Student+Taylor,+Adam

media type="file" key="2012-02-05_16-07-14.mp3" width="240" height="20"Welcome to your wiki page!

Determine what the audio recording feature is on your own computer, and respond to this invitation to join the class wiki by writing down what the application or software is called that you will be using to create an audio file of your commentaries. If you do not have such capability on your personal or home computer, please see me to arrange to use a school computer for creating audio recordings of your commentaries.

You will upload these audio files to your personal wiki page, and then you will review the oral commentaries of peers and offer feedback via the discussion feature.

Instructions on uploading files are forthcoming.

Hi Mrs. G. The application/software l.fasljflskjfglasjgflsjfl Hi Mrs. G. The Application/software I will be using is not fasljflskjfglasjgflsjfl. (Very good Application though) I will be using PMC recorder from my Android phone. media type="file" key="2012-01-08_14-58-42.wav" width="300" height="50" That was a test.

media type="file" key="Essays of EB White.mp3" width="240" height="20"

-Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Adam brought up the context but did not mention the purpose of the passage. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary?

He does not mention how he would organize the commentary. Nor is there any discernible organization.

-What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?

Can you explain what your organizational system was for this commentary? What do you think the purpose of the essay was?

-What did the speaker do well?

He incorporated quotes to further his arguments.

-What would you suggest for improvement?

The organization needs to be improved or clarified.

-What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.)

he forgot to address the purpose of the passage.

-What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? knowledge and understanding 4 interpretation 7 presentation 7 use of language 4 22/30 Michael Dickey

Here is my Commentary on Hamlet Act 3 Scene 3

media type="file" key="2012-01-29_17-34-31.mp3" width="240" height="20"

Here is my commentary on Much Ado About Nothing Act 2 Scene 3

media type="file" key="2012-02-05_16-07-14.mp3" width="240" height="20"

**Much Ado Review by Kelly Knupp:**
-Did the speaker address context? Purpose?

Adam, your introduction where you would state the context of the passage was a little unclear. While you did a pretty good job of conveying what the passage itself was about, there was little explanation of context within the play as a whole.

-Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary?

You said that you would use the guiding questions we were given to order your commentary, but since I didn't have that in front of me at the time, it was a little confusing. Next time try to be specific and literally tell the listener what order you're going to go in. For example, "I will progress through the passage chronologically, explaining how literary devices give rise to the overall meaning of the passage." Something along those lines.

-What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ASSESSOR?

-What did the speaker do well?

You made a good number of references to the text and your explanation of a soliloquy was good. You had good ideas.

-What would you suggest for improvement?

In a few instances, you had problems with pronouns. That is, sometimes the word “he” or “she” was overused and it wasn’t clear just who “he” or “she” was. Next time try to reference the character by name if possible. Also, usually in writing and oration about a book/play/past event (literature), the past tense is used. For example, instead of saying, “Benedick is confused,” say “Benedick was confused.” I have problems with this myself. Additionally, expand on the explanation of context at the beginning of the commentary.

-What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.)

The conclusion was a little short. However, it did an okay job of reiterating some of the main themes in the passage. You also forgot to say who wrote the play.

-What would you score them based on the IB Rubric?

A: Knowledge and Understanding of Extract or Work(s) B: Interpretation and Personal Response C: Presentation D: Use of Language

A: 2 B: 4 C: 4 D: 3

-Did the speaker address context? Purpose? My Introduction was ok. I didn't really say what's going on in the extract but rather whats happening in the whole play.
 * SCORE: 13/30**

-Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? Yes but it wasnt a proper way to address the commentary. I said that I will go along the lines of the guiding questions -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ASSESSOR? Where does it show that shakespeare has benedick acting fake?

-What did the speaker do well? I always had ideas about the excerpt and the use of being fake was good too.

-What would you suggest for improvement? I didn't really have enough meat for a commentary so I should take better pre commentary notes. -What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.) I didn't really have much of a conclusion and I kept saying he and she instead of the actual character names

-What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? A: Knowledge and Understanding of Extract or Work(s) B: Interpretation and Personal Response C: Presentation D: Use of Language A: 1 B: 3 C: 5 D: 1 10/30