REVIEW REVIEW OF PART-up second TAKEN THE .- 13.12.1910
In all cases, reprobate concerning the tests, it assumes that students have not shown to have the minimum level required by the chair, which allows distinctions approaches and issues reasonably questioned as to interconnect them and demonstrate that they understand the background of the institutions under study. In some of the evidence gaps are so large that it is surprising that they have ordered review. In other, we see a good orientation. TUESDAY I received the December 28 reviews collected on Monday, December 27, 2010, as almost no time to pass the notes and present, the review contains no analysis of the evidence said.
1. DNI 30908954. Student SSS His review did not reach the required level, especially lack of depth in some key topics such as cooperative, recruitment director with the company, responsibility of the trustees, the concept of return. No level. Note two.
2. ID 331305786. RLS has no level student. Note two.
3. DNI 33273845. AV student. Not reach the average level, the failing grade must be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
4. DNI 23313122. Student GL is very clear that it falls short of average, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
5. DNI 33788780. FS lacks student level. Note two.
6. DNI 33102733. Student. WF level clearly lacks his failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
7. DNI 23498159. AMC Student Certainly no level, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
8. MAT. 20355. Student FAQ Clearly not reach the required level. no level, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
9. DNI 33912062. UL Its review certainly no level, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
10. DNI 16593379. MC Its review certainly no level, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
11. DNI 21672842. RWG Its review certainly no level, your failing grade to be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
12. DNI 29257960. DR is an atypical review. Some topics are well developed. Other developers but including misconceptions, showing that it lacks consistency in the analysis. Is a student who has studied but lacks knowledge together, intertwined in an orderly manner. In cooperatives, showed strength, but large potholes responsibility confuses the management regime of the SA with the SRL and extinction of responsibility, which confuses even the right to protest. Not reach the desired level, the failing grade must be confirmed. DOS (2) .-
13. GSY student ID. 339112352. This review, by careful analysis and comparison, you can even say that reached the level required by the chair and therefore is considered just approved. The note of this test is four.
Gulminelli
Ricardo Ludovico.
0 comments:
Post a Comment