Difference between revisions of "Self Evaluation"

From Biolecture.org
imported>Yunseok Han
(Created page with "<p>Self-Evaluation of Yunseok Han for 2016-1<sup>st</sup> semester Bioinformatics</p> <p>The basically used evaluation criteria for the evaluation is the 11 questions in “...")
 
imported>SungHyun Byun
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
<p>Self-Evaluation of Yunseok Han for 2016-1<sup>st</sup> semester Bioinformatics</p>
+
<p>Self-Evaluation of SungHyun Byun for 2018-2<sup>nd</sup> semester Genomics.</p>
  
−
<p>The basically used evaluation criteria for the evaluation is the 11 questions in &ldquo;SELF check points for students&rdquo;<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1]</a> as the criteria suggested by the professor who gave this course. The answer for some of the questions, &ldquo;2. Did I think a lot about the subject(such as bioinformatics)?&rdquo;, &ldquo;3. Did I think of questions out of my own logical ramifications?&rdquo;, &ldquo;5. Did I did homework voluntarily with fun? &ldquo;, &ldquo;6. Did I develop my own ideas? &ldquo;, &ldquo;7. Did I contribute to the class and our mates?&rdquo;, &ldquo;8. Did I present anything in the class?&rdquo;, and &ldquo;9. Did I make the class more exciting by active participation?&rdquo; is &lsquo;No, I didn&rsquo;t&rsquo;, since I did not in real and there is no evidence that shows I did. This result shows the answer for the first question, &ldquo;1. Do I love the subject?&rdquo;, is &lsquo;No, I do&rsquo;, since I think a lot about the subject and do actively with fun for the subject if I really love the subject. The answer for other two questions, &ldquo;4. Did I follow the instructions of the teacher?&rdquo;, &ldquo;10. Did I learn the most important aspects of the course? &ldquo;, and &ldquo;11. Is my communication in the subject field improved?&rdquo; is &lsquo;Yes&rsquo;. As an evidence of the answer for the question 4, there are my email address and summary of the given lectures in my page for this course<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">[2]</a>. Also, the lecture summary is an evidence for the question 11, since that means I got to know little part of that field although it just a word for the subject field. There is no reliable exact evidence that shows the answer is true, but I learned that scientists must have their own scientific philosophy. The result for the basically used criteria is seven &lsquo;No&rsquo; and four &lsquo;Yes&rsquo; which means I did not well enough to have a good grade for the course and the questions answered &lsquo;No&rsquo; indicates that I did lower performance for this course. However, I know basic knowledge as a person who took this course as the questions answered &lsquo;Yes&rsquo; indicates, which means that I got the information of bioinformatics even though I just listened and noted shortly only about the given lecture and the important aspect to think as a scientist. Therefore, the result of the self-evaluation is B0.</p>
+
<p><strong>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Abstract</strong></p>
  
−
<div>&nbsp;
+
<p>SungHyun Byun took2018-2<sup>nd</sup> semester Genomics class. It is quite different class compared to other biology classes, because it is based on SELF study and discuss sessions. And students required to evaluate themselves based on scientific results and criteria. Based on following criteria, SungHyun&#39;s final grade will be B+</p>
−
<hr />
 
−
<div id="ftn1">
 
−
<p><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title="">[1]</a> <a href="http://biolecture.org/index.php/SELF_check_points_for_students">http://biolecture.org/index.php/SELF_check_points_for_students</a> Jong Bhak</p>
 
−
</div>
 
  
−
<div id="ftn2">
+
<p><strong>2.&nbsp; Grading Policy</strong></p>
−
<p><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title="">[2]</a> http://biolecture.org/index.php/Yunseok_Han</p>
+
 
−
</div>
+
<p>The basically used evaluation criteria for the evaluation is like following :</p>
−
</div>
+
 
 +
<p>[[ Attendance : 20%</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>Participation : 20%</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>Report and Essays : 60% ]]</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>And this is my opinion for each factors</p>
 +
 
 +
<p><strong>-1. Attendance (18/20)</strong></p>
 +
 
 +
<p>: I absent total two classes except the first week of the class, which is not mandatory according to UNIST attendance policy. Therefore, I deduct 2 points, and 10 points is the basic marks.&nbsp;</p>
 +
 
 +
<p><strong>-2. Participation (13/20)</strong></p>
 +
 
 +
<p>: The professor asked several questions in the class, and I answered several times. And I gave a comment to other students&#39; questions sometimes. However, I didn&#39;t ask questions or discuss the topic actively, so I can&#39;t give good points on the participation parts.&nbsp;</p>
 +
 
 +
<p><strong>-3. Report and Essays (45/60)</strong></p>
 +
 
 +
<p>: I prepared 2 presentation file related with genomics and 1 poster contents which is not directly related with genomics. I planned to gave a presentation in the class in front of the students and professor, but unfortunately I can&#39;t. I want to discuss the topics that I select from the article. That points is the key black mark for grading. If I gave a presentation in the class about the topic, it can get good grades, whether the contents good or not, because the willingness to share the idea as a student who study science is very important. In that respect, I think I have failed part of it. In conclusion, I gave only 45 points in report and essays section.&nbsp;</p>
 +
 
 +
<p><strong>Total : (76/100)</strong></p>
 +
 
 +
<p>[[ A+ : 95 - 100</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>A0 : 90 - 95</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>A- : 80 - 90</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>B+ : 75- 80</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>B0 : 70 - 75</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>B- : 60 - 70</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>C+ : 50 -60</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>C0 : 40 - 50</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>C- : 30 - 40</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>D+&nbsp;: 20 - 30</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>D0 : 10 - 20</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>D- : 0 - 10 ]]</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>Based on the critetia, I evalate myself as grade B+.</p>

Latest revision as of 02:43, 7 December 2018

Self-Evaluation of SungHyun Byun for 2018-2nd semester Genomics.

1.   Abstract

SungHyun Byun took2018-2nd semester Genomics class. It is quite different class compared to other biology classes, because it is based on SELF study and discuss sessions. And students required to evaluate themselves based on scientific results and criteria. Based on following criteria, SungHyun's final grade will be B+

2.  Grading Policy

The basically used evaluation criteria for the evaluation is like following :

[[ Attendance : 20%

Participation : 20%

Report and Essays : 60% ]]

And this is my opinion for each factors

-1. Attendance (18/20)

: I absent total two classes except the first week of the class, which is not mandatory according to UNIST attendance policy. Therefore, I deduct 2 points, and 10 points is the basic marks. 

-2. Participation (13/20)

: The professor asked several questions in the class, and I answered several times. And I gave a comment to other students' questions sometimes. However, I didn't ask questions or discuss the topic actively, so I can't give good points on the participation parts. 

-3. Report and Essays (45/60)

: I prepared 2 presentation file related with genomics and 1 poster contents which is not directly related with genomics. I planned to gave a presentation in the class in front of the students and professor, but unfortunately I can't. I want to discuss the topics that I select from the article. That points is the key black mark for grading. If I gave a presentation in the class about the topic, it can get good grades, whether the contents good or not, because the willingness to share the idea as a student who study science is very important. In that respect, I think I have failed part of it. In conclusion, I gave only 45 points in report and essays section. 

Total : (76/100)

[[ A+ : 95 - 100

A0 : 90 - 95

A- : 80 - 90

B+ : 75- 80

B0 : 70 - 75

B- : 60 - 70

C+ : 50 -60

C0 : 40 - 50

C- : 30 - 40

D+ : 20 - 30

D0 : 10 - 20

D- : 0 - 10 ]]

Based on the critetia, I evalate myself as grade B+.

Retrieved from "https://Biolecture.org/index.php?title=Self_Evaluation&oldid=9819"