ASSESSMENT WEIGHTING VIA THE WIKI: 60%
Group list (to be advised).
TIMETABLE: 12 Weeks, 60% of final grade.
COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN ISSUE: Group theoretical position
SOFTWARE: Wiki, Flicker, Youtube, Vegas, and others as may be necessary
TECHNIQUES: Written communication, oral communication, referencing, negotiation, editing
OUTPUTS: A Wiki with presenations that elaborate on the theme of collaboration and present background, work in progress and the final presentation of the Project.
PREMISE: Wiki's provide a complex portal through which students are able to both present and reflect on their groups theoretical position.
In your groups use a Wiki as a portal through which to present the project you have been allocated. The wiki should capture knowledge, background, and the projects development in such a way that facilitates others replcating the end result. The wiki will also be the portal through which you critically reflect on, prepare and present on one of the themes listed below. In each presentation use the allocated theme to bring specific aspects of your groups project into focus. For the group presentations the Wiki will contain a written component of 1000 words (, a selection of 7 images and approximately 3 minutes of video footage. It will also contain links to reference material and other relevant contextual information.
THEMES OF COLLABORATION
Group Presentation 1: Planning
Group Presentation 2: Communication
Group Presentation 3: Intellectual Property
Group Presentation 4: Conflict
Group Presentation 5: Remuneration
In addition to the overall course assessment criteria students will be assessed on the level and extent to which they engage with the criteria listed below:
1. REGARDING THE GROUP PROJECT:
CLIENT SATISFACTION _ is the client satisfied with the work produced and the experience of working with this group
KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE_ is the knowledge captured comprehensive, well organised and contextualised
REPEATABILITY_ is the knowledge captured communicated in such a way as to facilitate repeatability
2. REGARDING THE GROUP PRESENTATION:
CLARITY OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION _ Does the oral presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?
CLARITY OF THE WRITTEN PRESENTATION_ Does the written presentation communicate a clear, concise and appropriately delivered Group Theoretical Position?
DISTINCTIVEBNESS AND SPECIFICITY OF THE EXAMPLES_ Are the examples used to elaborate the particular theme of collaboration distinctive and specific?
REFERENCING _ Are all sources of content properly referenced?
THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT_ Is it clear that the students have a strong grasp of the conceptual context of their theme of collaboration?
THE STILL IMAGES_ Do the still images support and extend our understanding of the Group Theoretical Position the students are presenting?
THE VIDEO CAPTURES AND EDITING_ Do the video captures (including the way they have been cut together) support and extend our understanding of the Group Theoretical Position that the students are presenting?