# data[].attributes.body
My main recommendation would be to provide in your final paper many more methodological details than you provided in your presentation and make the links between the two portions of your study (addressing the two RQs) much more explicit. Also, a question I would have asked if we had had more time would have been regarding your statement "Commodified Chinese language - viewed as less important". This doesn't seem intuitively logical to me. It would seem to me that the commodification of a language would lead to people viewing the language as MORE important rather than less important (seen as more pragmatically useful and MORE likely to bring about monetary gain).

# data[].attributes.body
An engaging presentation! As I noted in the Q&A session, the characterization of 'Light Singlish' and 'Heavy Singlish' would have been better presented without comparison to 'correct' English - highlighting DIFFERENCE from Standard English rather than in terms of 'correctness'. Also, some of the other characterizations you used in the presentation should be re-considered. For example, "...used to adjust to the lingo" was, I believe, understood by your presentation audience because you had provided a brief discussion of this earlier, but a more 'academic' manner of characterizing this would be 'accommodation to the speech of others'.

# data[].attributes.body
This was a principled and well-executed media discourse analysis study for the data you chose to examine, but I believe it should be noted that the Bloobin campaign did feature TV ads in which the auditory mode was prominent. Also, Kress & van Leeuwen's conceptualization of salience is not ALL about size, prominence, or centrality in the text. The personification of the Bloobin and color contrast (e.g., the Bloobin's blue colour in contrast to a white background could make it quite salient in a text, even if the size is quite small and it's featured in the bottom corner of the text). Visually attractive slides! (The Bloobin and its colour-contrast also surely contributed to this.)

# data[].attributes.body
Presentation comments:

Could hardly see Torris's face!

Very good coverage of respondents

Pace of slides a bit too fast

Again, I think it would be good to show some samples of the questions used and responses given

# data[].attributes.body
From NJCP4:

The presentation was coherent and succinct. The explanation of the Social Identity Theory allowed us to understand the background of the whole research better. The explanation of the factors of how stereotypes came into youth lives was clear. The way of presenting the methodology was easy to follow. The reseach was extensive and through. Great use of visuals in the slides.

One way to improve is to be more careful in the assumption that person's accent is directly affected by their enthicity, and not the "Singaporean" accent that mostly everyone grows up with. They could also be clearer on what is meant by "warmth" (friendliness?). Secondly, we think that the background of the responders might help better understand the whole reseach. Lastly, maybe the explanation could be more about the current world's India (how most of Singapore's foreign workers in IT and such have Indian nationalities) rather than basing off historical events that may not be that relavent in today's context.

# data[].attributes.body
Comments:

The introduction of the project and problem of the views of accents was clearly presented through the theories, history and media. The topic is also very easy to understand with the different categories of impacts and source of stereotypes.

The data and research was very good but maybe less slides with more elaboration on each slide may be better for future presentations.

# data[].attributes.body
A significant presentation on the use of semiotic modes in Singapore's recycling campaign. The research question was well addressed. In addition, the pace was easy to follow and the presentation was well-structured. However, it would be easier to follow if the slides had fewer words, more pictures.

# data[].attributes.body
A good idea to distinguish between 'light' and 'heavy' Singlish, as well as to provide examples for a layperson audience, who might not always share the same ideas of what Singlish constitutes.

Aventis Learning Group – maybe not the best source?

For the presentation - maybe show a sample of what the survey questions and interview questions look like (just 1 or 2 for reference)? Also, show some relevant responses from the respondents.

In addition to industry, the role probably matters as well (but I can understand that people won't want to go into specifics about their roles)

“Communication CULTURE” (online vs F2F) - would it be more appropriate to use 'modality'?

Typo: Insight slide – “Singish”

# data[].attributes.body
A good analysis of Singapore's recycling campaign and the use of semiotic resources. The study is systematic, though not all details (what to choose, how to categorise, etc.) were shared during the presentation. Towards that end, in the 'Coding' and 'Categorisation' slides, it might be more useful to focus on just one or two examples than to show the entire list.

Small typo: 'Gestual' instead of 'Gestural' in one of the slides

# data[].attributes.body
There were clear and succinct in the history of Singlish in Singapore, such as in the noting the Standard English emphasis during nation building. They were able to express the government's thought process, showing the different sectors that involved Standard English and Singlish

They could develop more on the idea of how workplace interaction works

# data[].attributes.body
It is a meaningful presentation that allows the public to be more aware of the animated character bluebin, who is able to spread emotions to others, for example being angry when people sort out recycled waste wrongly. Their pace was good and they were able to introduce the area of their research succinctly, one thing they can improve on is to improve on speaking the the campaign as a whole

# data[].attributes.headline
Feedback Guidelines (for Panellist Reference)

# data[].attributes.subject
Feedback Guidelines (for Panellist Reference)

# data[].attributes.body
Thank you for spending time with us this morning to help our young researchers! You may consider giving feedback to projects based on their presentation delivery and on the following points:

1. Mastery of subject knowledge

- Does the project demonstrate extensive knowledge of subject?

- Is there convincing evidence to support ideas and conclusions?

- Are all questions answered with clear elaboration?

2. Organisation of presentation

- Is the organisation of the argument clear and logical?

3. Significance of project

- Is the project relevant or important to the field?

- Will it make a significant contribution?

~ HSSRP Organising Committee.

# data[].attributes.body
To add a comment to a post, click the space that says: Add comment. Alternatively, you can add a post by pressing the "+" under the project tag heading you are commenting on. When leaving a comment, please begin with your project tag/name.
For example:
Dr Smith: this group has demonstrated extensive knowledge of the subject. However, you can try to make more eye contact with the audience.
XYZP9: the presentation was well organised but the slides were too cluttered and difficult to read. You spoke energetically!