Reply to Q4: The Research section was done by me (Rasheda), it was uploaded on the blog, during the half term and did not go on the blog since, other section on question 2 and 3 went missing on my part even though it was uploaded however, it was pointed out by Olympia so I had to re-uploaded my part of the evaluation again.
OK. thanks for clarifying this- I assume it is all there now and displaying correctly- I will check now.
OK. thanks for clarifying this- I assume it is all there now and displaying correctly- I will check now.
Q3: there were some serious problems with clarity of language here- some incorrect ways of phrasing which you should avoid, such as:
" in the correspondence' this is wrong, please say 'the you tube statistics'
"show and communicate to us' no- re-phase and un-complicate this please.
" male 13-17 year old males'
this section needs to be thoroughly proof read and corrected.
This has been corrected now.
Q2: very good work- well done.
Q1: very good, until the paragraph which begins... " Another convention that was also noticed in majority of teaser trailers was that..." this paragraph demonstrates poor language skills, so needs re-wording.
The sections on the magazine and poster were good- no corrections needed. well done.
Also corrected.
Finally, I need to know who wrote which parts of the evaluation, so can one of you speak to me about this?
Should we write our names underneath each part? or?
you can put your name or names in the blog title or next to the sub-heading (such as planning', or 'production'. this is probably the clearest way of ensuring that I can assign marks fairly.
I have looked at the corrections you have made, and I'm happy with the overall standard now. well done!
