Difference between revisions of "Project"
From Valuescience
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
'''Critieria''' | '''Critieria''' | ||
# Proposal, draft(s), and final project delivered on or before due dates | # Proposal, draft(s), and final project delivered on or before due dates | ||
| − | # Embodies key elements of valuescience argument | + | # Embodies key elements of valuescience argument: define science, value, valuescience; value important because we base action upon, and justify action with it; reliable means to discern value essential to live, die well; valuescience sound means to address full spectrum of human concerns in integrated, sound way |
| − | define science, value, valuescience | + | # Identifies and applies to specific issues: example(s) drawn from project creators' lives |
| − | value important because we base action upon, and justify action with it | + | # Describes how project initiator(s) benefitted by practicing valuescience: changes in ideas; changes in action |
| − | reliable means to discern value essential to live, die well | + | # Tailored to audience: size, age, relation to project creators, education, socioeconomic status, etc. (as appropriate) |
| − | # Identifies and applies to specific issues | + | # Elicits evidence of learning by audience: understanding (evidence); action (evidence) |
| − | example(s) drawn from project creators' lives | + | |
| − | # Describes how project initiator(s) benefitted by practicing valuescience | + | |
| − | changes in ideas | + | |
| − | changes in action | + | |
| − | # Tailored to audience | + | |
| − | # Elicits evidence of learning by audience | + | |
| − | understanding (evidence) | + | |
| − | action (evidence) | + | |
# Can be used again by authors or others (state how) | # Can be used again by authors or others (state how) | ||
'''Grading''' | '''Grading''' | ||
# Evidence of effort | # Evidence of effort | ||
| − | # Quality of output as vehicle for communication | + | # Quality of output as vehicle for communication: engages audience; clear, understandable to target audience; persuasive case for valuescience practice |
| − | engages audience | + | # Amount of impact: quality of change (i.e., big or small, deep or shallow, broad or narrow); quantity of change (number of people, to date, potential) |
| − | understandable | + | |
| − | persuasive case for valuescience practice | + | |
| − | # Amount of impact | + | |
| − | quality of change (i.e., big or small, deep or shallow, broad or narrow) | + | |
| − | quantity of change (number of people, to date, potential) | + | |
Revision as of 14:41, 31 October 2016
Purposes
- Demonstrate competence to communicate benefits of valuescience
- Disseminate valuescience
Critieria
- Proposal, draft(s), and final project delivered on or before due dates
- Embodies key elements of valuescience argument: define science, value, valuescience; value important because we base action upon, and justify action with it; reliable means to discern value essential to live, die well; valuescience sound means to address full spectrum of human concerns in integrated, sound way
- Identifies and applies to specific issues: example(s) drawn from project creators' lives
- Describes how project initiator(s) benefitted by practicing valuescience: changes in ideas; changes in action
- Tailored to audience: size, age, relation to project creators, education, socioeconomic status, etc. (as appropriate)
- Elicits evidence of learning by audience: understanding (evidence); action (evidence)
- Can be used again by authors or others (state how)
Grading
- Evidence of effort
- Quality of output as vehicle for communication: engages audience; clear, understandable to target audience; persuasive case for valuescience practice
- Amount of impact: quality of change (i.e., big or small, deep or shallow, broad or narrow); quantity of change (number of people, to date, potential)
