Associate Name: Nicole Vesper
Main Advisor and OP Reviewer: Jennifer Dauksha-English Morgan

Output Packet #:  	2	Year: Capstone MSc
OP Title: Education for Agroecology

Date Submitted: July 27th, 2016
Date Reviewed: October 6th, 2016
Mark: 80
Grade: A
Time Spent on Review: 3.75 hrs

Dear Nicole,

This is a great project and Output Packet. I’m really excited to see how your pathway is emerging! One of your finest OPs to date!

Please forgive me that I was unaware that you submitted your OP, and then I went to CA and was unable to review it until a month of traveling completed. I’ve done a poor job at paying attention to when you’ve been active/on pause and put this out of my mind. I apologize.

My review is broken into these sections:
1. Evaluation Form 
2. Comments Per Section

As always, I respect your integrity in managing your pathway. I'm lucky to be your advisor! You inspire me on an ongoing basis. Thank you for the work that you do in the world.

Cheers,
Jennifer

OP REVIEW-------------------------

1. EVALUATION FORM-------------------- 

(attached)

2. COMMENTS PER SECTION---------------

Commentary
- Great navigational statements in the notes to reader section. It’s very clear.
- I would highly recommend getting rid of To Verb when stating goals. During my many proposal writing classes, they recommend adding more power/action by saying research or researching instead of to research, for instance.
- I think your goals for OP section could use an introductory sentence explaining the context.
- Absolutely love your world view and context section. It’s very passionate and raw. I love the authenticity and patrix busting awareness that you so eloquently speak.
- Digiphon - check!
- Gratitudes - I love being your Advisor!
- Excellent purpose statements.
- Great job summarizing the output contents. 
- Sufficient design overview, with the goals in mind as well. You said that the four ‘D’ framework aided you with OP structure. How so? And how did it support the process?
- I like that you add direct links to resources. 
- On Pathway Reflection - Dang you’ve had a rough patch. I’m impressed though by all of your accomplishments. 
- Process Reflection - I agree that your OP design is extremely effective. I love the thought os you stretching your intellectual muscles! 
- Tracking - always impressive. Would be great if you put the timelines as embedded images so they could be viewed right in the OP. 
- Loving all the deep reflection on learnings in OP process and MTMP.
- Thank you for responding to and incorporating much of my feedback.
- Add that the last three pages are also not included in word count - correct?
- Great self and peer evaluations. I appreciate how you give very specific example of how and why you feel you’ve met the criteria. You gave yourself a 70. I gave you an 80. You ok with that?

Core Report
-  I absolutely am impressed with the layout of this page. I’ve never seen an OP look like this - very professional and graphically eye catching! Sharp!
- Appreciate short and succinct introductions. This is my preferred style. Nice work keeping it simple. My only suggestion would be to add a lead in sentence that strikes inspiration and relevance cord with reader.
- What do you mean by militant research? Lol - never mind you answer it right away.
- Excellent overview of methodology - my only suggestion would be to compare and contrast the attributes, constraints and benefits of each.
- The Literature Review section explains a lot about the field. It sounds like you’ve identified some gaps and are adding a lot of value. My main suggestion would be to be very explicit about the interventions you’re making in the field or with the OP.
- Anything notable cross-culturally?
- On the actual research itself - I would suggest that you do not start a sentence/section out with naming a book (Hilmire et. al’s) is an awkward opening. I’’m noticing some typos in this OP. hooks needs capitalizing, and on the previous page when you introduce the title of your MSc, you forget to add the word ‘in’. In a way I feel like this section on design, could benefit from an introductory sentence that sates the 7 main talking points covered. I think they are, using an interdisciplinary and systems approach, integrate action and experimental learning opportunities, leveraging institutional resources, building bridges, establishing partnerships, creating autonomous learning spaces, accessibility, and bottom-up offerings. By stating them all together like that I can see patterns more so though than having them spread out. This is fascinating research. I’d same the same feedback for the other two section too.
- The last sentence in the section on curricula and content is action and meaning packed. Nice!
- I like that on Pedagogy and Roles of Education you do include an opening statement - see that really helps! Same on the final section with Berila’s summary.
- Your research is spanning 1970-2016, that’s pretty expansive. It would be good for you to note this and make an observation about the historical growth of the field.
- Appreciate your comment about how therefore, education is essential to class struggle. 
- Fantastic that you filled in some gaps by making recommendations. Nice work! Impressive!
- This conclusion is succinct and impactful. My only suggestion would be to add one sentence that anchors back into the introduction - remind us what you told us.
- I guess I want a bit more integration - maybe a section between research and conclusion summing up the hinge points that stack.
- Great resource list and extensive bibliography.

Supporting Evidence
- Not all the links in supporting evidence open up into new windows as you said in the navigation instructions.
- I would suggest that you create two supporting evidence pages - one for research (resource review and outcomes) and one for OP/pathway.
- I love that you followed through tracking your life goals - like self care.
- Impressive support for pathway!
- Great that you journal like this. Did you keep it up after February?

Educator Portfolio
- Excellent portfolio of support for this field of work. 
- Educator statement is rock solid!
- This is so very professional - you’re baddass and brilliant!
- On talks and presentations - is that given? or viewed?
- Nice graphical layout!

Resources
- Absolutely amazing. this is a breath of fresh air - as in - I wish more people would do this amount of critical thinking and external referencing of the field. Wow!  
- Note that you’re bibliography is really hard to read - add spaces, bold the names, or even hyphenate them.
- Awesome how you have these separated by topic.