These are due by March 3rd @ 5:00 p.m. This really isn't very complicated, but I try to be as specific as possible to avoid misinterpretations.
There are three components to the self-evaluation (I may have said two - but I didn't mean it!). You will evaluate yourself on your participation in class, on your participation in the weekly short blog entries due the day before class, and on your participation in commenting on one another's work. You will evaluate yourself on a five point scale for each category. The criteria are as follows, for each category. Please read the criteria, and send me an email before our next class, which includes the name of each category and your self-evaluation for that category. You *may* include a paragraph or less commenting on your own work. You *may* give me links to your best work for the weekly short blog and/or commenting on the work of others. These links are required if you are giving yourself a 4 or 5 in that category; you should be able to easily point out an example of your own excellent work.
5: You always come to class, always participate multiple times, and your part in the discussion is productive (for instance, you might regularly move the overall discussion in a new direction).
4: You come to class, always participate at least once in a given session (alternatively, you might have the occasional off class, but otherwise perform at the 5 level), and your participation is consistently productive.
3: You come to class, and usually have something to say in the course of the session. The value of your participation might be inconsistent, or you might have had several silent classes.
2: You rarely participate, but you pay attention, and occasionally have things to say.
1: You rarely or never participate in class.
"Question" Blog Entries
5: You always do the blog entry, you always put some thought into it, and your work is invariably productive; you would feel comfortable writing a full essay on at least some of these ideas. Your ideas might often show up in class (hopefully with your name attached to them).
4: You haven't missed any weekly blog entry. While the quality of those entries might vary (and their length probably does), and while only a few of your ideas might have come up class, you feel like some of them *could* have been the basis of a discussion.
3: You have missed no more than one weekly blog entry. The quality of those entries may be somewhat variable.
2: You do your blog entry more often than not, but may have missed more than one; when you do it, its quality may be inconsistent.
1: You usually don't do the blog entry at all.
Comments on the work of others
5: You always make your weekly comment on another person's blog entry. You always put thought into your comment, and you always productively focus on their overall argument, without getting wrapped up in details. You have at least a couple paragraphs of coherent thoughts.
4: The same as 5, except you might have missed an entry, or you might sometimes wander in your focus, or you might have done one or two of them in haste. Generally, though, you offer specific, focused, useful advice.
3: You usually remember to make your weekly comment, but they are often short and/or unfocused on their argument. You might, for instance, usually focus on grammatical or mechanical issues instead of their argument, or you might simply often praise the other person, without offering much in the way of constructive advice.
2: You have commented on others' work, but you sometimes forget to do so, and you don't put much effort into it when you do.
1: You don't usually comment on others' work.