Peer evaluation

Peer Evaluation on everyone's project:

Date: Tuesday 1st March 2016

Group 1: Mayukh, Omar, Daniel
They have created a voice control robot.
this project was about the robot being controlled through an app which is connected to the robot itself by bluetooth. I personally liked the part where they were being successful with their work. I think they can improve the presentation of the robot and explaining what they have used in detail as some of them were quite unusual material. I think this project can be in tech fair 2016 if these gets better.

Group 2: Yussuf, Amir, Mohammed
They have created a robot from a kit but added bluetooth so that the robot will listen to what the person is saying through an app. The part that I really liked was that they have managed to play music on their robot. I do push this robot to be in the tech fair 2016.

Group 3: Karim, Issa
Their project was hydraulic Arm Controlled with Sringes. I did not really understand their project. They kept on saying "If there was an arm, though we didn't put them.........."and haven't  explained about their actual project very much. I think they should have explained about the project in detail which I think is probably very important  for them. I do not recomment this project to be in the tech fair 2016.

Date; Sunday, 6th March 2016
Group 4; Nicoletta
Her project was holographic projection. I personally liked her project. Her project has been very successful and her explanation was good too. She also had a video which showed how it worked. I really liked her idea, I think it will be better if she speaks up more so then everyone can hear her. I do recommend her project to be in tech fair 2016.

Group 5; Alissa, Raushan
Their project was the video made from pawtoon. The topic was based on how social media can affect people's life. There are few improvements they could make; font size and color, they could add sounds to their video, etc. Also their voices were very small when they were presenting. They can also post this video onto youtube and make it to "public" so then people can access to their video easily and help the people. I do not really recommend their project to be in the tech fair 2016.

Group 6: Safa, Mille
Their project was a online game made from a website called "sploder" where they can create games online. They had 5 packs in each level and there were 5 levels in total. They said they took about 6 weeks to make them. The games were looking very entertaining. I liked the project but I do not recommend their project to be in the tech fair 2016.

Date: Tuesday 8th March 2016

Group 7: Karan, Kaisan, Abdulrahman
They made a crystal ball. I didn't really understand what their product are meant to be because they said the wires were broken and they couldn't bring it to school. They showed a demonstration video which showed how the product works but because this had no sound, I think they could have added the narration to get people understand better. However their pros and cons were very well explained. They were talking all at the same time which was hard for us audiences to understand what their product is all about. I do not recommend this product to be in the tech fair 2016.

Group 8: Anju, Noor
Their project is called 3D CD project. It basically looked like a dress which used CD (on the back side) so then it will look shiny. I did not really understand the part where they have used a technology in theirs. In their presentation, Anju had a nice and loud voice that everyone can understand what she was explaining us in the voice volume, but Noor's voice was quite small and was hard to listen as I was at the back. They have explained their process to making their project very well. They also had poster that explained about their project so I think this was good. Both power point and poster should have been in a bigger font so that everyone can see. I don't recommend this project to be in the tech fair 2016.

Group 9: Aya
Her project was called recycled simple tech operated car. Although her voice was small in explaining her project, she has managed to explain her ingredients very well in detail. She also used diagram to explain. She also had a video which I first thought that she has showed her knowledge but her video had no music, no narration, no pictures, and it was just a boring, long, only-text video made from powtoon.  This video had nothing that audiences can be attracted to. I don't recommend her project to be in the tech fair 2016.

Group 10: Nadia, Noaf, Lara, and Tanya
Their project was called the Fujifilm Polaroid Camera. In the presentation Noaf and Tanya were the only ones that were speaking confidently and Lara and Nadia seemed like they had no confidence in their work even though they said things like we used creativity and things. Their explanation of ingredients were very clear which was explained by Noaf. They were not well prepared. They had to ask the teacher if they could go at the end due to their poor organization skills. They might have had organization independently but they didn't have any organization at all as a group. Their promotional video was impossible to understand. They were taking selfies and they didn't explain about their project and teaching the audiences how it works. However I think their project is fine and could be in the tech fair 2016.

Date; Tuesday 15th March 2016

Group 11; Emma, Azahra
Their project was a game on a website called sploder. This website was the same one as Safa and Mille's group. They said their project was an improved version of Mario. Their project was kind of similar to Safa and Mille's group. In the power point presentation they explained Pros and Cons. They also said that game is to entertain people when they are bored. I think this is true. They could summarize the power point to not to make the audience feel bored. I think their project might be able to be in the tech fair 2016 but might be a competition between Safa and Mille's group and Emma and Azahra's group

Group 12; Abdullah, Ahmed
Their project was called FPS game. Their power point presentation was quite plain, and there were to much writing, and the color was only black and white, Me as an audience felt quite bored. At the same time there weren't enough information in the PPP. However I think their size of the letter in the PPP is good.  In the explanation, first of all, their voices were too small. However they have explained each point clearly. I think their project shouldn't be in the tech fair 2016.