How Your
Class Participation Grade is Determined
Class participation in WRIT 501 is not
an exact, quantifiable number, because a lot determines on the dynamics of
the individual class and students, the room and equipment, the time of day
the class is offered, and so on and so forth. This is a new class, too, and
I'm not sure how it will go, but over the years I
have identified some characteristics that are
most likely
to determine your class participation grade. Here are those characteristics.
Please note, too, the provision on the syllabus that adjusts your final
grade in the course for absences and tardiness; that counts off your
total
grade, not your class participation
grade. |
A
92 |
This student demonstrated leadership. S/he demonstrated self-respect and
respect for her/his classmates by always arriving on time, always preparing
the assigned material, completing (and printing out and proofreading)
assignments before class began, and in general conducting him/herself in a
way that benefited the class’s ability to learn. S/he regularly contributed
voluntarily to class discussions and those contributions were positive and
valuable. Her work demonstrated that she
explored the web constantly, looking to develop a detailed sense of
standards for effective, professional-looking and -functioning websites.
S/he was an active listener and provided timely, thorough, and valuable feedback to fellow students.
She
started assignments and projects well ahead of due dates
to get feedback from me and others on her
work in progress and have time to make revisions and check that the work is
perfect.
S/he provided focused, positive, and constructive suggestions in peer
reviews and in conferences. S/he listened closely to what her/his classmates and instructor
said and took thorough, useful notes. S/he used workshop
time productively and took
responsibility for
learning more about software than we covered in
class, since there is no way we can cover everything—and since teaching
yourself how to learn software well is a necessary ability in this time of
rapidly changing technologies. |
B
85 |
This student demonstrated leadership potential. S/he demonstrated
self-respect and respect for her/his classmates by usually arriving on time,
usually preparing the assigned material, completing (and printing out and
proofreading) assignments before class began, and in general conducting
him/herself in a way that benefited the class’s ability to learn. S/he
usually contributed voluntarily to class discussions and those contributions
were usually positive and valuable. Her work generally
demonstrated that she
explored the web frequently, looking to
develop a detailed sense of standards for effective, professional-looking
and -functioning websites.
S/he mostly was an active listener and mostly provided timely, thorough, and
valuable feedback to fellow students.
She
usually started assignments and projects well ahead of due dates
to get feedback from me and others on her
work in progress and have time to make revisions and check that the work is
perfect.
S/he mostly provided focused,
positive, and constructive suggestions in peer reviews
and in conferences. S/he usually
listened to classmates and the instructor, but may have been more interested
in hearing her/himself speak than others; S/he usually took fairly thorough
and useful notes. S/he used workshop time productively
and took
responsibility for
learning more about software than we covered in
class, since there is no way we can cover everything—and since teaching
yourself how to learn software well is a necessary ability in this time of
rapidly changing technologies. |
C
75 |
This student was the classic "good soldier." S/he demonstrated self-respect
and respect for her/his classmates by mostly arriving on time, mostly
preparing the assigned material, completing (and printing out and
proofreading) assignments before class began, and in general conducting
him/herself in a way that benefited the class’s ability to learn. S/he
sometimes contributed to class discussions voluntarily, but more often when
called on. Those contributions sometimes were positive and valuable.
Her work demonstrated some evidence that she
explored the web looking to develop a detailed sense of standards for
effective, professional-looking and -functioning websites.
Usually s/he
sat quietly in discussions and provided some
timely, thorough, and valuable feedback to fellow students.
She
mostly started assignments and projects well ahead of due dates
to get feedback from me and others on her
work in progress and have time to make revisions and check that the work is
perfect.
S/he provided
some focused, positive, and constructive suggestions in peer reviews. S/he
sometimes appeared not to be listening to classmates or the instructor and
only sometimes took thorough and useful notes in class
and conferences. S/he sometimes used workshop time
productively and sometimes took
responsibility for
learning more about software than we covered in
class, since there is no way we can cover everything—and since teaching
yourself how to learn software well is a necessary ability in this time of
rapidly changing technologies. |
D
6 5 |
This student was marking time until the class ended. S/he demonstrated a
lack of self-respect and respect for her/his classmates by arriving late,
not preparing the assigned material, forgetting materials, completing (and
printing out and proofreading) assignments after class began, and in general
conducting him/herself in a way that hindered the class’s ability to learn.
S/he almost always had to be called on to contribute. Contributions might or
might not be valuable and positive. Her work only rarely
demonstrated that she
explored the web and had developed
a detailed sense for herself of standards for
effective, professional-looking and -functioning websites.
She
rarely started assignments and projects well ahead of due dates
to get feedback from me and others on her
work in progress and have time to make revisions and check that the work is
perfect.
S/he often seemed to "zone out" during
other students’ oral presentations and did not provide timely, thorough, and
valuable feedback to fellow students. S/he got off topic or wasted time
during peer reviews. S/he gave indications of not paying attention to
classmates or the instructor and rarely took notes of any kind.
S/he wasted workshop time or did not take
responsibility for
learning more about software than we covered in
class. |
F
60 |
This student was biologically present but intellectually absent. S/he
frequently arrived late, was unprepared, forgot his/her materials, or gave
other signs that his/her classmates’ learning environment were not valuable
to him/her. S/he rarely took part in class discussions.
S/he played on the computer, texted, or read other materials instead of
paying attention in class. Contributions, if
offered, were frequently not valuable or positive. Her
work demonstrated that she
rarely explored the web
and did not apply the principles she learned to her
own work.
She
rarely started assignments and projects well ahead of due dates
to get feedback from me and others on her
work in progress and have time to make revisions and check that the work is
perfect.
S/he often did not pay
attention during other students’ presentations, sometimes skipped peer
reviews or failed to take them seriously, and did not contribute to helping
his/her classmates learn more effectively. His/her
presence was sometimes distracting to his/her classmates. S/he didn’t appear care what was
going on around her/him and rarely took notes of any kind.
S/he skipped scheduled appointments and conferences without notifying the
instructor.
S/he wasted workshop time or did not take
responsibility for
learning more about software than we covered in
class. |
|