ВУЗ:
Составители:
Рубрика:
14
Abstract 2
Computer Assisted Learning (CAL) is an area which is rapidly expanding amongst
Higher Education institutions as the power of available hardware rises facilitating new and
innovative HE teaching and learning environments. The University Institute of recently
allocated funds to stimulate a learning technology program which was generally intended
to impinge on all 4 Faculties within the institution. Each faculty was asked to bring
forward, software development schemes and bids for equipment and other, necessary
resources such as human resources, consumables, etc. The purpose of this paper is to
describe the experience of a team of academics in the Department of French, School of
Modern Languages within the Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Studies at the
University Institute of in the development of a Computer-assisted learning software
program. Funding was made available from a central source to develop and implement a
software program to assist French language learners to acquire vocabulary in "an
innovative and measurably effective manner". The software was implemented and tested
on a cohort of level 2 students who had, in general, studied French for 8 years, and staff
and students were consulted with regards to their reactions.
Comments on Abstract 2
Half the abstract is taken up with unnecessary background information about the
funding. The full title of the department is unnecessary detail. All this is very wordy, and
doesn't relate to what the paper is about. The "purpose" statement could be rephrased:
"This paper describes the evaluation of a piece of software designed to assist the
acquisition of French vocabulary with a group of level 2 students". There needs to be more
description of the methodology – how many students? How was the testing done? What,
precisely, was evaluated? What were the findings, and what are the implications of the
findings? The language used is vague – what is meant by "other, necessary resources such
as human resources, consumables, etc.", what was "demonstrably efficient" about the style
of learning? What was the nature of the consultation with staff and students? There are
also a number of grammatical errors, e.g. commas in the wrong places (substantiate,
software development). "Mock posh" language is used, i.e. the reference to academics
(don't need to use this word unless differentiating from administrators). In short, the
abstract contains much information which is of only marginal importance, and merely
repeats, almost word for word, what is in the body text; the syntax and punctuation is
often defective, verbose and trying too hard to write in an "academic" manner. True of
much of the paper.
Abstract 3
Reviews the manufacturing and processing challenges involved in the later stages of
the manufacture of large area full frontal wire mesh coating and describes some of the
techniques employed by CSW Packaging Solutions.
Comments on Abstract 3
This abstract is far too short and does not provide enough information about the
paper. It describes the purpose of the paper and its main subject but gives us nothing on
what was done (method) or on results. Specifically, it could have listed the "techniques"
mentioned, provided some of the key criticisms and then gone on to implications for
practice, i.e. recommendations.
