ROBERTO  CARLOS  FLORES     [email protected]   November  8th,  2016    

REVISION  PLAN  

    Navigation:     Both  of  the  reviewers  agreed  that  the  website  has  a  good  presentation  in  terms  of  accessibility.   None  of  them  had  problems  to  access  the  different  components  tasks  and  subtasks.  The  top   and  left  menu  worked  pretty  well  according  to  the  comments  seen  in  the  review.    I  agree  with   them  on  because  the  website  looks  very  intuitive  to  navigate  and  there  are  not  disruptors  or   confusing  elements.       Prior  the  evaluation,  there  was  something  I  was  worried  about.  I  tried  to  include  a  menu  in  the   left  because  it  was  not  in  the  layout  I  chose.  I  found  in  one  of  the  feedbacks  a  comment  about   making  this  look  different.  George  pointed  out  the  idea  of  making  it  movable  when  scrolling   down  to  have  better  access  to  the  menu.  I  knew  this  could  be  a  weakness  and  it  was  a  little  bit   noticeable.  Both  of  my  reviewers  gave  credit  to  the  menu  but  I  liked  the  feedback  I  received   from  George.     In  order  to  make  the  navigation  look  better,  I  would  look  for  online  tutorials  on  how  to  include   left  menus  in  a  website.  Another  option  may  be  to  look  for  forums  in  which  website  developers   may  provide  explanations  that  may  help  me  shape  this  idea.       Relevance:   According  to  the  comments  I  read  from  my  peers,  there  are  relevant  artifacts  in  my  portfolio   and  the  subtasks  match  the  description  of  the  components.  I  got  good  comments  about  the   quality  of  the  material  I  have  included  as  well  as  the  number  of  examples.       What  I  could  detect  as  weakness  is  that  there  are  some  artifacts  that  need  revision.  For   example,  in  the  development  section,  I  may  focus  more  on  the  development  of  the  process  and   not  the  final  product.  Also,  it  caught  my  attention  that  there  are  two  comments  in  the   evaluation  section  that  I  must  strongly  consider.  After  the  peer  evaluation,  I  think  the   evaluation  section  is  the  weakest  part  of  my  portfolio.     The  arrangements  for  this  section  would  be  to  evaluate  again  the  artifacts  I  presented  in  the   development  subtasks.  I  will  look  for  more  specific  examples  in  developing  material.  Also,  I  will   look  for  more  relevant  evaluation  examples.  Summative  and  formative  evaluation  is  something   important  to  include  and  I  have  to  more  precise  on  this  subtask.       Content   I  received  good  feedback  in  this  section.  Most  of  the  times  they  were  comments  on  the   subtasks  having  enough  number  of  artifacts.  I  read  nice  comments  on  media  production  

artifacts  and  how  professional  my  work  looks.  Both  reviewers  expressed  that  the  amount  of   material  was  enough  as  I  tried  to  incorporate  more  than  two  examples  per  each  subtask.     A  weakness  that  I  detected  and  my  peers  also  did  was  about  the  lack  of  material  in  the   evaluation  section  specially  in  the  Criterion  Reference  Measurement  (CRM)  as  well  as   management.  It  was  a  bit  difficulty  for  me  to  come  up  with  an  example  of  CRM  and  this   affected  the  overall  perception  of  this  task.  Something  I  want  to  highlight  here  is  that  I   submitted  the  link  with  some  sections  that  were  incomplete.  One  of  my  peers  evaluated  my   portfolio  one  or  two  days  later  but  I  incorporated  the  missing  parts  a  couple  of  days  later.   Obviously,  the  feedback  I  got  from  him  was  to  include  more  material  and  describe  the  artifacts.   Nevertheless,  I  developed  this  before  my  other  peer  checked  my  website  and  because  of  this   there  are  some  mismatched  comments.       The  action  I  will  take  to  make  this  area  look  more  complete  is  to  read  the  matrix  again  in  order   to  understand  better  what  I  need  to  include  for  the  development  and  management  section.   Also,  I  will  check  carefully  if  there  is  something  I  may  include  for  the  CRM.         Functionality   Andrew  and  George  provided  positive  comments  about  the  functionality  in  terms  of  loading  the   page  and  the  links  I  provided.  I  may  say  that  both  reviewers  could  perfectly  see  the  material  I   shared  in  my  portfolio  and  this  was  satisfying  to  read.       The  weakness  of  this  section  was  to  make  sure  that  all  the  content  loads  in  the  most  common   web  browsers.  To  be  honest,  I  did  not  think  about  it  until  one  of  my  peers  mentioned  that  he   had  problems  to  load  my  resume.  He  used  Firefox  and  mentioned  that  he  could  not  read  it   because  it  did  not  reflect  anything.       In  order  to  solve  this  issue,  I  will  look  for  information  related  on  WordPress  problems  when   loading  embedded  documents  in  different  browsers.  I  may  also  look  for  another  plugging  to   display  documents  on  the  website  or  just  simply  incorporate  the  information  as  a  normal  text.       Appearance:     I  could  see  that  both  of  the  reviewers  liked  the  layout  I  used  for  my  website.  They  shared  good   comments  on  the  text  I  used  as  well  as  the  colors.  I  wanted  to  make  this  portfolio  be  visually   attractive  and  I  think  it  looks  nice  and  professional.       One  weakness  I  saw  about  the  appearance  and  one  of  my  peers  let  me  know  is  about  the  links   of  the  files.  He  mentioned  that  I  should  make  it  more  predominant  to  differentiate  it  between   normal  text.  I  totally  I  agree  on  this  and  I  consider  it  as  something  to  change.       What  I  will  do  here  is  to  edit  the  color  for  the  links  and  use  the  normal  color  which  is  blue.  This   may  be  helpful  as  it  may  be  easier  for  other  viewers  to  detect  where  the  link  is.      

LINK  TO  THE  WEBSITE:     http://rcarlosflores.com/reflections/    

revision .pdf

ROBERTO CARLOS FLORES. [email protected]. November 8th, 2016. REVISION .... http://rcarlosflores.com/reflections/. Page 3 of 3. revision .pdf. revision .pdf.

30KB Sizes 1 Downloads 200 Views

Recommend Documents

Revision
Jul 23, 2012 - has reported that SCERT has taken up development of State ... the outsourcing of DTP, Designing and layout work of Textbooks based.

Revision
Jul 23, 2012 - The Vidya Volunteers support will be from SSA. f) Collaboration with ... the outsourcing of DTP, Designing and layout work of Textbooks based.

Revision Zika2016.pdf
Ae. vitattus, and Ae. furcifer mosquitoes, all belonging to the sub- genus Stegomyia.10 During the Yap outbreak, Ae. henselii was the. predominant mosquito in the island, though studies were unable. to detect the virus among trapped mosquitoes.35 Ae.

*Revision test1.pdf
quideria conet laborio. quata cument, cullor. top and tail test. table cell 4 ... *Revision test1.pdf. *Revision test1.pdf. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu.

Belief Revision and Rationalizability
tion in Perfect-Information Games”, Review of Economic Studies 64, 23-46. [6] Bernheim, B. D. (1984): “Rationalizable Strategic Behavior”, Econometrica 52,.

Revision of remenuration.PDF
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Revision of remenuration.PDF. Revision of remenuration.PDF. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu.

Instant Revision Geography.pdf
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Instant Revision ...

Revision of minimum.PDF
Page 3 of 15. Revision of minimum.PDF. Revision of minimum.PDF. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu. Displaying Revision of minimum.PDF.

revision series for ipcc - MAFIADOC.COM
Feb 6, 2012 - Business Ethics (7 to 12). 78. 09 Feb ... on in business environment and legal deeds & documents. (18, 19) ..... Take rest, & have breakfast.

Revision Timetable Instructions.pdf
Page 1 of 1. HOW TO PLAN YOUR REVISION TIMETABLE. You will need: Your exam timetable. A black pen. A green pen. A pen of a different colour. A hi-lighter. 1. Read your exam timetable and identify. when the exams for each of your subjects. are. Using

SSLC ENGLISH REVISION TEST PAPER2018_sheniblog.pdf ...
Anton Chekhov's story Vanka talks about a poor orphaned child.Prepare a narration in your own. words. 7.Alyakhin's neighbour feels sorry for the child Vanka.He wanted to help Vanka to find out his. grandad.Prepare a likely conversation between Vanka

Revision of designations-310118.PDF
There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Revision of ...

revision checklist for google docs
I write a comment to my buddy about my suggestions. • The comment can go at the end of the paper. • Wherever I click, is where the comment will go. • I can put ...

Collaborative Revision with Google Docs
One of the best features of Google Docs is the collaboration feature. Students can ... entering their email addresses and clicking “Invite Collaborators. ... In the example below, the work done by Sambengston is in green and the work done by.

Essay Revision Checklist
RE-READ ENTIRE ESSAY!! RE RE-READ ENTIRE ESSAY!!! Space after each punctuation, both periods and commas. Capitalization at the beginning of each sentence. Correct any spelling mistakes. NO pronouns like “I, you, we” in your essay. Correct any gra

TD REVISION 201617.pdf
Page 2 of 13. Le syndrome du chromosome X fragile est la cause la plus fréquente de. retard mental héréditaire. Le retard mental, variable d'un individu à.

Revision of designations.PDF
The Secretay (E), ... designations are needed to be identified for integrating ... Revision of designations.PDF. Revision of designations.PDF. Open. Extract.

A revision of Apteromantis - consevol
May 21, 2014 - ... is quite similar and no comprehensive taxonomic study has ana- .... performed Fourier analyses using SHAPE software (Iwata & Ukai 2002) ...

Revision of pension.PDF
Revision of pension.PDF. Revision of pension.PDF. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu. Displaying Revision of pension.PDF.

Revision of pension.PDF
Page 1 of 3. ' GOVERNITf,ENT OF INDIA (BHAR,AT SARKAR) R"sr N".35/ro/a. MrNtsrRY oF RAILWAYS {RAIL MANTRALAYA}. {RAILWAY BOARD}. No. F(E)lll/2008/PN1t1 2. The GMs/FA&CAOs,. All lndian Railways/Production Units. (As per mailing list). New Defhi, Dated

Revision of pension (2).PDF
pay fixation under each intervening Pay Commission based on the formula for ... Page 3 of 60. Revision of pension (2).PDF. Revision of pension (2).PDF. Open.

pay revision doubts - 2.pdf
D& 35700 - 75600 95/3l0(M1(03 2/36)95114l2/9595 a1(12/3511(1/1)0 01)2/01601/TW1(U). (23-///tl)63n033 /IT9(03/113laJ36)6336l12l17l636)/l1)01