MARKING TEMPLATE T171 TMA 01 - 2002 CUT-OFF DATE: 18th March 2002
STUDENT NAME: David Eales
STUDENT PI: T7777644
Overall Comments:
This is a very good start. You've obviously learned a great deal from
the early part of Module 1 - well done!
In question 1, you show an excellent sense of the sorts of issues a
website commentary needs to address, so you've earned a very good mark.
Your answer is very well organised under subheadings that match the categories
requested by the TMA specification - for even higher marks, it was just
a matter of devoting more equal attention to each.
For question 2, you've obviously understood Alexander's ideas &
made a good attempt to see your own messages in the light of his
principles. You needed to have confidence to develop your answers more
fully, to gain all the marks available.
Question 1 (60 marks)
What information did the site cover?
Score = 12 /12 marks
Apple.com 4
Woz.org 4
Apple-history.com 4
Comments:
A splendid survey! You could perhaps have cut down the amount of detail
on Apple.com's hardware/software coverage - everything in the right hand
column could be taken out & you'd still earn full marks (& gain
some words for use elsewhere).
Did the site present a balanced view or one perspective?
Score = 10 /12
marks
Apple.com 4
Woz.org 3
Apple-history.com 3
Comments:
Perceptive evaluations - they just needed expanding a little.
Careful proof-reading would have removed the suggestion that Apple.com
has gone into the Greek gods business (Adonis?! I'm guessing you meant
add-ons).
How easy was the site to navigate?
Score = 8/12
marks
Apple.com 3
Woz.org 2
Apple-history.com 3
Comments:
Perfectly sound remarks, but again you've not left yourself enough
space to go into the kind of detail I'd have liked.
Overall opinion of the site.
Score = 6 /12 marks
Apple.com 2
Woz.org 2
Apple-history.com 2
Comments:
You can probably guess what I'm going to say! Good stuff, not enough
of it.
How the site could be improved.
Score = 8/12
marks
Apple.com 2
Woz.org 3
Apple-history.com 3
Comments:
Sensible suggestions.
For Apple.com it might have been better to select one of the faults
& explain more fully how it could be improved
Q1 Total =
44/60 marks
Question 2 (40 marks)
Messages provided: Score = 10 /10 marks
Comments:
You've included two appropriate messages, demonstrating that you've
been taking an active part in the conferences - well done! It's good that
you included the header details, e.g. date, though you could perhaps
have distinguished more clearly between message text & commentary.
Explanation of why messages successful:
Score = 9/16
marks
A: 5/8 B: 4/8
Comments:
These points are appropriately identified & related to Alexander's
principles - it would have been a nice touch to refer to him by name, or
perhaps even quote him. It's just development you need, for higher marks
- the understanding is there.
Explanation of potential improvement:
Score = 7/14
marks
A: 4/7 B: 3/7
Comments:
For message A, you say "the main improvement is to make the message
not come across as a statement of fact but as an opinion." which is great.
What you then need to do is a) explain which of Alexander's principles
is involved here & b) say how you would change the message to
meet that requirement. Your proposal for message B is a useful one, but
not linked to any of Alexander's principles.
Q2 Total = 26/40 marks
Total 70
Presentation
Although there were no marks for presentation this time, some future
TMAs will take this into account.
Your page had a nice clean design, with a good system of internal links,
& the only significant improvements I'd suggest would be to use a heading
style for your subheadings (the questions) to make it easier on the eye.