Tell me, and I forget; teach me, and I remember; involve me and I learn.
Blended Learning
Building Voices
Peer Assessment
ROUGH DRAFT
PEER ASSESSMENT AND REFLECTION
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Total Points: 50
Points Breakdown:
Originality and Relevance (10 points).
9-10: Highly original and highly relevant research.
7-8: Original and relevant research, with some novel aspects.
5-6: Relevant but not completely original research.
3-4: Research with little originality or relevance.
0-2: Research without originality or relevance.
Clarity and Structure (10 points).
9-10: Impeccable structure, all sections well defined.
7-8: Clear structure, with some well-defined sections.
5-6: Adequate structure, but some sections could be better organized.
3-4: Confusing and disorganized structure.
0-2: Very poor structure, without clear organization.
News and Credibility (10 points).
9-10: The information is of maximum relevance and relevance in the field. Information should have adequate citations and be verifiable from other reliable sources.
7- 8: The information is mostly current and relevant. It is well-cited but less verifiable.
5-6: The information is somewhat current but still relevant. Information cited but with some doubts about verifiability.
3-4: The information is outdated but may be relevant. Information with few citations and limited verifiability.
0-2: The information is very outdated and of little relevance. Misquoted and difficult-to-verify information.
Analysis and Discussion (10 points).
9-10: In-depth analysis and well-founded critical discussion.
7-8: Clear analysis and adequate discussion, with some criticism.
5-6: Analysis and discussion present but superficial.
3-4: Poor analysis and limited discussion.
0-2: Analysis and discussion absent or very deficient.
References and Citations (5 points).
5: All sources are correctly cited and referenced.
4: Most sources are correctly cited and referenced.
3: Some sources are correctly cited, but others are missing.
2: Few sources are cited correctly.
0-1: Citations and references are incorrect or non-existent.
Writing Quality (5 points).
5: Impeccable writing without errors.
4: Clear writing with minimal errors.
3: Adequate writing, with some errors.
2: Writing with several errors.
0-1: Very poor writing, with many errors.
REFLECTION.
Reviewing a publication article is an exacting but greatly enriching duty. It allowed me to revise some aspects that define the quality and influence of the advertising article. Sifting through the novelty and relevance of these articles has helped me note some bright, pertinent research. That was fulfilling, especially in noting novel ideas adding significant value to the field. It was important to consider not only the logical flow of ideas but also the smoothness of the text and how easily the reader could get through it by following the thread of arguments. Checking the references and the data used, which were recent and from credible sources, was necessary to show the topicality and credibility of the articles. Do research and keep up with the very latest trends and developments. I can say that the article evaluation exercise has taught me to view everything that makes up academic work. It helped me appreciate that the presence of individual criteria in structuring an article can have a firm influence and significant contribution to fields of study and society in general. Moreover, it has made me improve my writing and analysis skills by learning from others' success and mistakes. This was a great opportunity to keep growing both as a student and as a person.