User talk:Kjatczak/sandbox

Hi Kjatczak!

Great job on this article!! Your additions greatly improve the quality of the article. Your overall picture of the benefits and drawbacks gives the reader an in depth understanding of OBE. You do a great job of combating systemic bias with your coverage of various OBE programs. Also, you maintain an encyclopedia-like tone throughout!

Few areas to add to:

Benefits section

Sentence order: under comparison place the "a potential employer..." sentence at the end and keep all of the school information towards the beginning.
The "potential employer sentence can be broken up into two separate sentences.
Adding in commas throughout such as "on an individual level, ...."

Drawbacks section

under involvements you talk about improvements that can be made to the system. What are potential improvements that could be made that require parental involvement?

OBE Programs

Overall, make sure you are focusing on the OBE in each country. There are a few spots with other program elements expanded upon.
add wikipedia links for specific countries like European Qualifications Framework.
Also, there are a few links that might not be necessary such as President Obama, Bush or South Africa.
Europe: you discuss work based learning. What does it entail? Is it directly related OBE?
Europe: move the programs overall goals to the top and then focus on the OBE part.
Malaysia: is the unemployment information relevant? do you have any studies of whether the outcome based education is working?
Hong Kong: I took out the "d" where it said "and" to make it "an". Also, do you have examples of how specific universities implemented this?
Hong Kong: I am not sure if the "only time will tell" is encyclopedic.

Seriously, GREAT JOB! I had to get super nitpicky to come up with comments. Let me know if you have any questions!

--Bellerive37200 (talk) 03:14, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Editing

Hi Kjatczak! I think you have done a great job adding to this article! I will try to add to the constructive suggestions made above!

Intro

I like how the into section offers a worldwide perspective offering examples from various areas of the globe, while managing to keep the section brief and provide a broad overview. However, I think it is indicative of some things to watch for throughout the article, such as grammar (there seemed to be some run-on sentences in some places), as well as clarifying what levels of education you are referring to. I think you could be more specific about this, or if you want to keep it more generalized, maybe you could mention the levels at the beginning to indicate they are all included.
I like the image and the fact that it is from the global south and and relevant since you mention South Africa in the into. I was wondering if you could find out how to make it bigger possibly or even add another one if you really wanted to enhance the page.

Differences with traditional education methods

You mentioned the economy at the very beginning of this section, and I was wondering if you could explain its relevance more.
You talked about how the traditional system's goal "was" to... and I feel as though this does not need to be past-tense because it still exists and hasn't changed.
I felt like the 2 sentences about offering an environment to learn but not learning and having an opportunity to learn were confusing and could be made clearer.

OBE programs

I would recommend alphabetizing this section so that it is not random and no one can say it favors some areas over others.
The statement under Australia about how critics say the method should work but then it doesn't seems confusing to me since aren't they critics of OBE?
Also in Australia, you mention that they have shifted "towards a focus on deep learning, or learning essential content." Is this something different from traditional education and another new form then?
You mentioned competency, vocational, and work-based learning in the South Africa and EU sections, and I was wondering if there was anything to link these to for people to learn more about them.
I feel as though it might not be encyclopedic to use the phrase "should be" in the EU section.
As mentioned by your other editor, I was not too sure about the "only time will tell" phrase in the Hong Kong section.

General

I thought you had appropriate Wikilinks throughout to help readers understand the material. I also thought you had a strong organization to the article. One thing I thought of that it left me questioning a little bit was the origins of this system, as far as how it got started and when it was first implemented. Overall, I think you did very well! RunIowa (talk) 01:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]