Report_Card September
•
0 likes•85 views
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey given to 94 participants following a class. It shows average ratings and benchmark comparisons for questions related to the instructor and the overall learning experience. Ratings for the instructor and most question categories exceeded the internal benchmark. The report provides recommendations to identify areas below benchmarks and use the detailed data to guide instructor and course improvements.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Download to read offline
![Report Card
Run By: Carrie Williams (cwilliamsaz15) MTM Tool: Report Card
Date Run: Oct 1, 2015 From Saved Query: No
MTM Benchmark Only my company
Report Card a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question
All Question
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.37
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.13
Instructor
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.37
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.37
Report Card Instructor a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question
Instructor
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.37
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.37
Instructor overall
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.36
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.36
Participants were encouraged to take part in class discussions.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=93] 8.47
MTM Benchmark [n=93] 8.47
The instructor provided realworld experiences and examples.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=93] 8.28
MTM Benchmark [n=93] 8.28
The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.43
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.43
The instructor''s presentation skills were adequate.
|5 |6 |7 |8 |9
Average [n=94] 8.30
MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.30
Report Recommendations
Interpreting the Report
Below are tips to help you understand the information in the report. For additional information, please click the Help tab above the
report.
Shows the overall scores by question category and questions selected for training provided by the organization.
Report allows you to compare the organization's performance against internal or external benchmarks (represented by a orange
bar).
Report may be customized using filters for comparison of specific attributes such as courseware, question category, etc.
Recommended Actions
Below are recommended next steps to take after reviewing the information in this report. Additionally, you'll find links to
automatically run complementary reports for drillingdown further into the data or analyzing the information in another way.
Determine which question categories fall below the benchmark and drill down by utilizing the breakout by question or by using the
reports below to determine what may be causing the score to determine what corrective action to take. For example, if job impact
is low for specific courses, perhaps the right people aren't attending the training or the material delivered is not intended to impact
performance.
Filtering the report to one instructor or one set of courses will allow the report to be used in performance reviews. Because the
questions are also displayed, the potential areas where instructors or courses perform high or low can be identified and a
- 1 / 2 -](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/80db0572-cb71-418b-bcf6-4783e94fa559-151003003214-lva1-app6891/85/Report_Card-September-1-320.jpg)
Recommended
Report_Card November 2015
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an organization. It shows average scores out of 9 for different survey questions and categories, such as the instructor, and compares the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The scores were generally high, averaging around 8.4 out of 9, which met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends analyzing categories that score below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement and using the detailed feedback to enhance learning effectiveness.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows average scores for an instructor training provided to 49 participants, comparing the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The instructor received high scores above the benchmarks in encouraging participation, providing real-world examples, knowledge of the subject, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card October 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from student surveys for a training provided by the company. It shows average ratings for questions and categories like the instructor, compared to the company's internal benchmark. Most categories received an average rating of 8.3-8.5 out of 9, meeting or exceeding the benchmark. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve training quality and better meet learning goals.
Report_Card June 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data by survey question category and individual questions for a training provided by the organization. It shows the average scores for each category and question compared to an internal benchmark. Scores for the instructor category and overall instructor rating were slightly higher than the benchmark. The report recommends analyzing categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular report distribution and reviewing other related reports for further analysis.
Report_Card March 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average ratings for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. Ratings for the organization were above the benchmark averages for instructor knowledge, presentation skills, encouragement of discussion, and use of real-world examples. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card July 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends identifying any question categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular distribution of the report to communicate results.
Report_Card 945
This report card summarizes learning performance data from surveys on various questions about an instructor and course. It shows the average ratings for different questions, categories, and an overall instructor rating, and compares the results to an internal benchmark. The ratings were generally high, averaging around 8.4-8.5 on a 9-point scale, but some questions like real-world examples and instructor presentation skills were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing questions that scored lower to identify areas for improvement and using the report for instructor reviews and development.
Report_Card July to November
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on categories like instructor, course content, and specific questions. It shows the average ratings for a company compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. The report finds the company performed equal to or slightly above the benchmarks on instructor ratings and recommends analyzing metrics below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, like using lower-rated questions to guide instructor development plans.
Recommended
Report_Card November 2015
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an organization. It shows average scores out of 9 for different survey questions and categories, such as the instructor, and compares the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The scores were generally high, averaging around 8.4 out of 9, which met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends analyzing categories that score below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement and using the detailed feedback to enhance learning effectiveness.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows average scores for an instructor training provided to 49 participants, comparing the scores to the organization's internal benchmarks. The instructor received high scores above the benchmarks in encouraging participation, providing real-world examples, knowledge of the subject, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card October 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from student surveys for a training provided by the company. It shows average ratings for questions and categories like the instructor, compared to the company's internal benchmark. Most categories received an average rating of 8.3-8.5 out of 9, meeting or exceeding the benchmark. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve training quality and better meet learning goals.
Report_Card June 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data by survey question category and individual questions for a training provided by the organization. It shows the average scores for each category and question compared to an internal benchmark. Scores for the instructor category and overall instructor rating were slightly higher than the benchmark. The report recommends analyzing categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular report distribution and reviewing other related reports for further analysis.
Report_Card March 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average ratings for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. Ratings for the organization were above the benchmark averages for instructor knowledge, presentation skills, encouragement of discussion, and use of real-world examples. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card July 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks. The report recommends identifying any question categories below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans. It also suggests scheduling regular distribution of the report to communicate results.
Report_Card 945
This report card summarizes learning performance data from surveys on various questions about an instructor and course. It shows the average ratings for different questions, categories, and an overall instructor rating, and compares the results to an internal benchmark. The ratings were generally high, averaging around 8.4-8.5 on a 9-point scale, but some questions like real-world examples and instructor presentation skills were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing questions that scored lower to identify areas for improvement and using the report for instructor reviews and development.
Report_Card July to November
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on categories like instructor, course content, and specific questions. It shows the average ratings for a company compared to its internal benchmarks across various metrics. The report finds the company performed equal to or slightly above the benchmarks on instructor ratings and recommends analyzing metrics below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, like using lower-rated questions to guide instructor development plans.
Report_Card August 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys given after training sessions. It provides average scores for questions about the instructor and instructor performance, comparing the organization's scores to its own internal benchmarks. Scores for the organization were consistently higher than the benchmarks. The report recommends determining which question categories scored below benchmarks, using additional reports to identify potential causes, and scheduling regular report distribution to instructors and course managers for development and improvement purposes.
Report_Card1
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average scores for questions in different categories, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, averaging around 8.3 out of 9, but some categories like real-world examples were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing categories below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, and using filters to guide instructor or course reviews and development plans.
Report_Card December 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks on questions about encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card 9 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and course compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 9, with 9 being the highest. Across all questions, the average rating was 8.33 compared to the benchmark of 8.13. For questions specific to the instructor, the average rating was 8.33, matching the internal benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories that scored below benchmarks and using additional reports to determine how to improve weak areas.
1000 report
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and categories like class discussions and real-world examples, all of which were 8.4 or higher on a 9-point scale. The instructor ratings matched the internal benchmark averages. The report recommends determining which categories, if any, fall below benchmarks and using filters to identify strengths or areas for improvement by individual instructors or courses.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average scores out of 9 for different question categories and individual questions, comparing results to an internal benchmark. Scores were above the benchmark for all categories. Recommendations include identifying lower scoring categories and drilling down to determine how to improve weak areas, using filters to analyze specific instructors or courses, and regularly sharing the report to communicate results.
Report_Card May 2016
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an instructor-led training. It shows average scores for questions about the instructor and course content, comparing the organization's results to its internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, ranging from 8.57 to 8.69 out of 9. The report recommends identifying areas scoring below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card 1st Qtr 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for questions grouped by category, and compares the ratings to an internal benchmark. Ratings for the instructor category and individual questions about the instructor's knowledge, examples provided, and presentation skills were at or above the benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July 2015 to January 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's results to its own benchmark. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmark across all questions. The report recommends identifying areas below the benchmark to determine how to improve and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July to December 2015
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows the average scores for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across several metrics related to instructors. The instructor received high marks above the benchmarks in areas like knowledge, presentation skills, and providing real-world examples. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks and using filters to guide performance reviews and course redesigns.
Randomized Assignment Generator for Brightspace
The presentation introduces a randomized assignment generator tool developed by Virtual High School (VHS) to address issues of academic integrity as student enrollment increased. The generator utilizes the randomized folders feature in the quizzing tool to create unique assignments for each student by drawing from a bank of questions. The presentation provides instructions on setting up assessments using the generator by configuring properties, restrictions, assessments, submission views, and table of contents. It was found to initially reduce instances of academic integrity but a more robust solution was later needed as enrollments continued growing.
Cl pricing 01_orientation class_412
This document provides an overview and schedule for an orientation class on pricing theory and practices. It outlines that the class will introduce fundamental pricing concepts and skills, discuss how pricing fits within the marketing mix, and help students develop the ability to set profitable prices. It also notes the class will include 35 lectures, assignments, tests, and presentations that will be completed both individually and through teamwork, with student performance evaluated based on attendance, test scores, assignment work, and presentations.
TBR Collaboration Analysis
Matrix of collaborative IT projects referenced in panel discussion “Collaboration by Design, Innovation with Purpose” at the EDUCAUSE annual conference Nov. 2011.
Caa2013 9 10-july2013
The document summarizes a pilot study analyzing 115 question items from an online export controls training. Various techniques were used to analyze the data, including exploratory data analysis, principle component analysis, and clustering analysis. The analysis identified questions with deficiencies or anomalies, indicating issues with question design. It was found that exploratory data analysis helped highlight both strong and weak question items, identifying areas for improvement. Recommendations include developing a visual dashboard to monitor question performance, applying validation rules to the authoring tool, and taking a more systematic approach to question design and alignment with learning objectives.
Test Selection with Moose In Industry - Impact of Granularity
Vincent Blondeau conducted an experiment comparing static and dynamic test selection approaches after code changes. The static approach uses call graph analysis to select tests related to changed code, while the dynamic approach executes tests to map them to covered code. The experiment found that the dynamic approach was more precise and had higher recall, identifying more relevant tests, though it required test execution time. Considering code commits, which group related changes, tended to decrease results for both approaches. The ratios of selected tests to total tests were low, indicating the approaches could still help reduce test suite execution time. Future work includes better understanding how developers use tests and providing a test selection tool.
All about-the-atar
The ATAR is a ranking of a student's academic achievement compared to other students in NSW and ACT. It is calculated based on a student's scaled marks in their top 10 HSC units, including their best 8 units and best 2 units of English. The scaling process controls for competition and determines a student's percentile ranking compared to both their HSC cohort and entire Year 7 cohort. A student's ATAR is their final truncated percentile between 0.00 and 99.95. Myths include that certain subjects maximize an ATAR and that scaled marks depend only on a subject's mean, not a student's relative performance.
Evaluation Plan Presentation
The document outlines an evaluation plan for a surgical sales representative training program consisting of four levels. The plan assesses the program through reaction evaluations completed each day, learning evaluations to test knowledge at the end of each unit, application questionnaires one month after training, and a business impact analysis comparing sales of trained reps to untrained reps over one year. The goals are to evaluate satisfaction, learning, application of skills, and return on investment. The five-day program covers product lines, selling strategies, and has interactive learning activities.
Econ101 Syllabus
This document provides an overview of the EC101.06 Principles of Microeconomics course for Fall 2009. It outlines the instructor, class times, textbook, grading structure, and course requirements. The grading will be based on two midterm exams, a final exam, and in-class performance/attendance. The course will introduce basic microeconomic concepts over 14 weeks of lectures covering topics like supply and demand, costs of production, and market structures. Problem sessions will also be held weekly to reinforce the material.
Word press web design san diego
PROS has highly experienced WordPress experts in San Diego who have developed, designed & optimized hundreds of WordPress projects.WordPress is a popular platform to build beautiful, scalable and responsive websites. It also has a large repository of plugins and themes which enhance the capabilities of this platform. WordPress CMS is very simple, user-friendly and easy to use. That’s why more than 14% of the top 1 million websites on the internet are powered by WordPress.
http://www.internetsearchinc.com/wordpress-design-development/
El volumen
Este documento define el volumen como una magnitud métrica escalar que representa la extensión en tres dimensiones de una región del espacio. Explica que el volumen se calcula multiplicando la longitud, ancho y altura de un objeto y que se mide usualmente en metros cúbicos y sus múltiplos. También describe algunos instrumentos comunes para medir volumen como probetas graduadas, jeringas y volumenómetros.
Esfuerzos combinados (2)
Este documento describe la transformación de esfuerzos planos cuando se rota un elemento respecto a un eje. Explica que las ecuaciones para las nuevas componentes de esfuerzo forman las ecuaciones paramétricas de un círculo, conocido como el círculo de Mohr. Los puntos en este círculo representan los valores máximos y mínimos del esfuerzo normal después de la rotación.
More Related Content
What's hot
Report_Card August 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys given after training sessions. It provides average scores for questions about the instructor and instructor performance, comparing the organization's scores to its own internal benchmarks. Scores for the organization were consistently higher than the benchmarks. The report recommends determining which question categories scored below benchmarks, using additional reports to identify potential causes, and scheduling regular report distribution to instructors and course managers for development and improvement purposes.
Report_Card1
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average scores for questions in different categories, comparing the organization's performance to its own internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, averaging around 8.3 out of 9, but some categories like real-world examples were slightly below the benchmark. It recommends analyzing categories below benchmarks to identify areas for improvement, and using filters to guide instructor or course reviews and development plans.
Report_Card December 2015
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmarks on questions about encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying areas below benchmarks and using filters to guide instructor or course improvements.
Report_Card 9 2016
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and course compared to the organization's internal benchmarks. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 9, with 9 being the highest. Across all questions, the average rating was 8.33 compared to the benchmark of 8.13. For questions specific to the instructor, the average rating was 8.33, matching the internal benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories that scored below benchmarks and using additional reports to determine how to improve weak areas.
1000 report
This report card summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and categories like class discussions and real-world examples, all of which were 8.4 or higher on a 9-point scale. The instructor ratings matched the internal benchmark averages. The report recommends determining which categories, if any, fall below benchmarks and using filters to identify strengths or areas for improvement by individual instructors or courses.
Report_Card
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on questions about instructors and course material. It shows average scores out of 9 for different question categories and individual questions, comparing results to an internal benchmark. Scores were above the benchmark for all categories. Recommendations include identifying lower scoring categories and drilling down to determine how to improve weak areas, using filters to analyze specific instructors or courses, and regularly sharing the report to communicate results.
Report_Card May 2016
This report summarizes learning performance survey results for an instructor-led training. It shows average scores for questions about the instructor and course content, comparing the organization's results to its internal benchmarks. Scores were generally high, ranging from 8.57 to 8.69 out of 9. The report recommends identifying areas scoring below benchmarks to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card 1st Qtr 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for questions grouped by category, and compares the ratings to an internal benchmark. Ratings for the instructor category and individual questions about the instructor's knowledge, examples provided, and presentation skills were at or above the benchmark. The report recommends identifying categories below the benchmark to determine how to improve, and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July 2015 to January 2016
This report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor and course. It shows average ratings for the instructor and individual questions, comparing the organization's results to its own benchmark. Ratings for the instructor met or exceeded the benchmark across all questions. The report recommends identifying areas below the benchmark to determine how to improve and using filters to evaluate specific instructors or courses for performance reviews or redesign plans.
Report_Card July to December 2015
This report summarizes learning performance data from surveys based on question categories and individual questions. It shows the average scores for an organization compared to its internal benchmarks across several metrics related to instructors. The instructor received high marks above the benchmarks in areas like knowledge, presentation skills, and providing real-world examples. The report recommends identifying categories below benchmarks and using filters to guide performance reviews and course redesigns.
Randomized Assignment Generator for Brightspace
The presentation introduces a randomized assignment generator tool developed by Virtual High School (VHS) to address issues of academic integrity as student enrollment increased. The generator utilizes the randomized folders feature in the quizzing tool to create unique assignments for each student by drawing from a bank of questions. The presentation provides instructions on setting up assessments using the generator by configuring properties, restrictions, assessments, submission views, and table of contents. It was found to initially reduce instances of academic integrity but a more robust solution was later needed as enrollments continued growing.
Cl pricing 01_orientation class_412
This document provides an overview and schedule for an orientation class on pricing theory and practices. It outlines that the class will introduce fundamental pricing concepts and skills, discuss how pricing fits within the marketing mix, and help students develop the ability to set profitable prices. It also notes the class will include 35 lectures, assignments, tests, and presentations that will be completed both individually and through teamwork, with student performance evaluated based on attendance, test scores, assignment work, and presentations.
TBR Collaboration Analysis
Matrix of collaborative IT projects referenced in panel discussion “Collaboration by Design, Innovation with Purpose” at the EDUCAUSE annual conference Nov. 2011.
Caa2013 9 10-july2013
The document summarizes a pilot study analyzing 115 question items from an online export controls training. Various techniques were used to analyze the data, including exploratory data analysis, principle component analysis, and clustering analysis. The analysis identified questions with deficiencies or anomalies, indicating issues with question design. It was found that exploratory data analysis helped highlight both strong and weak question items, identifying areas for improvement. Recommendations include developing a visual dashboard to monitor question performance, applying validation rules to the authoring tool, and taking a more systematic approach to question design and alignment with learning objectives.
Test Selection with Moose In Industry - Impact of Granularity
Vincent Blondeau conducted an experiment comparing static and dynamic test selection approaches after code changes. The static approach uses call graph analysis to select tests related to changed code, while the dynamic approach executes tests to map them to covered code. The experiment found that the dynamic approach was more precise and had higher recall, identifying more relevant tests, though it required test execution time. Considering code commits, which group related changes, tended to decrease results for both approaches. The ratios of selected tests to total tests were low, indicating the approaches could still help reduce test suite execution time. Future work includes better understanding how developers use tests and providing a test selection tool.
All about-the-atar
The ATAR is a ranking of a student's academic achievement compared to other students in NSW and ACT. It is calculated based on a student's scaled marks in their top 10 HSC units, including their best 8 units and best 2 units of English. The scaling process controls for competition and determines a student's percentile ranking compared to both their HSC cohort and entire Year 7 cohort. A student's ATAR is their final truncated percentile between 0.00 and 99.95. Myths include that certain subjects maximize an ATAR and that scaled marks depend only on a subject's mean, not a student's relative performance.
Evaluation Plan Presentation
The document outlines an evaluation plan for a surgical sales representative training program consisting of four levels. The plan assesses the program through reaction evaluations completed each day, learning evaluations to test knowledge at the end of each unit, application questionnaires one month after training, and a business impact analysis comparing sales of trained reps to untrained reps over one year. The goals are to evaluate satisfaction, learning, application of skills, and return on investment. The five-day program covers product lines, selling strategies, and has interactive learning activities.
What's hot (17)
Test Selection with Moose In Industry - Impact of Granularity
Test Selection with Moose In Industry - Impact of Granularity
Viewers also liked
Econ101 Syllabus
This document provides an overview of the EC101.06 Principles of Microeconomics course for Fall 2009. It outlines the instructor, class times, textbook, grading structure, and course requirements. The grading will be based on two midterm exams, a final exam, and in-class performance/attendance. The course will introduce basic microeconomic concepts over 14 weeks of lectures covering topics like supply and demand, costs of production, and market structures. Problem sessions will also be held weekly to reinforce the material.
Word press web design san diego
PROS has highly experienced WordPress experts in San Diego who have developed, designed & optimized hundreds of WordPress projects.WordPress is a popular platform to build beautiful, scalable and responsive websites. It also has a large repository of plugins and themes which enhance the capabilities of this platform. WordPress CMS is very simple, user-friendly and easy to use. That’s why more than 14% of the top 1 million websites on the internet are powered by WordPress.
http://www.internetsearchinc.com/wordpress-design-development/
El volumen
Este documento define el volumen como una magnitud métrica escalar que representa la extensión en tres dimensiones de una región del espacio. Explica que el volumen se calcula multiplicando la longitud, ancho y altura de un objeto y que se mide usualmente en metros cúbicos y sus múltiplos. También describe algunos instrumentos comunes para medir volumen como probetas graduadas, jeringas y volumenómetros.
Esfuerzos combinados (2)
Este documento describe la transformación de esfuerzos planos cuando se rota un elemento respecto a un eje. Explica que las ecuaciones para las nuevas componentes de esfuerzo forman las ecuaciones paramétricas de un círculo, conocido como el círculo de Mohr. Los puntos en este círculo representan los valores máximos y mínimos del esfuerzo normal después de la rotación.
3. intranda viewer Tag: Named Entity Recognition im Regelbetrieb
Named Entity Recognition - Planung des Regelbetriebs und gemeinsamer Workshop zur Ausarbeitung neuer Recherchemöglichkeiten
Goobi UK user meeting: Extensions for Goobi with plugins
This document summarizes a presentation given by Steffen Hankiewicz of intranda GmbH on extensions for Goobi using plugins. It discusses Goobi's plugin infrastructure and how it has evolved over time to become more modular. It provides examples of different types of plugins used in daily work, including editors, PDF uploads, QA views, authority enrichment, and special exports. The LayoutWizard plugin is also highlighted as one that can generate individual page images from book scans.
Power point-hidraulica overall
Este documento presenta conceptos básicos de hidráulica. Define hidráulica como la parte de la mecánica que estudia el equilibrio y movimiento de fluidos con aplicaciones prácticas. Explica que los líquidos son sistemas continuos y deformables, y describe propiedades como isotropía, movilidad, viscosidad y compresibilidad. También introduce conceptos como peso, densidad, presión atmosférica y relativa. Finalmente, aborda la compresibilidad de los líquidos y propiedades como tensión superficial y viscosidad.
Temperatura
Este documento presenta diferentes unidades y métodos para medir la temperatura. Describe termómetros de vidrio, resistencia, bimetálicos y de gas, así como pirometros y termómetros de máxima y mínima. Explica cómo cada instrumento mide la temperatura utilizando propiedades térmicas y cómo se usan en aplicaciones industriales y meteorológicas.
Viewers also liked (9)
3. intranda viewer Tag: Named Entity Recognition im Regelbetrieb
3. intranda viewer Tag: Named Entity Recognition im Regelbetrieb
Goobi UK user meeting: Extensions for Goobi with plugins
Goobi UK user meeting: Extensions for Goobi with plugins
Similar to Report_Card September
Report_Card July 2015 (1)
The report summarizes learning performance data from a survey based on questions about an instructor. It shows the average ratings for the instructor and participant responses to individual questions, comparing the results to an internal benchmark. Overall ratings for the instructor were high, averaging 8.38-8.39 out of 9, matching the benchmark. Participant responses were also positive for encouraging discussion, providing real-world examples, instructor knowledge, and presentation skills. The report recommends identifying any categories below the benchmark and using additional reports to analyze ratings and feedback to help improve instructor or course performance.
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional DesignTraining Industry Conference & Expo
The practice of measuring training and calculating ROI has been a part of learning for many years, yet few are able to realize a practical application and show the change in business due to learning. This session highlights how Allscripts implemented a measurement and evaluation program. You will discover the many changes made within the organization due to its implementation. The session follows Allscripts’ journey through the decision to implement, the changes made to the roles within the learning organization, and the shift in the relationship between the learning department and the business. B2B Report
This survey evaluated an entrepreneurship training program called Boots to Business. 110 instructors completed the survey. The survey found:
1) Module 1 was considered the most comfortably taught, while Modules 4 and 5 needed the most improvement.
2) The course objective about understanding business resources was rated highest, while evaluating feasibility tools was rated lowest.
3) Most workshops used 4+ instructors to provide diverse perspectives, but had limited time for preparation.
4) Technology issues and low attendance frequently caused workshop cancellations. The findings suggest reviewing Modules 4-5 and addressing technology and attendance challenges.
05 Understanding RPMS tools and MOV's
This document discusses RPMS tools and performance indicators for teachers in the Philippines. It explains that there are two RPMS tools for different levels of teachers that assess them on key result areas, objectives, means of verification, and performance indicators. It provides examples of how a Teacher I and Master Teacher I would be assessed and rated using their submitted means of verification for various objectives. Sample scenarios show the teacher's quality and efficiency ratings, average rating, and overall score. The document aims to help teachers and evaluators understand how to use the RPMS tools and what documentation to include for assessment.
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
Rik Marselis presented how TPI NEXT and PointZERO can contribute to increasing the business success of an organization by improving the testing process as well as the IT process as a whole.
Prior to this presentation Rik, together with Geoff Thompson, presented about "Why would you want to improve your test process" (also uploaded on slideshare).
This presentation was given at a conference for the test experts of the Siemens group.
YouTestMe Starter Presentation
This presentation's purpose is to get you acquainted with the concept of YouTestMe Starter - new software mainly oriented towards various testing purposes. Feel free to check out our other products - www.youtestme.com. Contact us at info@youtestme.com for more information.
Understanding rpms tools and mode of verifications
This document provides information about RPMS tools and performance assessment for teachers in the Philippines. It discusses the two RPMS tools for teachers, which assess Proficient Teachers and Highly Proficient Teachers. It also outlines the parts of the tools, including key result areas, objectives, means of verification, and performance indicators. The document gives examples of how a sample teacher's performance would be assessed using the tools, providing hypothetical documentation the teacher may submit for different objectives and calculations for determining overall performance ratings.
YouTestMe Starter User Presentation
In the world of today, testing has become a necessary process in numerous aspects – YouTestMe Starter automates and diversifies it, while saving a lot of time. Our main goal is to enable the attainment of practical knowledge to everyone involved in the testing process, both individuals and groups.
Brown Bag on Quality Matters
The document discusses Quality Matters (QM), a peer review process for online course design based on a rubric and research-backed standards. The QM rubric has 8 general standards addressing course overview, objectives, assessment, resources, interaction, technology, and accessibility. Reviewers initially score each standard individually then reach a team score. For a course to meet QM expectations it must achieve "yes" on essential standards and score a minimum of 72 out of 85 points. The goal of QM is to evaluate courses and ensure critical elements like objectives, interactions, and assessments are properly aligned to support learning outcomes.
05-Understanding-RPMS-Tools-and-MOVs.pptx
This document provides information about RPMS tools and performance indicators used to assess teachers in the Philippines. It discusses the two RPMS tools for teachers, which include a profile, job summary, key result areas, objectives, means of verification, and performance indicators. It also explains what the means of verification are and provides examples of how teachers' performance is rated in different key result areas and objectives using means of verification, quality, efficiency, and timeliness ratings. Sample scenarios are given to illustrate how a Teacher I and Master Teacher I would be assessed.
Similar to Report_Card September (10)
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Transform Your Learning Results with Data from Measurable Instructional Design
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
Increasing business success with TPI NEXT and PointZERO
Understanding rpms tools and mode of verifications
Understanding rpms tools and mode of verifications
More from Carrie E. Williams
Understanding Your Customer dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Understanding Your Customer" from the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 20, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course aimed at helping small business owners better understand their customers. The course is offered by the SBA Office of Entrepreneurial Development as part of their training resources for small businesses.
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Taking Your High-Tech Product to Market" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 19, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course to help entrepreneurs learn how to take high-tech products to market. It encourages continued learning as a valuable asset.
Young Entrepreneurs dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course from the U.S. Small Business Administration called "Young Entrepreneurs: An Essential Guide to Starting Your Own Business" on December 19, 2016. The course provided guidance for starting a small business.
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "Encore Entrepreneurs, An Introduction to Starting Your Own Business" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 19, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course aimed at providing an introduction to starting a small business.
How to Win Federal Contracts dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course called "How To Win Federal Contracts" through the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 18, 2016. The course taught her how to pursue and win federal contracts. The SBA aims to provide small businesses with resources through online training courses.
Stratregic Planning dsp_certificate
Carrie E. Williams completed an online course in strategic planning for small businesses offered by the U.S. Small Business Administration on December 17, 2016. The certificate recognizes her completion of the course, which aimed to provide small business owners with strategic planning resources from the SBA.
Mentor Protege Program Certificate of Completion
The SBA Mentor-Protégé Program connects small businesses with federal contractors to provide training and experience. It allows mentors to receive bonus points on future government contracts and credit subcontracts to protégés towards contracting goals. The program aims to strengthen small businesses by helping them develop the skills needed to compete for federal and commercial contracts.
Transcripts.oxps
This document is a digital transcript for Carrie Elizabeth Williams that details her Microsoft Office certifications. It shows that she has passed certification exams in Microsoft Office Access 2013, Excel 2010 and 2013, Outlook 2010 and 2013, PowerPoint 2007, 2010 and 2013, Word 2007, 2010, and 2013 including the Word 2013 Expert exams. The transcript provides the names of the testing centers and dates she passed each of the 14 exams. It also describes Certiport as the provider that tracks and authenticates over 12,000 certification exams administered worldwide.
CompTIA CTT+ Classroom Trainer certificate
This document contains Carrie Elizabeth Williams' CompTIA certification information including her certificate code and verification URL. It provides her name, certificate number, date of issuance, and credentials needed to validate her CompTIA certification online.
Ranking_Learning_Providers 1 2016 to 10 2016
This document provides a summary of the ranking of New Horizons - Southern California as a learning provider based on evaluations from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. It shows that New Horizons ranked 1795 out of 4457 total learning providers based on 27,703 evaluations, with an average score of 8.72 out of 9. The document also provides recommendations on interpreting the report and recommended next steps for analysis.
MS_Learning_Transcript
This document contains certification information for Carrie E Williams including her contact information and a list of her active and past Microsoft certifications such as Microsoft Office Master Specialist, Microsoft Office Expert in Word 2013, and Microsoft Office Specialist in Access 2013. It provides the certification numbers, versions, and achievement dates for each certification. It also lists the Microsoft certification exams she has completed successfully, along with the exam IDs, descriptions, and dates completed.
COURSEEXCEL2010PlainandSimple
The document outlines an Excel 2010 course that will cover basic Excel functions and principles over 15 chapters across 6 days of instruction. Topics include getting started with Excel, building workbooks, formatting cells and worksheets, using formulas and functions, sorting and filtering data, creating charts, adding graphics, sharing data with other programs, and using Excel in a group environment. The course aims to teach students how to apply Excel skills to everyday work and life. Attendance is required and students may be dismissed for excessive absences.
AARP Foundation Finances 50+ Part 1_FINAL_LLOs
This document is a 3-part workshop from AARP on personal finances for those over 50. Part 1 focuses on understanding net worth by calculating assets and liabilities, setting financial goals, and creating a budget to balance monthly expenses. Key lessons include learning how financial decisions impact one's life, setting realistic goals, and using a budget to prioritize spending and savings to work towards ones goals. The next steps recommended developing an action plan, seeking help from money mentors, and reviewing additional resources.
Office Operations Curriculum 2010
This document provides an overview of courses available in the Microsoft Office 2010 curriculum. It describes courses that teach basic skills for Word 2010, Windows 7, Excel 2010, Outlook 2010 and provide certification in digital literacy. It also describes Total Testing software that allows employers to assess candidate qualifications and an Axzo Press ILT series that includes basic, intermediate and advanced courses for Word 2010 to develop proficiency. Pre-tests for Word 2010 from GMETRIX are also included.
Digital Literacy Objectives
The document outlines the course topics and objectives for a Digital Literacy Standard Curriculum. It covers 6 courses: Computer Basics, The Internet and World Wide Web, Productivity Programs, Computer Security and Privacy, and Digital Lifestyles. Each course contains multiple lessons that teach basic computer and technology concepts, skills, and career opportunities related to digital literacy. The curriculum aims to provide students with a foundational understanding of computers, software, online safety, and using digital tools and media.
Objective Domain for Word 2010 Core Test Schedule
The document outlines a 4-day training schedule for Word 2010 basics, intermediate, and advanced exercises. Day one covers basics like managing documents, navigation, formatting, and inserting pictures. Day two focuses on tables, headers/footers, spelling and autocorrect. Day three covers intermediate skills such as page setup, templates, and comments. The final day instructs advanced functions including mail merge, backgrounds, and sharing documents. An objective test schedule is also provided, mapping learning objectives to specific exercises and documents.
COURSEWORD2010PlainandSimple
This document provides information about a Word 2010 training course offered by New Hope Enterprises Inc. It includes the instructor and director contact information, course description, attendance policy, required text, course objectives, and tentative 5-day course outline. The attendance policy states that students may be dropped from the course if they have two unexcused absences or are tardy three times. The course objectives are to present basic principles of Word 2010 and its application to daily life and work.
More from Carrie E. Williams (19)
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Taking Your High Tech Product to Market dsp_certificate
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Encore Entrepreneurs Introduction to Starting Your Own Business dsp_certificate
Report_Card September
- 1. Report Card Run By: Carrie Williams (cwilliamsaz15) MTM Tool: Report Card Date Run: Oct 1, 2015 From Saved Query: No MTM Benchmark Only my company Report Card a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question All Question |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.37 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.13 Instructor |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.37 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.37 Report Card Instructor a summary of learning performance by survey question category and by survey question Instructor |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.37 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.37 Instructor overall |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.36 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.36 Participants were encouraged to take part in class discussions. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=93] 8.47 MTM Benchmark [n=93] 8.47 The instructor provided realworld experiences and examples. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=93] 8.28 MTM Benchmark [n=93] 8.28 The instructor was knowledgeable about the subject. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.43 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.43 The instructor''s presentation skills were adequate. |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 Average [n=94] 8.30 MTM Benchmark [n=94] 8.30 Report Recommendations Interpreting the Report Below are tips to help you understand the information in the report. For additional information, please click the Help tab above the report. Shows the overall scores by question category and questions selected for training provided by the organization. Report allows you to compare the organization's performance against internal or external benchmarks (represented by a orange bar). Report may be customized using filters for comparison of specific attributes such as courseware, question category, etc. Recommended Actions Below are recommended next steps to take after reviewing the information in this report. Additionally, you'll find links to automatically run complementary reports for drillingdown further into the data or analyzing the information in another way. Determine which question categories fall below the benchmark and drill down by utilizing the breakout by question or by using the reports below to determine what may be causing the score to determine what corrective action to take. For example, if job impact is low for specific courses, perhaps the right people aren't attending the training or the material delivered is not intended to impact performance. Filtering the report to one instructor or one set of courses will allow the report to be used in performance reviews. Because the questions are also displayed, the potential areas where instructors or courses perform high or low can be identified and a - 1 / 2 -