Items not evaluated
An additional hypothesis in the course was that students could be motivated to achieve excellence by an intrinsic drive based on a positive educational environment.
Three areas were not formally evaluated.
First were the group presentations that made up the content of the course. Second were the verbal individual essay presentations. In the case of the verbal presentations, names were chosen at random.
In both of these areas, feedback was encouraging and strengths noted. In cases where important topic areas were missed, questions by the instructor tried to bring these out. In many cases, an explanation was posted electronically by the individual or group for the entire class. In individual essays, students were free to incorporate suggestions.
The third area not evaluated was the week-to-week performance in the laboratory and the practice triple jump. Here people were encouraged to be spontaneous, to be willing to take risks and to learn from each other.
There was the expectation that students would have an intrinsic motivation to do well in front of their instructors and peers. Unconventional thinking and innovation were encouraged.
Since marks were not an issue, students felt comfortable in taking risks but were at the same time motivated to do well before their peers.
