshow is
that Federal and/or State governments should help small businesses
afford health insurance for their companies. He proposes that a tax
incentive or a subsidy should be created.
2. No I was not bored by any images in his slideshow. Even if it was
the same image, Jorge created movement and kept the mind stimulated.
He used different techniques to help the slideshow flow well together.
3. The images work very well with the spoken text. He was able to
deliver the message simultaneously with his spoken text as well as his
images. As I stated before I liked the way he used the same image but
was able to break them up and use movement to keep it interesting.
4. The delivery of the podcast was very well. He had a nice tone and
his speed of delivery was very nice. His intonation was done in a
manner to keep the piece interesting and he never sounded monotone.
5. The references and “for more information” were all unique to each
script and he didn’t double-dip. The only recommendation I would have
is that the slideshow script needs to be cited. Especially the
interview with Dana More-Sudac needs to have a citation as well as all
of the images need to have this included. It was a very interesting
piece that I learned from.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote:
brandy lopez
1. What is the main point that your partner is making in
the slideshow?
students who don't know how to speak English, so they can learn how.
Once they've learned the english language, they will do better in
school and have a better chance of getting a higher paying job because
they know two languages instead of one.
2. At any point during the slideshow, were you bored by an image;
that is to say, did an image stay on the screen for too long?
--The second image was a good image for her topic but i feel as though
it was too plain to keep up for the amount of time that it is shown in
the slideshow. I do think that she started off slow feeding the images
then towards the end she speed them up a little bit. There were
pictures, but to me it felt as if there were 5.
3. How are the images working with the spoken text?
--They images that Maria has chosen work very well with the time she
is speaking, and each section is goes with each picture.
4. Comment on your partner's delivery. All of you have composed
and written a podcast and received an evaluation of that podcast, so
you know what to listen for when your partner is practicing (tone,
intonation, speed of delivery, etc.).
--Her tone was very even and nice to listen to. It was assertive. i
liked that she wasn't quiet, because otherwise it would have bored me.
Her talking speed was just right. towards the end, she started to
speed up a bit, but she melowed back out, so overall she was fine with
her speaking.
5. Review the script. Compare the References and "for
more information" in the script. Is s/he double-dipping the
References or “for more information” (known as the Recommended Reading
in the Webtext) to the Webtext and Podcast. All of the References, for
more informations, and Recommended Readings must be unique to each
component. If your partner hasn’t double-dipped, tell me here in this
discussion, and if your partner has double-dipped, tell him or her
that s/he needs unique References, Recommended Readings and “for more
informations,” and also post here what your partner needs to change
about these sources.
--I dont know if she has doubled dipped or not because i don't see any
references in the slideshow or on the slideshow page. As far as the
pictures go, she did not double dip.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jorge Campos
Jorge Campos
1. The point of this slideshow is explaining the effects of smoking
and second-hand smoke on people.
2. Not at all the images are very strong and impactful.
3. Unfortunately, the images just seem to scroll through and do not
build on the podcast or bring special emphasis.
4. The podcast was very informative but, it the delivery was too
speedy, i found my self replaying certain sections over and over.
5. There is no suggested reading in the podcast.
On Nov 30, 5:04 pm, Carl Roach <carlwalterro...@gmail.com> wrote: