SE251:Session5Group8
- In the Edit view of this page, copy the Wiki markup code into the clipboard. Edit your group's peer assessment page and paste the markup into that page.
- When editing your page, provide a numeric score for each assessment criterion in the table. Numbers have the following meaning:
- Strongly disagree
- Disagree
- Neither agree nor disagree
- Agree
- Strongly agree
- Add text under each heading below the table.
| Assessment criteria | Score |
|---|---|
| The session content is relevant to the course | 5 |
| The session has been a useful aid to your own learning | 3 |
| The team presenting the session has demonstrated that they have understood what they have presented | 5 |
| You have learnt something new from the session | 4 |
Justification for the above scores
This group covered the assignment very well, and brought up a lot of the issues that were encountered. While the multi-map was interesting, most of the other discussion seemed merely a repetion of what was covered in the labs, so for most of us not much was learned. For most of the presentation, this group seemed to know what they were talking about.
One aspect of the session that was particularly good
Multi-map provided an interesting discussion topic.
One part of the session that could have been improved
Perhaps less time spent on the more tedious aspects of the assignment.
Peer assessors present
Shrikkanth Sreedharan (ssre005)
Braedon Fraser Vickers (bvic005)
David John Olsen (dols008)
Han lin (hlin079)
Sutirtha Basak (sbas046)
Jonathan James Andrew Smith (jsmi233)