Assessing graduate screen production outputs in nineteen ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Q15 EMOTIVENESSFigure 7.39 ICC of Q15 (Emotive level of this production is…)Very nice – excellent fit.Q16 BELIEVABILITYFigure 7.40 ICC of Q16 (Believability of this production is…)Also very nice – excellent fit.Assessing graduate screen production outputs in nineteen Australian film schools106
Q17 SOCIAL RELEVANCEFigure 7.41 ICC of Q17 (Social relevance of this production is…)Tendency to under-discriminate across total score groups.Q18 PRODUCTION VALUEFigure 7.42 ICC of Q18 (Overall production values are…)Very good fit – slight over-discrimination in highest scoring groups.Assessing graduate screen production outputs in nineteen Australian film schools107
Page 1 and 2:
Assessing graduate screen productio
Page 3 and 4:
Project Team and Contact DetailsPro
Page 5 and 6:
Rasch Statistical Analysis and Cons
Page 7 and 8:
StaffNathan Mewitt, for conference
Page 9 and 10:
ContentsList of Acronyms ..........
Page 11 and 12:
List of AcronymsACTAFTRSACUADSAGMAL
Page 13 and 14:
List of TablesTable 5.1 The number
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 6.6Figure 7.1Figure 7.2Figur
Page 17 and 18:
Executive SummaryThe Assessing of S
Page 19 and 20:
PART 11. ASSESSING GRADUATE SCREEN
Page 21 and 22:
• to host a conference that will
Page 23 and 24:
ulky, unwieldy and untenable for th
Page 25 and 26:
Art scholarship: This term is used
Page 27 and 28:
describes the reasons for the art-b
Page 29 and 30:
and problematic. Problems of assess
Page 31 and 32:
assessment. Rather, the feedback pr
Page 33 and 34:
• If it is shown at a properly ac
Page 35 and 36:
from the UK as depicted in Figure 2
Page 37 and 38:
in Higher Education. Sydney, ALTC/U
Page 39 and 40:
accepted notions of scholarship.3.1
Page 41 and 42:
In contrast to the linear unfolding
Page 43 and 44:
Film editors understand the multidi
Page 45 and 46:
3.2.9 Thinking VisuallyWhen it come
Page 47 and 48:
6. The existence of this art-theory
Page 49 and 50:
Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1971 and in
Page 51 and 52:
How do different academics assess s
Page 53 and 54:
The above standard deviation scores
Page 55 and 56:
Is there something more insightful
Page 57 and 58:
Total (%) Mark and the component ma
Page 59 and 60:
Figure 4.10 Schematic representatio
Page 61 and 62:
18.1% 7.6% 59.0% 15.3%MEDIA ARTS CU
Page 63 and 64:
4.4.8 Exhibition SiteThe exhibition
Page 65 and 66:
4.5.2 Role of Conventional Scholars
Page 67 and 68:
4.5.8 Scholarship StandardsThe thre
Page 69 and 70:
The artistic “How” is often pre
Page 71 and 72: TOTAL % SCOREA-Z CONSTITUENT PARTSF
Page 73 and 74: Figure 4.20 Logical oppositions and
Page 75 and 76: ETHICSQ20THE USE OF EMOTIONS IN THI
Page 77 and 78: The above criteria components const
Page 79 and 80: 2009 and can be found at the follow
Page 81 and 82: with us on this project. Subsequent
Page 83 and 84: discerned in Table 5.1 below. It sh
Page 85 and 86: Figure 5.1 Project Assessment Schem
Page 87 and 88: Queensland Griffith 5-6 November 20
Page 89 and 90: VICTORIAN ASSESSMENT GROUP complete
Page 91 and 92: assessment scale of 0 to 100 per ce
Page 93 and 94: 6.3 Linear ScaleIt turns out that,
Page 95 and 96: 6.5 The Rasch Model Probability Cur
Page 97 and 98: Figure 6.5 Category characteristic
Page 99 and 100: 7. RASCH ANALYSIS 17.1 Rasch Analys
Page 101 and 102: 7.1.5 Location of the Threshold Est
Page 103 and 104: Figure 7.5 TC for Q24 (Exhibition s
Page 105 and 106: 7.1.6 Fit of Items to the ModelCons
Page 107 and 108: intense or difficult items to exten
Page 109 and 110: As may be seen, item Q23 (amount of
Page 111 and 112: Q2 SCRIPTFigure 7.17 ICC of Q2 (Scr
Page 113 and 114: Q2 SOUNDSCAPEFigure 7.21 ICC of Q2
Page 115 and 116: Q2 ART DESIGNFigure 7.25 ICC of Q2
Page 117 and 118: This means that highest score group
Page 119 and 120: Q8 ENHANCEMENTFigure 7.33 ICC of Q8
Page 121: Q13 DURATIONFigure 7.37 ICC of Q13
Page 125 and 126: Q22 AIMSFigure 7.45 ICC of Q22 (Thi
Page 127 and 128: 8. RASCH COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 28.1
Page 129 and 130: FactorSub-groupNumberNMeanproductio
Page 131 and 132: Production Mean location Std deviat
Page 133 and 134: Mean differences amongst Years, Dur
Page 135 and 136: 0.488: it is negative, as expected.
Page 137 and 138: percentage statistic valueCountry A
Page 139 and 140: highest.Factor Sub-group N Mean loc
Page 141 and 142: (dots) are somewhat flat compared t
Page 143 and 144: The slight under-discrimination evi
Page 145 and 146: 9.2.5 Local AssessorsThe need to un
Page 147 and 148: Figure 9.6 Graph of mean locations
Page 149 and 150: 9.4.5 State Assessment Committee Mo
Page 151 and 152: 9.4.8 Assessing Crew FunctionsHow d
Page 153 and 154: 6. Auto-ethnographic information is
Page 155 and 156: PART 410. CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATI
Page 157 and 158: Q4THE PUBLICATION VALUE OF THIS PRO
Page 159 and 160: Q12THE DURATION OF THIS PRODUCTION
Page 161 and 162: Q20THIS PRODUCTION HAS ATTAINED ITS
Page 163 and 164: 10.1.9 Conclusion 5: To Be Consiste
Page 165 and 166: - individual contribution to the pr
Page 167 and 168: The result of this project support
Page 169 and 170: scholars, who will be able to follo
Page 171 and 172: Diegetic Life Forms II Conference b
Page 173 and 174:
BIBLIOGRAPHYAndrich, David, ‘A ra
Page 175 and 176:
Kress, G. and Theo van Leeuwen, Rea
Page 177 and 178:
Rasch, G., On general laws and the
Page 179 and 180:
INFORMATION SHEETAssessing graduate
Page 181 and 182:
Consent FormAssessing graduate scre
Page 183 and 184:
1. OVERALL MARK (%)PRODUCTIONS 1-5
Page 185 and 186:
6. THE CLARITY OF THE THEME/ CENTRA
Page 187 and 188:
12. THE INTELLECTUAL LEVEL OF THIS
Page 189 and 190:
18. OVERALL PRODUCTION VALUES ARE:
Page 191:
24. YOUR RECOMMENDED EXHIBITION SIT
show all

Assessing graduate screen production outputs in nineteen ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?