What should I take into consideration when assessing your performance & contributions to the SM wiki? Please help fill out the grading rubric:
Criterion
|
Exceeds Expectations
|
Meets Expectations
|
Below Expectations |
peer assessment:
fair share of contribution |
25 |
|
|
peer assessment:
timely contributions
|
10 |
|
|
peer assessment:
quality contributions
|
25 |
|
|
overall, wiki represents a comprehensive/diverse picture of social media tools |
50 |
|
|
overall, wiki represents a scaleable framework for social media research |
50 |
|
|
usability: clear navigation, clear categories, etc. |
40 |
|
|
*If you get a failing grade on the peer assessment part, you will get 0 points for the entire assignment
60 points for peer assessment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL: |
200 |
|
|
Comments (3)
Scott Schroeder said
at 4:50 pm on Sep 8, 2009
I think accuracy of the information provided should be one. We don't want to have to retract the wiki on misleading information.
abranum@... said
at 10:29 am on Sep 9, 2009
Andrew Branum
Jenny Smock said
at 2:09 pm on Sep 9, 2009
JAS
You don't have permission to comment on this page.