This summary provides an overview of two units on language testing and assessment:
Unit B4 discusses test specification design, including elements that should be included like samples and guiding language. It also examines the distinction between prompt and response attributes.
Unit C4 focuses on how test specifications evolve over time. It provides examples of a role-play assessment and how the scoring criteria and use of written plans changed between versions as instructors debated and tested the requirements. The unit proposes applying a reverse engineering workshop to critically analyze existing test tasks and improve testing practices.
PPP SHOWING CANDIDATES THE EXAM FORMAT: THE DIFFERENT PAPERS (READING, WRITING, LISTENING AND SPEAKING) AND PARTS OF EACH ONE, A SHORT EXPLANATION OF WHAT EACH PAPER IS ABOUT AND SOME PRACTICAL EXAMPLES OF THE ACTUAL CAMBRIDGE EXAM.
GRIPS PhD workshop April 17, 2018
There are several distinct markers of success in graduate school.
1. Acceptance of the thesis / dissertation.
2. Publication of a research paper in a journal.
3. Acceptance to present at a conference.
In all of the above cases, success depends on two factors:
1) the content of the document, and
2) the writing of the document.
Successful writing must be readable, i.e. it must be easy and comfortable to extract information and argument from the text.
This workshop will survey the main elements of readability, illustrating each one with a task example.
PPP SHOWING CANDIDATES THE EXAM FORMAT: THE DIFFERENT PAPERS (READING, WRITING, LISTENING AND SPEAKING) AND PARTS OF EACH ONE, A SHORT EXPLANATION OF WHAT EACH PAPER IS ABOUT AND SOME PRACTICAL EXAMPLES OF THE ACTUAL CAMBRIDGE EXAM.
GRIPS PhD workshop April 17, 2018
There are several distinct markers of success in graduate school.
1. Acceptance of the thesis / dissertation.
2. Publication of a research paper in a journal.
3. Acceptance to present at a conference.
In all of the above cases, success depends on two factors:
1) the content of the document, and
2) the writing of the document.
Successful writing must be readable, i.e. it must be easy and comfortable to extract information and argument from the text.
This workshop will survey the main elements of readability, illustrating each one with a task example.
HUMANITIES 105 - THE HUMAN STRUGGLE PRESENTATION ASSIG.docxeugeniadean34240
HUMANITIES 105 - THE HUMAN STRUGGLE
PRESENTATION ASSIGNMENT:
Prepare a presentation (you may use PowerPoint or just a written account) in which you inform
the class about further details of some aspect of AThe Human [email protected] During the class,
students watch/read your presentation and may post questions about it on the [email protected] function B
you may answer up to five of those questions. Each student whose question is chosen will
receive an extra credit point.
FOR PRESENTERS:
You may choose to expand on a topic that has caught your interest in class, or you may choose a
topic we haven=t touched upon, but which you see as part of Athe human [email protected] B this is a very
broad category; if you have doubts about whether your choice qualifies, just check with me
about it. (Past topics students presented ranged from the signing of the Magna Carta, the French
Revolution, the Armenian Genocide, the modern media=s influence on body image, the abuse of
opiate drugs, the struggle for LBTQ rights, etc.)
FOR THOSE ASKING QUESTIONS:
When you post a question about a presentation on AChat,@ address the presenter by name (AHello,
Susan B why do you [email protected]) and sign your name to the question. I have to keep track of extra
credit points from this B please make it easy for me! Similarly, when you=re a presenter and
responding to a question someone has asked, address that person by name (AGeorge B the reason
[email protected]), as there may be a flood of questions all at once. Each presenter may respond to only
five questions.
This table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method.Criteria
0 - Not Present
1 - Needs Improvement
2 - Meets Expectations
3 - Exceeds Expectations
Learning Objective 1.1: Describe the types of qualitative research.
Description is not present.
Descriptions of the types of qualitative research is vague, incomplete, or inaccurate.
Descriptions of the types of qualitative research are clear, complete, and accurate.
Demonstrates the same level as “2” plus the following:
Provides detailed information about the types of qualitative research.
Criterion Feedback
Narrative and case study are mixed up here and each needs a more specific and clear definition.
Learning Objective 1.2: Define grounded theory.
Definition is not present.
Response includes an unclear or incomplete definition of grounded theory.
Response includes a clear and accurate definition of grounded theory.
Demonstrates the same level as “2” plus the following:
Response includes a thoughtful analysis of the importance of each principle in terms of early childhood research.
Learning Objective 2.1: Describe characteristics of good qualitative research and their importance.
Response is not present or is inaccurate.
Response includes an unclear or incomplete description of five characteristics of good .
Module 1: Master's Prepared Nurse Interview Guide
Criteria
% Value
1: Unsatisfactory
2: Less Than Satisfactory
3: Satisfactory
4: Good
5: Excellent
% Scaling
0%
80%
88%
92%
100%
Content – 70%
Introduction
5%
Introduction lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Introduction is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Purpose is not clear.
Introduction is clear, forecasting development of the paper.
Introduction is comprehensive; purpose of the paper is present.
Introduction is comprehensive and makes the purpose of the paper clear by restating the thesis.
Career
Overview
15%
Omits major elements and is disorganized.
Describes but fails to paint a clear picture of the nurse's career and/or progression in a logical order.
Addresses most of the primary elements of the individual's career in a logical fashion.
Addresses the primary elements. Reader can easily see purpose.
Thoroughly presents all of the information to portray a clear chronology as well as richness of detail.
Graduate
Education
15%
Omits major elements; is disorganized; and has no depth or detail.
Describes but fails to address some of the elements; lacks depth and detail.
Addresses the same elements but lacks depth and detail.
Necessary elements are present and clearly presented. Decision-making process is evident to the reader.
Thoroughly presents the process that led to the decision to seek graduate education as well as the program itself with clarity, order, and depth.
Present
Position (includes pearls of wisdom)
20%
Omits major elements; information is tangential and disorganized.
Describes but fails to address most of the primary elements in any depth.
Addresses most of the primary elements of the present position with recognition of competencies but lacks detail.
All key elements are presented with clarity.
Thoroughly presents all of the key elements of the present position with emphasis on competencies required. Describes in rich detail, and includes advice given and original insights.
Conclusion
15%
Conclusion lacks any discernible purpose.
Conclusion is insufficiently developed and/or vague.
Conclusion is clear and identifies key points of interview but fails to draw inferences.
Conclusion is clearly evident to the reader. Career opportunities are present.
Conclusion is comprehensive; paints a clear picture of the potential outcomes and career opportunities of graduate education; identifies key points of the interview; and demonstrates insight and interpretation.
Organization and Effectiveness – 20%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7%
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are com ...
College-Level Writing RUBRIC
C
ri
te
ri
a
Performance
Indicators
Target/
High Proficiency
15
Proficiency
12
Acceptable
9
Needs Improvement
6
Unacceptable
3
C
o
v
e
ra
g
e
&
O
rg
a
n
iz
a
ti
o
n
Content‐Specific
Assignment Criteriai
∙Writing meets all
assignment content
∙Writing meets most
assignment content
∙Writing meets minimum
assignment content
∙Writing meets
some/few assignment
∙Writing does not
meet assignment
as per Instructor
Guidelines
requirements. requirements. requirements. content requirements. content
requirements.
∙Writing is clear and ∙Writing is generally clear and ∙Writing is adequate in ∙Writing may be unclear ∙Writing is
appropriate for the appropriate for the purpose of terms of clarity and and/or inappropriate unclear and
Purpose purpose of the the assignment—with some appropriateness for the for the purpose of the inappropriate for
& assignment. exceptions. purpose of the assignment. the purpose of
Support ∙All evidence and ∙Evidence and examples are assignment. ∙Evidence and examples the assignment.
examples are generally effective, specific ∙Evidence and examples may require further ∙Evidence and
effective, specific and and relevant—with some meet basic requirements development to be examples are not
relevant. exceptions. for being effective, adequately effective, effective, specific
specific and relevant. specific and relevant. and/or relevant.
∙Ideas are coherently ∙Organization of ideas is ∙Organization of ideas ∙Organization of ideas ∙Ideas are
and logically generally coherent and logical. meets the minimum does not meet the incoherent and
Structure & organized with well‐ ∙In addition, most paragraphs requirement for being minimum requirement illogically
Development developed paragraphs are well‐developed and use coherent and logical. for coherent and logical. organized.
and effective effective transitions. ∙Some paragraphs may ∙Paragraphs lack ∙Paragraphs are
transitions. be well‐developed and development and/or fail undeveloped
use effective transitions to employ transitions and need
while others do not. effectively. transitions.
∙All sources are
critically reviewediii,
∙Most sources are critically
reviewed and documented
∙Sources meet the
minimum requirements
∙Sources do not meet
the minimum
∙Insufficient
sources and/or
Documentation of documented and following standard practices of for being critically requirements for being insufficient
Sources formatted following the field (APA, MLA, Turabian, reviewed and critically reviewed and quality, critical
standard practices of CMS, etc.). documented following documented following review and
the field (APA, MLA, standard practices of the standard practices of documentation.
Turabian, CMS, etc.). field (APA, MLA, the field (APA, MLA, Standard
Turabian, CMS, etc.). Turabian, CMS, etc.). practices of the
field are not ...
ASSIGNMENT 2 - Research Proposal Weighting 30 tow.docxsherni1
ASSIGNMENT 2 - Research Proposal
Weighting: 30% towards final grade
Word limit: 3000 (-/+10%) – text only, excluding tables, appendices, references,
covers page, contents.
This is an individual piece of work
Apply the requirements of the Harvard Referencing System throughout the
report.
Use the structure appearing below:
Research Proposal Specifics
You are about to commence a new research project in a field of your choice.
You are expected to write a report that constitutes a research proposal.
1. Working individually, you will:
- Have chosen a clear and specific research question/ aim/ hypothesis for your research;
- Have contextualised your research question/ aim within the academic literature;
- Understand the philosophical and methodological bases for your research;
- Have a sound method to address the research question/ aim/ hypothesis.
2. Use Harvard style in-text citation and referencing.
3. Do not copy any materials you use word for word unless you identify these sections clearly as
quotations.
4. If you paraphrase any materials, you must identify sources through in-text referencing.
5. This is an individual assignment please do not work closely with anyone else.
6. Write 3000 words (+ or – 10%) excluding the header sheet, cover page, contents page, reference
list, footnotes and appendices.
Marks for criteria: Criteria
10% Focus and Completion Does the proposal
address the set tasks in a meaningful
manner?
20% Research Objective Does the proposal
clearly articulate
20% Synthesis and Soundness Does the
proposal place the research objective in
the context of the relevant academic
literature and any relevant past studies?
Does the discussion demonstrate a
comprehensive understanding of that
literature?
30% Research Methods and Methodology Does
the proposal sensibly outline methods for
accessing sources of data that will address
or answer the research objective? Is the
method consistent with the methodology?
10% Clarity of Approach Is the proposal well
organised, logically constructed and
attentive to the needs of the reader? Does
the timeline include an Gantt chart or key
milestones for research?
10% Mechanical Soundness Is the portfolio
clearly written, spell
Structuring the research proposal
1. Introduction (~200 words)
Explain the issue you are examining and why it is significant.
Describe the general area to be studied
Explain why this area is important to the general area under study (e.g., psychology of
language, second language acquisition, teaching methods)
2. Background/Review of the Literature (~1000 words)
A description of what has already known about this area and short discussion of why the background
studies are not sufficient.
Summarise what is already known about the field. Include a summary of the basic
background information on the topic gleaned from your literature re ...
• Cooperated with fellow colleagues in a lab environment and experimented on the science of fluid flow through various types of piping and fittings.
• Researched the head loss that is caused in different piping including Venturi pipe, orifice plate, and elbow pipe fittings.
BA634 Current & Emerging Technology Research Paper 1 .docxwilcockiris
BA634 Current & Emerging Technology
Research Paper
1
Understanding Evolving Technologies
As we all know technology is evolving at a rate that, to some, seems
overwhelming. These technologies often evolve to offer higher quality products and
services at lower prices causing a disruption in markets that is sometimes perceived as
unwelcome. These disruptive technologies are sometimes the results of innovative
business models that are also part of the evolving processes of a competitive
marketplace.
This is an individual research paper required from BA634 students.
As a Research Project, select one of the following research areas:
Cloud Computing (Intranet, Extranet, and Internet)
Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
Internet of Things (IoT)
Robotics
Medical Technology
1) Your research paper needs to be between 12-15 pages.
2) It needs be submitted as a WORD document.
3) The research paper must only include materials from peer reviewed
journals and peer reviewed conference proceedings. APA formatted
citations are therefore required for the final submission. Newspapers,
websites (URLs), magazines, technical journals, hearsay, personal
opinions, and white papers are NOT acceptable citations.
4) Each submission will be checked for plagiarism. All plagiarized
documents will results in a grade of zero for the exercise.
5) If there is extensive synonym use or not understandable, long
sentences, the document will results in a grade of zero for the
exercise.
6) The final research paper must include your through analysis and synthesis
of the peer reviewed literature used in your research paper.
7) There will be a limit of 3 images, tables, figures are to be included in the
BA634 Current & Emerging Technology
Research Paper
2
appendices and DO NOT count for page limit requirements.
8) Long quotations (i.e. paragraphs) are NOT permitted. Only one quoted
sentence is permitted per page.
9) Footnotes are NOT permitted.
Document Details
Chapter 1 Introduction
Background/Introduction
In this section, present enough information about the proposed work such that the reader
understands the general context or setting. It is also helpful to include a summary of how the rest
of this document is organized.
Problem Statement
In this section, present a concise statement of a research-worthy problem addressed (i.e., why the
work should be undertaken – don’t say required for the class). Follow the statement of the
problem with a well-supported discussion of its scope and nature. The discussion of the problem
should include: what the problem is, why it is a problem, how the problem evolved or developed,
and the issues and events leading to the problem.
Goal
Next, include a concise definition of the goal of the work (i.e., what the work will accomplish).
Aim to define a goal that is measurable.
Research Questions
Research que.
5. In Popham’s model, the Prompt Attribute
describes the input to the examinee while
the Response Attribute describes what the
examinee does as a result.
Bachman and Palmer (1996) phrased this
same distinction in different terms using
‘characteristics of the input’ versus
‘characteristics of the response.’
6. Clearly, the author disagrees with the
majority. It’s also clear that he’s open to
change of perspective. How do we know
this?
a) The author states precisely a willingness to
change.
(b) In line 10 ‘there may be some value to the
opposing view if...’ suggests a willingness to
change.
(c) The title suggests a willingness to change.
(d) The comment near the end indicates
willingness to change: ‘I may be persuaded if...’
7. 1- The RA for this item might simply
read: “The student will select the
correct answer from among the choices
given.”
If that were the case, then the spec
writer has decided on a rather
minimalist approach to the PA/RA
distinction, describing the actual action
performed by the examinee.
8. 2- An alternative RA might read like this:
a- The student will study all four choices.
b- If a particular choice references a
particular line in the passage, the student will
study that line carefully.
c- He or she will reread the passage to
eliminate three choices.
d- Then the student will select the correct
answer from among the choices.
9. Either of these RAs
could work in conjunction
with a PA
similar to the following:
10. “1-The item stem poses a question about
the author’s viewpoints, which will require
inference from the text.
11. 2- Choices ‘a’, ‘b’, and ‘d’ are distracters that
attribute to the passage a comment that the
author didn’t make, or which is taken out of
context and misinterpreted.
Choice ‘a’ refers to a comment the author
made, without actual reference in the text
while choices ‘b’ and ‘d’ refer to some part of
the text, (e.g., a line number a paragraph, a
header, a title).
12. 3- Choice ‘c’ will be the key or correct
response; it may use any of the locator
features given above (line number,
paragraph, header, title, etc.), or it can
simply refer to the whole passage.”
13. This PA/RA formula is a classical model of
spec for multiple-choice items.
In this formula, all guidelines about the item
are in the PA: the entire description of its
stem, its choices, why the incorrect choices
are incorrect, and why the key is correct is
considered to be part of the prompt and not
the response.
14. The choices themselves seem to be part of the
examinee’s thinking.
In our multiple-choice item, the examinee will
probably double-check whether the author did
indeed say what is claimed in line 10 or near
the end and if so, whether it is being interpreted
correctly. In effect, the item itself is a kind of
outline of the examinee’s answering strategy; a
layout of the response.
15. Guidance about both the prompt and the
response are important in a test specification.
It is possible to fuse the PA and RA and simply
give clear specification guidance on both;
actually, we could create a new spec element
(the ‘PARA’) in which we can put all this
guidance.
17. The basic element of spec design is
producing samples and the guiding
language that goes with them.
Guiding language and samples, constitute
a minimalist definition of a specification, in
an attempt to disentangle prompt from
response.
20. A testing event is a single task or test
item such as a multiple-choice.
A procedure is a set of events or tasks
such as an oral interview or a portfolio
assessment for teacher observation.
21. Test developers organize items into a test using
a ‘table of specs’ that presents information, at a
very global level:
- How many of each item type and skill are
needed?
- What special materials are required to develop
the test?
22. Specplates
A ‘specplate’ is a combination of the
words ‘specification’ and ‘template,’ a
model for a specification, and a
generative blueprint which itself
produces blueprints.
23. Over time, certain specs fuse into a higher-
order specification. A specplate is a guide
tool to ensure that the new specifications
meet a common standard established by the
existing specs. One type of information that
might appear in a specplate is guidance on
task type.
24. PA (excerpt)
For a M.C. task on verb tense and voice
agreement: Each incorrect choice
(distracter) in the item must be incorrect
according to the focus of the item. One
distracter should be incorrect in tense,
another incorrect in voice, and the third
incorrect in both tense and voice.
25. PA Specplate (excerpt)
“When specifying the distracters, the PA
should contain the following language ‘Each
incorrect distracter in the item must be
incorrect according to the focus of the item.’
Immediately following that sentence, the PA
should clearly specify how each of the three
distracters is incorrect.”
26. You are encouraged to employ (if feasible) the
dual-feature model of multiple-choice item
creation, namely:
Key : both of two features of the item are
correct (tense/voice)
Distracter 1 : one of two key features of the
item is incorrect (tense/voice)
Distracter 2 : the other of two key features of
the item is incorrect (tense/voice)
Distracter 3 : both of two key features of the
item are incorrect (tense/voice).”
27. The ‘magic formula’ model of M.C. item
creation is: crafting an item for which, in order
to get the item right, examinees must do two
things correctly.
Once the specplate has been written, it can
serve as the starting point for new specs that
require those features. Rather than starting
from scratch each time, the specplate
generates the specification shell and important
details follow somewhat automatically.
28. Ownership
Specs ownership is part of human nature
because of a sense of investment in the
test-crafting process.
However, a well-crafted test is never owned
by a single individual. Thus, a simple
historical record of contributions is the best
way to attribute a spec to its various
authors.
29. Disagreement is sometimes inevitable in
specs design; yet, a compromise between
opposing positions is possible.
There is consensus that the faculty will
observe the test in action and decide after a
while whether more changes are needed.
30. Summary of Unit B4
The central focus of this unit was the nature
of test specs and their elements.
We have raised and tried to answer the
question: what are the essential minimum
components to specs beyond the bare
minimum of guiding language and samples?
32. In the conclusion to Unit A4 we listed the
following elements of a specification-driven
testing theory:
■ Specs exist.
■ Specs evolve.
■ The specs are not launched until ready.
■ Discussion lead to transparency.
■ All are welcome to discussion.
33. We saw in Unit B4, that all specs share
two common features:
1- spec-generated sample items, 2-
relative guiding language.
34. In this Unit, we will focus on some
design considerations that arise as a
spec evolves.
35. [V. 1: Guiding language on the scoring
scale]
The objective of this spec is for students to
produce a role-play task on the pragmatics
of making a complaint in a simple everyday
situation.
In a role-play with the teacher, students are
asked to plan and render a complaint about
something that has gone wrong.
36. Scoring of the interaction will be as follows:
1- not competent – the student displayed little
command of the situation pragmatics.
2- minimally competent – the student used
language of complaint, but the interaction was
hesitant and/or impolite.
3- competent – the student’s interactions were
smooth and generally fluent, and there was no
use of impolite language.
4- superb – the student’s interactions were
smooth and very fluent, and in addition, the
student displayed subtle command of nuance.
37. [Version 1, sample one]
You’ve recently purchased a radio; back home, you
discover that a part is missing from the box.
[Version 1, sample two]
After getting back home from shopping, you discover
that a jar of peanut butter is open and its seal is
punctured, so you’re worried that it may be unsafe to
eat.
In both cases, you want to return to the store to the
resolve the situation with the manager.
(a) write out a plan of what you will say, then,
(b) role-play the conversation with your teacher.
38. [V. 2: Guiding language on the scoring scale]
1- not competent – the student displayed little command of
the pragmatics of the situation. If the student wrote a plan, it
was inadequate or not implemented.
2- minimally competent – the student used language of
complaint, but the interaction was hesitant and/or impolite.
The student’s plan may have been adequate, but the student
was unable to implement it.
3- competent – the student’s interactions were smooth and
generally fluent, and there was no evidence of impolite
language use. The student wrote a viable plan and generally
followed it during the interaction.
4- superb – the student’s interactions were smooth and very
fluent, and in addition, the student displayed subtle command
of nuance. The student wrote a viable plan and generally
followed it during the interaction.
39. After some time, the descriptor for Level 4 is
improved again, Levels 1-3 being unchanged:
[V. 3: Guiding language on the scoring
scale]
4- superb – the student’s interactions were
smooth and very fluent, and the student displayed
subtle command of nuance. He/she wrote a viable
plan and generally followed it during the
interaction. Alternatively, the student wrote little (or
no) plan, but seemed to be able to execute the
interaction in a commanding and nuanced manner .
40. There are some interesting questions that
arise:
- What is the role of the written plan?
- Why have the instructors adapted the scoring scale
to reflect alternative use of the plan?
- Do you suspect that any changes might be coming
for level 3 on the scale?
- Do you suspect that the plan may prove to be an
optional testing task, in general?
- Do you think that the plan may prove unworkable?
41. Planning causes debate which in turn
causes change
A newcomer arrives at the faculty at a point
in time between Version 2 and Version 3, an
energetic instructor who plays the role of a
productive debater in meetings.
This new instructor asks, “Do we plan when
we do complaints in real life, and if yes, do
we write it?”
42. The newcomer causes the teachers to watch
carefully the use of this task in the next test
administration, and sure enough, there are high-
level students for whom the plan is irrelevant and
a waste of time.
New questions arise here:
- What obligations do teachers have to challenge
each other and help make tests better?
- What ownership should be given to this new
teacher or to any new teacher?
43. However… change stagnates
Gradually, teachers stop teaching the written
plan in their lessons, and most students do not
produce one during the test.
The instructors simply stop looking at the spec,
they stop using a written plan, and the task
evolves beyond reference to the spec.
44. Then, one teacher remembers to teach written plans
and the students feel they did better on the test
thanks to plan writing.
- Should students be welcome to discussions of test
evolution and change?
- Should teachers re-visit and re-affirm the wording of
the spec, which does permit a plan?
- Or should they follow their own instinct and ignore
this student feedback, encouraging role-plays without
written plans?
- Should teachers continue to heed the advice of their
‘energetic colleague’ and teach their students to do
such tasks without written plans, because that is more
authentic?
46. 1- Introduction and Welcome:
Orient your colleagues to selected tasks. The
goal of this part is not to revise the tasks but to
make sure they know what the tasks are.
Orient the participants to the basic design of
specs: samples and guiding language. Don’t show
actual specs because people will think that the
spec samples you show are how all specs should
be written. In addition to the critical analysis that is
the target of the day, you want an organic, bottom-
up growth of specs.
47. 2- Group Phase 1:
Divide the participants into groups or pairs,
each being assigned the same set of tasks.
Ask each group to do straight reverse
engineering and write out what they think is
the guiding language for the tasks without
recommending any changes.
This should be followed by a report back.
48. 3- Vent Your Spleen:
In the whole group, allow people to vent
about test tasks they have never liked –
tasks they did not analyze in Phase 1.
Based on the judgmental splenetic
discussion that will certainly result, select a
new set of tasks, and proceed to the next
step.
49. 4- Group Phase 2:
Divide the participants into groups, each having
to do critical reverse engineering of some tasks
about which they feel particularly splenetic. The
goal is a set of specs that improve testing at
your situation. A report back should follow.
5- ‘What’s Next?’
The group discusses which specs stand a
reasonable chance of implementation. Not
everything that arises will be feasible. Some
things will be difficult to implement. But some
should survive.
50. Summary
This Unit was a practical application on Units A4
and B4, a way to drill all the theoretical notions
and concepts that we have studied in both units.
The Unit proposes more exercise related to
validity as in Unit C1.