| Original submission元の投稿 : |
Presentation title: Internship Journaling: A Database Plugin for Experiential Learning Presentation type: Case study (20 mins) ケース・スタディー（２０分） Presentation language: English 英語 Presentation keywords: internship, experiential learning, journal writing, database module, Presentation abstract: Internships, study abroad trips, domestic work/study programs, teaching practice, and other experiential programs often require a reflective journal be written as evidence of learning. This journal is usually on paper, which means it is difficult to send back to university teachers and staff to review, especially during initial days when feedback is most needed. In addition, for summative evaluation, the journal data needs to combined, analyzed and synthesized into end-of-term reports to the hosting company/school and the sending institution. Inspection by external accrediting institutions may be required when formal credit is being given. Therefore, a secure, online database system could solve this problem, and provide more timely supervision by teachers. In this case study, the Database activity module of Moodle was modified so that the journal data can be checked and approved by both an on-site supervisor and a remote instructor. To prevent incomplete or incorrect data, notifications and digests of student entries are sent to instructors to alert them of strong or weak performance. With timely information, the instructor can requests revision or give warnings. To achieve this workflow, two new data fields were programmed and added to the current core Database module. Also, reports were coded so that students and teachers can get summary information automatically. |
| Abstract要約 : |
Internships,
study abroad trips, domestic work/study programs, teaching practice, and other
experiential programs often require a reflective journal be written as evidence
of learning. This journal is usually on paper, which means it is difficult to
send back to university teachers and staff to review, especially during initial
days when feedback is most needed. In addition, for summative evaluation, the
journal data needs to combined, analyzed and synthesized into end-of-term
reports to the hosting company/school and the sending institution. Inspection
by external accrediting institutions may be required when formal credit is
being given. Therefore, a secure, online database system could solve this
problem, and provide more timely supervision by teachers. In this case study,
the Database activity module of Moodle was modified so that the journal data
can be checked and approved by both an on-site supervisor and a remote
instructor. To prevent incomplete or incorrect data, notifications and digests
of student entries are sent to instructors to alert them of strong or weak
performance. With timely information, the instructor can requests revision or
give warnings. To achieve this workflow, two new data fields were
programmed and added to the current core Database module. Also, reports were
coded so that students and teachers can get summary information automatically. |
|
Peer Review 1
| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 10 / | | 10 / | | 10 / | | 10 / | | 7 / | | 45 / | | | 92 / |
Feedback When the author writes "Therefore, a secure, online database system could solve this problem" it follows after describing multiple problems. It's a bit unclear as to which problem the online submission of the journal is addressing (submission difficulty, review difficulty, timely feedback, inspection by acrediting institutions, or all of the above problems? ). However, this seems like a very good topic for the moot! Peer Review 2
| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 9 / | | 9 / | | 8 / | | 9 / | | 8 / | | 40 / | | | 83 / |
Feedback A timely and useful topic that will certainly be helpful for those who attend. It is unclear, from the explanation here, if the new modifications have been added to Moodle core. It would help to explain this in the explanation so potential attendees have an idea of how they may obtain a copy of the module to be introduced. Peer Review 3
| Criteria | Assessment |
|---|
| 6 / | | 9 / | | 9 / | | 9 / | | 7 / | | 40 / | | | 80 / |
Feedback Overall, the submission seems interesting. These suggestions are to help clarify the description more than a to serve as a critique of the content. It may be clearer to begin with a description of what the plugin does and why it is necessary. One would assume that the talk is primary about the plugin rather than the issue that the plugin is attempting to address. Most of the submission seems to focus on what the plugin is for. There is no mention what the two new data fields even are or why they may be necessary. Is it only to allow for checking by two different supervisors or instructors? How would that be different from just having two teachers for a course? |