George Welly
A01
Group 1C
providing feedback for:
2C Pre-Screening: Institutionalized Sponsored Student Programs
Group 2C highlighted the effects of institutions sponsoring student programs through various interviews. I believe the group performed well in performing a non-biased argument/objective especially since the first thing to assume is the fact that people may automatically distrust the institution immediately. Based of off the immediate responses, I believe that the employees of such programs whether it may be the former or current, displayed a trust in the university and proved that the institutions are supporting the programs. One thing I believe should be changed is the fact that an intro and a conclusion should be placed in the video so that the audience can have a clearer understanding of what is going on. Moreover, an additional brief explanation of the student program would be helpful since what went on through my mind such as “What exactly is S.A.F.E.?” Another caveat I had when watching the video is the insertion of Leslie and her argument within the video. The two interviews before Leslie made the ideal clear that the institution was helpful to the student programs, despite the fact that there are some changes going on, but Leslie’s argument in which students do not want to go against administration made me ponder on the fact that perhaps the two interviewees felt comfortable and did not wish to go against the institution that so helps the student program thrive. Overall, these issues should be fixed just by being more explicit with an intro and a closing to introduce and summarize exactly what the group intends--besides that, the group performed swell.
No comments:
Post a Comment