Home >Education >Q3 evaluation

Q3 evaluation

Date post:19-Jul-2015
Category:
View:45 times
Download:0 times
Share this document with a friend
Transcript:

Q3.What have you learned from your audience feedback?

Q3.What have you learned from your audience feedback?By: Karolina KocajQ1. What is your gender?

This question has allowed me to find out who gave the feedback about our documentary and who in our target audience gave more answers. Through looking at the results to this question I have learned that the majority of people giving feedback about our documentary were female, which means that the results may be slightly biased toward the interests of females. Q2. What is your age range?

Just like the previous question this question has allowed me to gain understanding of who gave feedback for our documentary and what age range within the target audience we had the most responses from. The results showed me that we got responses from all the age ranges within our target audience which is good as the response we varied across all ages. However the majority of respondents were between the ages of 16-20 which will have an impact on the responses.

Q3. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all and 5 being very entertaining) How entertaining did you find the documentary?

This question has allowed me to find out if people within our target audience have found the documentary entertaining and enjoyed watching it. The majority of people gave the documentary a 4 or 5 on how entertaining they thought thedocumentary was which shows that they have enjoyed watching it. However there were a few people that gave it a 3 and one person that gave it a 1 which could be due to the lack of interest in the topic of our documentary.Q4. why?

The answers to this question has allowed me to learn as to why people have rated the documentary the way they have. The responses show that there were two people that have answered the questionnaire that dont really like pets which explains the lover ratings. However the majority of people have found the documentary entertaining and the most people said that they have enjoyed watching the documentary have found the different pets to be interesting. Q5. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being very informative) How informative did you find the documentary?

The results from this question has allowed me to gain an understanding on how informative they thought the documentary was. The majority of people have found the documentary very informative as they gave it a score of 5 out of 5. Which meant that they could have learned something from it. However there was one person that have it a score of 2 which could be due to the fact that the person already has a wide knowledge of pets. Q6. why?

These are the responses giving explanations to the scores given on how informative the documentary is. Some people said that they found it informative as they have found out different information about exotic pets that they didnt know about. A lot of people have said that the information was mostly given on how to look after pets. This could be due to the fact that our documentary was the only first 5 minutes to a 30 minute full documentary and people were unaware of this, so later in the documentary other information would have been given.Q7. What was your favourite interview?

The majority of people have answered that their favourite interview was the exotic pet shop owner and the dog owner which could be due to the fact that they were very informative and had a variety of different interviews which have made it interesting. However the least favourite interview was the cat shelter worker and the pet shop manager. This could be due to the fact that the cat shelter worker just gets cut of and the pet shop manager just dragged out her answers. Q8. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being very eye catching) How eye catching did you find the documentary?

The answers to this question will allow me to gain an understanding on how eye-catching the audience thinks the documentary is. The majority of people have given us a score of 4 however quite a lot of people have also given it a 5 and there were no responses below 3 which means that people generally thought that the documentary was eye catching. Q9. why?

The responses to this question has allowed me to learn what was eye catching about the documentary and what wasnt. Most people said they the wide range of cutaways have made the documentary eye catching, however some people have said that the lighting in some of the cutaways could have been a bit better. Also a few people have said that the graphics could have been a bit more interesting which could be an improvement. Q10. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being very technical) How did you find the technical quality of the documentary? (including editing, interview set up, sound and continuity)

This is probably due to the facts that we have used industry standard equipment and editing software which have allowed us to construct and produce a high quality product. The responses to this question have allowed me to find out how good or bad was the quality of our documentary. The majority of answers given for this question were 5 out of 5 which means that most people thought that the documentary was of a high quality. Q11. why?

The answers from this question have allowed me to learn as to why people thought the technical quality of our documentary was good. A lot of people have said that the documentary looked professional and that we have included a lot of the codes and conventions which is what we were aiming for when producing the documentary. This also tells me that we have effectively used the different technologies to construct our product for it to be appealing for our target audience. Q12. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all and 5 being very obeying) to what standard do you feel the documentary obeyed professional conventions of a documentary?

The answers to this question have allowed me to gain knowledge on how professional people thought our documentary was. The majority of people have given the score of 5 and there were no scores below 3 which means that generally people thought that our documentaryobeyed the codes and conventions of documentaries and therefore resembled real media products.Q13. why?

The answers to this question has allowed me to gain knowledge to why people thought our documentary obeyed the codes and conventions of real documentaries. A lot of people have said that our documentary resembled real media products which was what we were aiming for. Some people have also said that it was interesting and not boring which made it like real documentaries. This shows me that we have successfully constructed a product that is of a similar standard to a real documentary. Q14. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being completely enough) Do you think the documentary showed enough of a range of pets?

The responses to this question have allowed me to learn if we have included enough pets in our documentary. The average score for this question was 4.5 which means that the majority of people have though that we have included a wide range ofpets and we didnt need anymore. However some people thought we could have included more pets in the documentary. We could have maybe included other pets in our documentary such as horses or birds. Q15. Are there any other pets you can think of that we could have included?

The responses to this question have given us suggestions of what other pets we could have included in our documentary. A lot of people have said that it would be a good idea to include horses. I think that this is a very good suggestion as it would make the documentary not only focus on pets that are kept at home but also at pets that are kept outside in places like the stables. Q16. why?

This question has given us reasons as to why we should have included the pet that they have suggested in our documentary. Some of the responses have said that the pet that they have suggested would make the documentary more interesting. Also people have said that it would have allowed us to show people a different perspective of keeping pets which would have probably been pets such as horses that are kept at the stables and not in the house. Q17. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being enough) Do you think we included enough interviews?

The answers to this question have allowed me to gain knowledge if people though we have included enough interviews in our documentary. The majority of people have given us a 5 out of 5. Which means that we have included enough of a range of interviews in our documentary. However there were some people that have given us the score of 2 or 3 which means that they thought we could have included more interviews. Q18. How do you think we could have improved the documentary?

The responses to this question have allowed me to gain knowledge of what we could improve in our documentary to make it better. Some people have said that the thing we could have improved on is using more cutaways as it would have made it more interesting. Also people have said that we should have ended it with an overview or a conclusion, but again people didnt know that our production was only the first five minutes to a 30 minute documentary. Overall people have given us a lot of suggestions on how we could improve our documentary. Q19. On a scale of 0 to 5 (0 being not at all an 5 being professional) Do you think the newspaper advert included high quality photographs?

We also wanted to gain feedback about our two ancillary texts, which one of them is the newspaper advert. The answers to this question have allowed me to find out if the audience though the photographs were of high quality. The average score for this question was 4.1 which means that a lot of people have though that the photographs were of high quality. However some people ha

Click here to load reader

Reader Image
Embed Size (px)
Recommended