Hello David,
I wasn’t able to find a “522 Feedback” category under Forums as indicated in the A4 information, but I hope this will work as I found a spot under “Categories – Non-Forum”.
Some thoughts on what could be improved:
- I think the new venture cannot be sufficiently developed in a course where much of the time is spent learning how to examine and promote a venture. An eight minute presentation to investors is not, in my opinion, realistic. So what then is the point? The elevator pitch is helpful because it concentrates the mind on the essentials of the idea. My thought is that perhaps focusing on unpacking and then repacking portions of a current offering or two over the course of the three assignments would get the learning done, and leave any future developments up to the students when they have time to fully develop a venture. I think this may particularly be the case as this site is public and ripe for stealing students’ underdeveloped ideas.
- I suppose you regularly re-write the information on the site. I think that is important as it is confusing to find where important information is. I believe the rubrics in particular have to be better developed. For example, the rubric for participation seems quite utopian in what it asks for. What constitutes a middle ground or poor performance could be spelled out.
- A central place for questions pertaining to the assignments and your responses would assist in providing guidance. Sometimes one student asks a great question that perhaps doesn’t occur to others and being able to see that would be great. It would also avoid you having to answer the same question repeatedly.
- If the responsiveness of the site cannot be improved, it might be best just to keep it within UBC. I know the idea of this being a public resource is a core element to your initial vision, but as someone who comes to this course with little appreciation of education technology I have to say that while the site demonstrates real effort on the students’ part and at times very impressive skills and research, the limited nature of the course does not really produce something that I would expect anyone would responsibly rely on. These are generally first efforts and should be appreciated as such, but the course just doesn’t allow for the kind of detail you’d expect to see in a real world pitch put together as full-time work.
- Lastly, I think you have to be more present in the course and provide ongoing feedback in either discussions or general comments. Your experience in the area seems to have no part in the course other than in drafting the initial course materials.
I hope some of this is helpful. These are only my thoughts and not intended as any kind of criticism, as I’m sure you appreciate.
Thanks for your efforts on this interesting course.