BldgAltEntf E050: Schokopartei

Tataaaa! 50 Episoden! WIR SINGEN! Nach den üblichen News von A und O gibt es diesmal einen Rückblick über die vergangenen 49-50 Folgen. Die Null, ihr wisst ja ... Die Fundgrube ist auch dabei und ein klein wenig Politik, damit ihr euch wie zu Hause fühlt. Eine Weltverbesserungsidee darf natürlich auch nicht fehlen.

Die Folge haben wir am 11.08.2023 aufgenommen.

Intro & Feedback

Gruß zurück an Mathias und gern ein Hinweis auf die Streams zusammen mit Hendrik auf Twitch und später auch auf YouTube zum Nachschauen.

News+Alt+Entf
News+O

Bei O läuft Laufen, dabei u. a. der Podcast „Vom Laufen„. (Im Gespräch wurden auch Methodisch Inkorrekt und Alliteration am Arsch erwähnt.)
O hat sich zum Kohlbrandbrückenlauf angemeldet.

News+A

A freut sich über die Weiterbildung vom OER-Fachexperten Dirk Bock.
Wie jeden Spätsommer rantet A über Einschulungsfeiern in der Woche.

Statistik+Alt+Entf

Zahlen bitte (weil es sich besser liest und wir sie bestimmt auch einmal selbst nachschauen wollen), Stand: 07.08.2023 mittags

Durchschnittliche Episodenlänge: 2h 11min
Vollständige Laufzeit aller Episoden: 4,5 Tage (Rekord ohne Schlafen war 11 Tage, Stand 2009)
39 Tage im Durchschnitt, bis eine neue Episode veröffentlicht wird
49% Frauen (BldgAltEntf E005 Solo-Folge von O, Edufunk-Folge im Open EduRadio)
8.5 GB Speicher (uberspace ist cool)

Hörstatistik

Gesamtdownloads: 25.011
Letzer Monat: 540 insgesamt
ca. 300 pro Episode nach 4 Wochen
Meiste Hörer*innen in Episode: E042: „Per Anhalter durch die Bildung“
Feed vs. WebPlayer: 82% vs. 15%

Beim Plaudern haben wir diese anderen Podcasts noch erwähnt

Freakshow
Alles gesagt (Zeit)
Lage der Nation
Podcast Podcast
Feelings
You are fucked
Edufunk
Hotel Matze
AntennaPod
Ausgecheckt – das Luca-System

Lieblings+Alt+Entf

Paper, die uns in Erinnerung geblieben sind:

de Vogel, Susanne

Simply the best? Determinants of achieving the highest grade in a doctoral degree in Germany Artikel

In: Higher Education, Bd. 85, Ausg. 5, S. 1161–1180, 2023, ISSN: 1573-174X.

Abstract | Links | BibTeX

@article{deVogel2023,

title = {Simply the best? Determinants of achieving the highest grade in a doctoral degree in Germany},

author = {Susanne de Vogel},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00883-z},

doi = {10.1007/s10734-022-00883-z},

issn = {1573-174X},

year = {2023},

date = {2023-05-01},

journal = {Higher Education},

volume = {85},

issue = {5},

pages = {1161–1180},

abstract = {In Germany, the final grade of a doctorate is significant for careers inside and outside the academic labor market. Particularly important is the highest grade—summa cum laude. At the same time, doctoral grades are constantly subject to criticism. Thus far, however, neither German nor international studies have examined the determinants of doctoral grades. Drawing on Hu’s model of college grades, this study develops a conceptual framework for explaining doctoral grades and investigates the impact of doctorate holders’, reviewers’, and environmental context characteristics on the probability of doctoral candidates graduating with the highest grade, summa cum laude. Using logistic regression analyses on data from the German PhD Panel Study, the study confirms that high-performing individuals are more likely to achieve the highest doctoral grade. A learning environment that is characterized by supervision security, high expectations to participate in scientific discourse, and strong support in network integration also increases the chances of graduating with a summa cum laude degree. In contrast, being female, having a highly respected reviewer, studying natural sciences, medical studies or engineering, completing an external doctorate, and studying within a learning environment characterized by rigid time constraints are negatively related to the probability of receiving a summa cum laude grade. This study is the first to lend empirical evidence to the critical discussion of doctoral grades and offers insights to ensure the validity of doctoral grades.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

Schließen

In Germany, the final grade of a doctorate is significant for careers inside and outside the academic labor market. Particularly important is the highest grade—summa cum laude. At the same time, doctoral grades are constantly subject to criticism. Thus far, however, neither German nor international studies have examined the determinants of doctoral grades. Drawing on Hu’s model of college grades, this study develops a conceptual framework for explaining doctoral grades and investigates the impact of doctorate holders’, reviewers’, and environmental context characteristics on the probability of doctoral candidates graduating with the highest grade, summa cum laude. Using logistic regression analyses on data from the German PhD Panel Study, the study confirms that high-performing individuals are more likely to achieve the highest doctoral grade. A learning environment that is characterized by supervision security, high expectations to participate in scientific discourse, and strong support in network integration also increases the chances of graduating with a summa cum laude degree. In contrast, being female, having a highly respected reviewer, studying natural sciences, medical studies or engineering, completing an external doctorate, and studying within a learning environment characterized by rigid time constraints are negatively related to the probability of receiving a summa cum laude grade. This study is the first to lend empirical evidence to the critical discussion of doctoral grades and offers insights to ensure the validity of doctoral grades.

Schließen

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00883-zdoi:10.1007/s10734-022-00883-z

Schließen

Blackler, Alethea L.; Gomez, Rafael; Popovic, Vesna; Thompson, Helen M.

Life Is Too Short to RTFM: How Users Relate to Documentation and Excess Features in Consumer Products Artikel

In: Interacting with Computers, Bd. 28, Nr. 1, S. 27–46, 2016, ISSN: 0953-5438.

Abstract | Links | BibTeX

@article{Blackler2016,

title = {Life Is Too Short to RTFM: How Users Relate to Documentation and Excess Features in Consumer Products},

author = {Alethea L. Blackler and Rafael Gomez and Vesna Popovic and Helen M. Thompson},

url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu023},

doi = {10.1093/iwc/iwu023},

issn = {0953-5438},

year = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2018-10-20},

journal = {Interacting with Computers},

volume = {28},

number = {1},

pages = {27–46},

abstract = {This paper addresses two common problems that users of various products and interfaces encounter—over-featured interfaces and product documentation. Over-featured interfaces are seen as a problem as they can confuse and over-complicate everyday interactions. Researchers also often claim that users do not read product documentation, although they are often exhorted to ‘RTFM’ (read the field manual). We conducted two sets of studies with users which looked at the issues of both manuals and excess features with common domestic and personal products. The quantitative set was a series of questionnaires administered to 170 people over 7 years. The qualitative set consisted of two 6-month longitudinal studies based on diaries and interviews with a total of 15 participants. We found that manuals are not read by the majority of people, and most do not use all the features of the products that they own and use regularly. Men are more likely to do both than women, and younger people are less likely to use manuals than middle-aged and older ones. More educated people are also less likely to read manuals. Over-featuring and being forced to consult manuals also appears to cause negative emotional experiences. Implications of these findings are discussed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

Schließen

This paper addresses two common problems that users of various products and interfaces encounter—over-featured interfaces and product documentation. Over-featured interfaces are seen as a problem as they can confuse and over-complicate everyday interactions. Researchers also often claim that users do not read product documentation, although they are often exhorted to ‘RTFM’ (read the field manual). We conducted two sets of studies with users which looked at the issues of both manuals and excess features with common domestic and personal products. The quantitative set was a series of questionnaires administered to 170 people over 7 years. The qualitative set consisted of two 6-month longitudinal studies based on diaries and interviews with a total of 15 participants. We found that manuals are not read by the majority of people, and most do not use all the features of the products that they own and use regularly. Men are more likely to do both than women, and younger people are less likely to use manuals than middle-aged and older ones. More educated people are also less likely to read manuals. Over-featuring and being forced to consult manuals also appears to cause negative emotional experiences. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Schließen

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu023doi:10.1093/iwc/iwu023

Schließen

Außerdem mochten wir die Mythen sehr.

Fundgrube+Alt+Entf

Projekte, Tools, Apps… das sind doch bürgerliche Kategorien. Wir packen einfach alles in die Fundgrube:

ChatGPT-Games (via Nele)  Mit ChatGPT spielen
Marc Rebillet
Podcasts

Die Elon Musk Story
4 Days a week
Behind Science

Politik+Alt+Entf

A und O haben Einreichungen zur Richtlinie zur Förderung von Projekten zur Stärkung, Erweiterung und Vernetzung von OER-Communities gelesen und kommentiert.
A rantet über die sog. Volksabstimmung 2023

Weltverbesserung+Alt+Entf

Angeregt durch den 80/82-Podcast: Treten dem Schulförderverein Eurer (ehemaligen) Schule bei.

Diese und andere Weltverbesserungsideen findet man auch gesammelt hier.