ملتقى طلاب وطالبات جامعة الملك فيصل,جامعة الدمام - اسئلة اختبارات مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

- E8 (https://vb.ckfu.org/forumdisplay.php?f=395)

- - [ اسئلة اختبارات ] : مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات (https://vb.ckfu.org/showthread.php?t=587910)

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة zanan (المشاركة 11040158)

_

^

Thank a lot

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة m7md.khamis (المشاركة 11041497)

في اسئلة العام المصورة الاجابة محلولة ب judgment وش الراي !!!

This is where 'checklists' come in. These are written records of the sort of 'breakdowns' just described.

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة دحوم الشرقية (المشاركة 11039575)

صباح الخير

50- When teacher subjectively judges an application this is called.
a) Empirical judgment
b) Experimental judgment
c) Process judgment
d) Expert judgment

الحل الصحيح a او d حصلت اختلاف في جواب هالسؤال

d
_________

Evaluation can be done purely individually, subjectively, globally and introspectively. I.e. the teacher simply

looks through the material, or in our case tries out the program (or just reads the blurb about it in a catalogue),

and comes to an overall intuitive judgment about whether it would suit their class or what class it would suit.

When teachers evaluate in this way it may help in part to try to place themselves in the role of some type of

learner using the material. When trying out a CALL program it is especially useful often to make deliberate

mistakes to see how the program responds - e.g. give wrong answers and press the wrong keys etc.

This could be described as the global 'expert judgment' method of evaluation. The evaluator introspects and

somehow accesses an unanalysed notion of some users of the software, an unanalysed impression of the

software, and matches the two using often inexplicit criteria

سؤال 28 ... نفس المعنى

والي عنده اعتراض يثبت بالدليل .. :mad:

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة m7md.khamis (المشاركة 11041497)

في اسئلة العام المصورة الاجابة محلولة ب judgment وش الراي !!!

خذ العلم يالغالي
الاجابة Checklist

The judgmental evaluation

(A2) However, to regard evaluation as in any way systematic it is necessary at the very least to 'unpack' this armchair approach a bit. The teacher
(or anyone else) acting alone as evaluator should break down the 'overall' or global judgment into parts. This means (a) looking carefully at
different aspects of the materials separately and (b) thinking of all the relevant different aspects of the learning situation, learners, potential
use etc. etc. and (c) judging aspects of (a) in respect of (b), broken down into points. This last in part resembles the process of assessing
'content validity', often talked about in language testing: one can check on an achievement test by analysing the aspects of language tested
and comparing them with what the syllabus or the teaching course before the test covered. Another general principle of language testing also
applies here: it is known that tests with more items are more reliable than shorter ones, and a set of agree/disagree items circling round some
issue is more reliable than a single one targeting it. So here, the summary of a whole series of introspective judgments of specific aspects is
more reliable than one global one.
This is where 'checklists' come in. These are written records of the sort of 'breakdowns' just described. They may be made by the
teacher/evaluator, or adopted from someone else. They at least provide a way of ensuring that important aspects do not get forgotten and that
there is some consistency if the same person evaluates several things. However, the evaluation still remains individual, introspective and
maybe pretty subjective. Checklists generally take the form of sets of headings to be considered or sets of questions to ask oneself. They may
or may not include a system for weighting different elements, or adding up a total score in some way. Two I know of for CALL are the list of
points in Jones and Fortescue, and a more reasoned and systematic framework by Odell (in Leech and Candlin). Recently Chapelle has a set
of 6 points formed from an SLA research perspective (2001 p54ff). John Roberts has a much bigger collection of such checklist used in general
materials evaluation.
However, many published checklists strike one as a rather miscellaneous collection of points or questions, not clearly distinguishing between (a)
and (b) and (c) above, and not obviously exhausting the types of point that should be considered, or organising them in a motivated way.
For teachers, often the checklist-based evaluation just described is the only one feasible, since it is the one that can be done quickly and easily and
before the materials have been extensively used or even bought. It can be enhanced by incorporating the views, arrived at in a similar way
perhaps, of more than one person. I.e. the teacher can get other teachers to do the same sort of evaluation, or read reviews in journals etc.
This makes it less individual, though still introspective and rather subjective.

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة منصور القحطاني (المشاركة 11041765)

this is where 'checklists' come in. These are written records of the sort of 'breakdowns' just described.

كل الشكر لك اخوي منصور

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة سحــ الليل ــاب (المشاركة 11041777)

d
_________

evaluation can be done purely individually, subjectively, globally and introspectively. I.e. The teacher simply

looks through the material, or in our case tries out the program (or just reads the blurb about it in a catalogue),

and comes to an overall intuitive judgment about whether it would suit their class or what class it would suit.

when teachers evaluate in this way it may help in part to try to place themselves in the role of some type of

learner using the material. When trying out a call program it is especially useful often to make deliberate

mistakes to see how the program responds - e.g. Give wrong answers and press the wrong keys etc.

this could be described as the global 'expert judgment' method of evaluation. The evaluator introspects and

somehow accesses an unanalysed notion of some users of the software, an unanalysed impression of the

software, and matches the two using often inexplicit criteria

سؤال 28 ... نفس المعنى

والي عنده اعتراض يثبت بالدليل .. :mad:

:(107):

هنا نحتاج الى الحاسة السادسة مثل ماقال ضاري

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة S T O P (المشاركة 11041797)

خذ العلم يالغالي

الاجابة Checklist

The judgmental evaluation

(A2) However, to regard evaluation as in any way systematic it is necessary at the very least to 'unpack' this armchair approach a bit. The teacher
(or anyone else) acting alone as evaluator should break down the 'overall' or global judgment into parts. This means (a) looking carefully at
different aspects of the materials separately and (b) thinking of all the relevant different aspects of the learning situation, learners, potential
use etc. etc. and (c) judging aspects of (a) in respect of (b), broken down into points. This last in part resembles the process of assessing
'content validity', often talked about in language testing: one can check on an achievement test by analysing the aspects of language tested
and comparing them with what the syllabus or the teaching course before the test covered. Another general principle of language testing also
applies here: it is known that tests with more items are more reliable than shorter ones, and a set of agree/disagree items circling round some
issue is more reliable than a single one targeting it. So here, the summary of a whole series of introspective judgments of specific aspects is
more reliable than one global one.
This is where 'checklists' come in. These are written records of the sort of 'breakdowns' just described. They may be made by the
teacher/evaluator, or adopted from someone else. They at least provide a way of ensuring that important aspects do not get forgotten and that
there is some consistency if the same person evaluates several things. However, the evaluation still remains individual, introspective and
maybe pretty subjective. Checklists generally take the form of sets of headings to be considered or sets of questions to ask oneself. They may
or may not include a system for weighting different elements, or adding up a total score in some way. Two I know of for CALL are the list of
points in Jones and Fortescue, and a more reasoned and systematic framework by Odell (in Leech and Candlin). Recently Chapelle has a set
of 6 points formed from an SLA research perspective (2001 p54ff). John Roberts has a much bigger collection of such checklist used in general
materials evaluation.
However, many published checklists strike one as a rather miscellaneous collection of points or questions, not clearly distinguishing between (a)
and (b) and (c) above, and not obviously exhausting the types of point that should be considered, or organising them in a motivated way.
For teachers, often the checklist-based evaluation just described is the only one feasible, since it is the one that can be done quickly and easily and
before the materials have been extensively used or even bought. It can be enhanced by incorporating the views, arrived at in a similar way
perhaps, of more than one person. I.e. the teacher can get other teachers to do the same sort of evaluation, or read reviews in journals etc.

This makes it less individual, though still introspective and rather subjective.

بارك الله فيك اخي s t o p وبيض الله وجهك وفالك الفل مارك:(204):

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

السؤال هذا تكرر في اختبارات الآي تي خلال السمسترات الماضية

If you using the checklist approach, some key things that you should not forget are ……
a) To be explicit about where the list come from.
b) To be explicit about which exiting list is being uses/adapted.
c) To have as many detailed subsections as possible.
d) All the above.

:rose:

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

يا شباب ركزوا في الأسئلة ... اذا ما جابها كوبي بيست فيسوي مثل اختبار طرق البحث

نفس أسئلة المستوى الماضي بس اغلبها شال كلمة او فقرة من السؤال وحطها اجابه او نفس الاجابه بس يمخولك بكلمه معها شبيهه في الاسبلنق

الأخ الي يقول عملت الكوز 28 مره ؟

لو جاب هالسؤال

When all of the answers are correct ,the software displays…..message in red at the top of the exercise.

a) Incorrect answers

b) A well done

c) A poorly done

d) A wrong answer

وفوفو لعب فيه هيك :

When all of the answers are correct ,the software displays( a well done ) message in ……

a) red at the center of the exercise.

b) red at the top of the exercise.

c) rid at the top of the exercise.

d) green at the corner of the exercise.

شو كنت بتعمل لو ما ركزت زين ...

المهم ... الي يعرف احد يبي مدرس علوم ابداعيه ليلية رقمي بحطه في الكنترول .. :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

رد: مذاكرة جماعية لمادة اللغة وتقنية المعلومات

اقتباس:

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة m7md.khamis (المشاركة 11041881)

بارك الله فيك اخي s t o p وبيض الله وجهك وفالك الفل مارك:(204):

من بؤك لباب السماء
جميعاً يارب

الله يستر من مدخل الادب الامريكي

هذا وهو مدخل \: