Hey guys!
Here is my interpretation of the Rubric Rows:
Rubric Row 1: Basically, I need to include all of the necessary information: research question, method, and conclusion. All of these are in the script.
Rubric Row 2: All of the emphasis in this row is on the results and discussion. I need to focus on having evidence from my results section back up my conclusion in the discussion. I cannot have anything be unsubstantiated. To focus on the Results and Discussion, I cut most of my Literature Review (as stated before).
Rubric Row 3: I need to explain how I came to my hypothesis in my Literature Review. I believe with all the major cutting in my Literature Review, I still kept this in, but I need others opinions on this because, as stated later in the blog post, the literature review got demolished. I also need to see how my views on the hypothesis changed. I believe I cover this explictely in my discussion section ad then go into my findings.
Rubric Row 4: My powerpoint is basically void of words, barring subtopics, my research question, and tables. Additionally, I think I am going to have to recolor my graphs to make them more aesthetically pleasing.
The major cutting of my Literature Review:
I'm going to be honest. I cut a large chunk of my literature review and I am high key scared I cut too much, but it was necessary to be able to make the script fit within the time limit. If you see any connections missing or you are just like "Catherine I see a huge chunk missing" just hmu. I shorten my intro and definitions section by a lot and I do not think this is a problem. I do not think I cut too much out of the gratification section, but I may have over simplified it/ made the audience think to much for themselves. I cut a lot more, but I may need to cut more so just delete away.
We are still over words:
LOL I am not Akash and I cannot blurt 1000000 words a minute. I still need to cut down on my word count by at least 600 words. Areas I think I can cut down on are the specifics of my graphs and the depth my methods section goes into. In my methods I do not know if it is necessary to go as in depth on the episodes and seasons I picked as well as if I could just state the five different parts of the revised code instead of having an explanation for each of them. Another thing is all the specifics I talk about on my graphs if they could be cut a little. Another idea I had was combining the results and discussion/ have them more in conversation with each other as many of the same things were stated in each section. I do not know if this would affect the rubric like it would on the paper rubric, but I am willing to try to ensure I stay within the time limit.
Word Count: 520
What's good Catherine! First, sorry for the streak mishap... I feel so guilty :( Also, my script comments are in the PDF because I was working on a plane lol, and the slide comments are in the Divya's Slide Comments doc. Ok, so as far as your presentation goes, I think that you have assessed the rubric rows well, and have adjusted your script accordingly. For the first row, you have addressed all four sections clearly in your slides, so naturally it will be apparent in your script too. For Row 2, you will see I have commented on some areas in both sections where I think you can expand on tying the findings to the lit review and academic conversation. I think for the results, to bring clarity to your results, you need to make it very clear in your script how you've chosen to structure this section. Further, for each of the three categories of findings, after you have talked about the various elements in those sections, I think you then need to end with a final claim of what your findings for that category mean in general (you'll see a specific comment in the PDF). For your discussion section, there are some findings that I think you can more thoroughly tie to the larger significance (i.e., the section about demographics). Further, I think that you need to clarify your connection to viewer preferences for the drama versus challenge section (my comment goes into more detail about what I mean), because right now it seems a little contradictory to the findings. Because these two sections are so important on the rubric, we just want to make sure they are absolutely solid. For Row 3, I agree that you converse with your initial hypothesis and thoughts and your final understanding of the answer to the question well. This was most apparent when you said that the answer to your question was more complex that you originally thought in the discussion section. For the fourth row, I really like the aesthetic of your slides. They are unique and captured my attention. In my comments on the slides, you'll see some areas where I think you should add more to a slide than just a word, but for the most part, I liked the slides.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to figuring out where to cut words, I think in your literature review, you can cut a lot of all of the content that comes right before the section on gratification. Instead of defining the different classifications of reality TV for Survivor, I think that you can just state that Survivor is a reality TV show, specifically a competition program. And that way you can have more time to emphasize and expand a little on gratification. Also, I noticed that you cut out the other elements after narrative. And while it's fine that you not delve into the specifics like you did for narrative, I still thinks it's important that you at least mention what those other elements. Otherwise the jump to the question seems abrupt. I think you can cut out the initial code section of your methods and rather just focus on the revised code. When explaining the different parts of the code, while you are correct that it's not all that necessary to go into the details, you should still address how each of those parts of the code tie into Formula if at all. Lastly, I don't think you should combine the results and discussion section. Definitely talk to Mrs. Haag about this, but if you decide to do this, then I think the best way to structure this would be to give the results for the "Formulaic" elements and then give the connections to significance and academic conversation for those findings. Then do the same for the other two categories of findings.
You're doing amazing! You're almost done!! You got this!
Hey Catherine!
ReplyDeleteYour presentation was great on the whole! The pictures behind the words were really cool, and I liked how you minimized words for most of the powerpoint.
A few major comments though --
Your hook isn't too compelling...perhaps talk about the prevalence of reality TV and be like let's look at how reality TV has evolved -- then survivor. It's slightly longer but will grab the attention of the audience. Alternatively, describing a stereotypical reality show and asking ppl if they've seen reality TV as like a rhetorical question could work.
For definitions and lists (e.g., narrative slide, and definition of reality tv), I'd put more text on the slide with the key terms in a different color. I get the aesthetic, but it's easier to follow along with some text for the audience, especially for key info they have to recall later.
I'd use more animation, esp to show causation and other relationships, like the narrative and gratification slides. It also keeps the audience engaged. This goes along the lines of engaging the audience.
You should emphasize looking at Reality TV by talking about why we would care about reality tv... emphasize the word reality even in the name of the category -- it tells us about ourselves and our reality. Such an articulation of significance would help you hit rubric row 1 better.
A common trend in your script was also long-winded explanations that were too close to your paper. Make sure you're making things colloquial and smooth (e.g., shorter sentences). I think you had this problem toward the end. Such changes would help you engage the audience better (on the rubric).
Finally, you need to plan your interactions with the graphs much more, and then also make the graphs more self-sufficient with better titles and labels. They also look very poorly put together, so try to figure out how to integrate those better. Of all things, your portrayal of graphs in your script and ppt were the weakest part. This will help you improve your score on the rubric row of using evidence from your data to come to conclusions. Moreover, improving transitions where I marked would also help (also switching the order at times).
I'm sure you will nail your presentation, and this draft was great start!
Good work,
Yash
(384)
Hey Catherine! I hope you had a good weekend!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I would like to start off with your presentation! I just wanted to say that it looked pretty great. I really like how you used different backgrounds to captivate your audience. However, I would also like to say that your slides were a little bland with regards to information. A lot of the time, I thought that your slides were just title slides rather than slides that contained any information that would be of use to the viewer to make them understand your project better. Although you do a really good job showing the different elements of your script and the different moving parts in your research paper, I think that ultimately you are taking away from the strength of your own presentation if you do not put atleast some information on your slides. In addition, I think that some of your graphs on your presentation were a little but confusing and weird. This is just because you mislabeled/didn't label that properly to help the audience understand what you are trying to convey. I would suggest putting titles and labeling axes on all of your graphs! I also thought your final slides were a bit repetitive. Other than that I thought your presentation was great!
Moving onto your script, I thought that you did well to justify why we were talking about reality competition TV in the first place, but I feel like you assumed that the audience understood a lot of the terminology that you referred to throughout your paper. In addition, you also used really long and unnecessary explanations for a lot of things, which could help you cut down your word count and reduce the speed at which you have to speak. In addition, even though you justify looking at reality TV, you do not really explain its significance. Explaining the significance of your project would help you with rubric row 1 and 2. Another thing I am worried about with your script is how you talk about/describe your graphs. Already, your graphs are a little confusing and without labels, and your script does not help annotate them. I think you should dedicate specific time to how you personally looked at the graphs and analyzed them for trends. By engaging with your results, you will be able to find evidence for your research project and will better be able to justify/put your research in conversation with other sources from your literature review!
I can't wait to watch your presentation!
Ved Narayan
431 words