Workshop Evaluation: Fill & Download for Free

Evaluation means making of a judgment about the amount, number, or value of something.. examples1.Physical Activity Evaluation2.Children’s Activity Evaluation3.student performance evaluation4.Workshop Evaluation……etc

1. Certificates. Any workshop that is organized(free or non-free) must absolutely have a certificate awarded upon completion. So many people are obsessed with obtaining certificates that they sometimes do not evaluate whether they will actually learn something useful and more importantly, is the certificate of any use.2. Attending "Ethical Hacking Workshops" by Fadia, Rahul Tyagi, Sunny Vaghela or any other such charlatan out there and claiming they are hacking gurus of some kind(I've encountered so many such people and cringe every time I hear the claim).(Refer to Varrun Ramani's answer to What are some examples of experts who in the end were not real experts? for more on Fadia; other answers talk about few other such charlatans).

For the MSL (Curiosity), landing site selection began in 2006. The selection of the MSL landing site was through a series of community-led, open workshops that occurred in parallel with the design and development of the spacecraft. The workshops were organized by a NASA-appointed Landing Site Steering Committee, co-chaired by Dr. John Grant (Smithsonian Institution) and Dr. Matthew Golombek (JPL). Workshops in June 2006, October 2007, September 2008, September 2010, and May 2011 considered over sixty sites, narrowing the list of candidate sites to four. The down-selections were based on many factors including their scientific relevance and assessment against surface and atmospheric safety constraints. A team of senior NASA science officials then conducted a detailed review and unanimously agreed to move forward with the MSL Science Team's recommendation. The team was comprised of a host of principal and co-investigators on the project. Finally, on 22 July 2011, NASA announced that the Curiosity rover will target Gale Crater as its landing site.With the Mars 2020 rover mission, essentially the same occurred. The number of landing sites was reduced from about 30 to eight at the second landing site workshop held 4 August 2015. The first workshop was held 14 May 2014. When narrowing the selection down to three, the following criteria was used:Criterion 1:The site is an astrobiologically-relevant ancient environment and has geologic diversity that has the potential to yield fundamental scientific discoveries when it is a) characterized for the processes that formed and modified the geologic record; and b) subjected to astrobiologically-relevant investigations (e.g., assessment of habitability and biosignature preservation potential).Criterion 2:A rigorously documented and returnable cache of rock and regolith samples assembled at this site has the potential to yield fundamental scientific discoveries if returned to Earth in the future.Criterion 3:There is high confidence in the assumptions, evidence, and any interpretive models that support the assessments for Criteria 1 and 2 for this site.Criterion 4:There is high confidence that the highest-science-value regions of interest at the site can be adequately investigated in pursuit of Criteria 1 and 2 within the prime mission.Criterion 5:The site has high potential for significant water resources that may be of use for future exploration-whether in the form of water-rich hydrated minerals, ice/ice regolith or subsurface ice.Oddly enough, the fourth Mars 2020 Landing Site Workshop should be getting over in several few hours. It is scheduled to close at 1430 18 October 2018. The Community Assessment of Final Candidate Landing Sites isn’t going to be held until after lunch. Based on the handout, the criteria for today’s discussion will be:Criterion 1(In-Situ Science): The landing site includes an astrobiologically-relevant ancient environment and has geologic diversity with the potential to yield fundamental scientific discoveries when it is a) characterized for the processes that formed and modified the geologic record; and b) subjected to astrobiologically-relevant investigations (e.g., assessment of habitability and biosignature preservation potential). (scoring: 1=low potential, 5=high potential)Criterion 2(Returnable Cache Science): A rigorously documented and returnable cache of rock and regolith samples assembled at this site has the potential to yield fundamental scientific discoveries if returned to Earth in the future. (scoring: 1=low potential, 5=high potential) Criterion 3: There is confidence in the assumptions, evidence, and any interpretive models that support the assessments for Criteria 1 and 2 for this site. (scoring: 1=low confidence, 5=high confidence).B. Extended Mission Scenario AssessmentFor each of the extended mission scenarios described at the workshop, evaluate the following criteria specifically in relation to the scientific knowledge and samples that would occur in the extended mission beyond what is likely to be obtained in the first 1.25 Mars years. Stated differently, evaluate the incremental scientific benefit of each extended mission scenario. Criterion 1 (In-Situ Science): The extended mission scenario has the potential to yield fundamental additional scientific discoveries using the rover payload. (scoring: 1=low potential, 5=high potential)Criterion 2 (Returnable Cache Science):Rock and regolith samples assembled in the extended mission have the potential to yield fundamental additional scientific discoveries if returned to Earth in the future. (scoring: 1=low potential, 5=high potential) Criterion 3: There is confidence in the assumptions, evidence, and any interpretive models that support the assessments for Criteria 1 and 2 for the extended mission. (scoring: 1=low confidence, 5=high confidence).In case you are curious, it is being held at the Hilton Los Angeles North/Glendale, Glendale, CAThen, of course there are the landing engineering assessments already done to consider as well.