First link: He gave background on his students. He showed that “nearly all of our students come from low-income households and receive free or reduced lunch” which showcases that he does not live in a rich district where the parents or PTA can just fund the project. He also gave a valid reason for wanting the supplies. He mentioned that all the tests are online instead of paper and pencil, meaning it’s necessary to have the computer and supplies. He kept it short and simple. He attached a picture of the lab, but I wish he had posted more that showed more details.
Second link: She also gave background on her students. She created an emotional side by saying that her “students face many challenges”, that they love technology, that “they don’t They don't have a lot in life and for them to know that they can come to school to have the best classroom experience would make their day!” She showed them what they have and why it would be better for her to get the new materials. She gave a lot of information on her students and what her students could do with the new materials, she really made it personal. I think she could have benefited from having some statistical numbers/research in her summary.
Third link: Her title summary has “Help me give my students a "once-in-a- (past) lifetime" experience of a time lost to the ages at Medieval Times!”, which has code in it and I was immediately confused/didn’t want to look at the project because of that. Her project had a lot of clichés in it, like “To say I love my students would be an understatement, to say the least! This batch of sixth-graders has been one the most responsible” and “I'd be hard-pressed to find another class of kids more deserving than this bunch!”, every teacher says that about their students, I want to know more about the actual students. She talked about time travel more than she did about the actual project. She didn’t really mention what the students would learn, just that they “will engage in a history lesson”. Personally, if I was going to be a donor I would want to know exactly how and what students will learn from this project. She also didn’t include a picture, and I think pictures are always beneficial.
Second link: She also gave background on her students. She created an emotional side by saying that her “students face many challenges”, that they love technology, that “they don’t They don't have a lot in life and for them to know that they can come to school to have the best classroom experience would make their day!” She showed them what they have and why it would be better for her to get the new materials. She gave a lot of information on her students and what her students could do with the new materials, she really made it personal. I think she could have benefited from having some statistical numbers/research in her summary.
Third link: Her title summary has “Help me give my students a "once-in-a- (past) lifetime" experience of a time lost to the ages at Medieval Times!”, which has code in it and I was immediately confused/didn’t want to look at the project because of that. Her project had a lot of clichés in it, like “To say I love my students would be an understatement, to say the least! This batch of sixth-graders has been one the most responsible” and “I'd be hard-pressed to find another class of kids more deserving than this bunch!”, every teacher says that about their students, I want to know more about the actual students. She talked about time travel more than she did about the actual project. She didn’t really mention what the students would learn, just that they “will engage in a history lesson”. Personally, if I was going to be a donor I would want to know exactly how and what students will learn from this project. She also didn’t include a picture, and I think pictures are always beneficial.