QuILT-rules

QuILT-sitemap: https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-content

Terms and conditions (offered by teachers, revisions by Students - s also the history behind and the discussions parallel):

• All sources (Internet, books, persons) can always be involved into the problem solving by Students.
• No data/fact should be learned (in the classic way - But: the problem solving is mostly faster, if a big data asset is available in the brain of Students.)
• Good questions can not be answered through simple Google searches.
• Knowledge is, what can be transformed into source code, each other human activity is a kind of artistic activity.
• Students should not only be capable of reflecting the already well-known “knowledge” from the past, but they have to find problems, lacks, risks in the structure of the given net of facts and rules. Therefore: Students should become a better expert as their classic teachers.
• A relevant question is: what is better than an other object?
• The real role of the “teachers” is the role of the coaches.
• The learning/teaching/coaching processes should be as far as possible to produce log-data (e.g. questions and answers should always be collected in a written form).
• The magic of words is not the final form of the description of knowledge.
• It worth knowing about the Academic Writing Skills as far as possible (especially in cases, where relevant messages should be created in form of SMS.)
• The log-based evaluations of performances of the Students will always be public in an anonimyzed way (see: PLA-phase, mid-term dashboards, final evaluation).
• Performances should be benchmarked/compared as far as possible.
• Evaluations should be derived about performances not only by the coaches, but especially by Students about at least 3 further Students.
• Questions should be answered as far as possible in the first case by Students.
• Unprepared declarations from coaches/literature without trial & error effects by Students are to minimize.