Pitch Evaluation - Revision history

Marcin: /* Specifics of Content */

2018-08-08T12:29:42Z

Specifics of Content

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:29, 8 August 2018
Line 3:		Line 3:
	=Specifics of Content=		=Specifics of Content=
	*Did the Fellow present the overarching OSE narrative and mission successfully?		*Did the Fellow present the overarching OSE narrative and mission successfully?
	*Were the 7 tools mentioned, and the function of each?		*Were the 6 tools mentioned, and the function of each?
	*Did it become clear what each machine is capable of and what are its limits?		*Did it become clear what each machine is capable of and what are its limits?
	*Were the 3 main activities of Fellows clear?		*Were the 3 main activities of Fellows clear?

Marcin at 12:29, 8 August 2018

2018-08-08T12:29:18Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 same star rating as  for [[FIT XM Evaluation]]
 =General=
@@ Line 15: / Line 27: @@
 *How did the Fellow handle questions?
 *How did the Fellow handle questions that they did not know an answer to?

Marcin: /* General */

2018-07-31T03:11:18Z

General

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:11, 31 July 2018
Line 13:		Line 13:
	*Did the Fellow have good eye contact?		*Did the Fellow have good eye contact?
	*No ahs and ums?		*No ahs and ums?
			*How did the Fellow handle questions?
	*How did the Fellow handle questions that they did not know an answer to?		*How did the Fellow handle questions that they did not know an answer to?

Marcin at 03:10, 31 July 2018

2018-07-31T03:10:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:10, 31 July 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	same star rating as for [[FIT XM Evaluation]]		same star rating as for [[FIT XM Evaluation]]

	*Did the Fellow present the overarching narrative successfully?		=General=
			*Was the Fellow confident?
			*Was the Fellow Energetic?
			*Was the presentation Clear?
			*Was the Fellow Entertaining?
			*Was the Fellow clear, organized, and well-prepared? Ie, did the slides lead the presenter - or did the presenter just use the slides as ancillary?
			*How did the Fellow appear? Did they smell? Did they have clean clothes
			*Was the cadence and pace adequate?
			*Was the presentation coherent?
			*Did the presentation inspire the audience?
			*Did the Fellow have good eye contact?
			*No ahs and ums?
			*How did the Fellow handle questions that they did not know an answer to?

			=Specifics of Content=
			*Did the Fellow present the overarching OSE narrative and mission successfully?
			*Were the 7 tools mentioned, and the function of each?
			*Did it become clear what each machine is capable of and what are its limits?
			*Were the 3 main activities of Fellows clear?
			*Was the XM workshop model exlained, with 3 clear examples?
			*Was the environmental aspects emphasized: for plastic recycling, energy efficiency (fast print), and materials efficiency (way to make a frame with 0 metal waste)?
			*Were Design Jams explained?
			*Was the crowdfunded, crowd-design aspect clear - in terms of how public product development can occur starting with schools and libraries?
			*Was the Open Source Earth Catalog / Open Source Everything Store concept clear?
			*Was the history of open source clear, and why it doesn't exist today?

Marcin: Created page with "same star rating as for FIT XM Evaluation *Did the Fellow present the overarching narrative successfully?"

2018-07-31T02:45:00Z

Created page with "same star rating as for FIT XM Evaluation *Did the Fellow present the overarching narrative successfully?"

New page

same star rating as for [[FIT XM Evaluation]]

*Did the Fellow present the overarching narrative successfully?