<p>I like the idea of a teacher talking to student A about the rating given by student A to student B because learning how to listen is even more important than learning how to speak.</p>
<p>Thanks, theoxpride10. I’ll suggest that to my teacher when I get back to school!</p>
<p>I’ll suggest this: for every category that has a grade of 3 (or 2) or below, the student has to write a 1-sentence explanation on why did he give that grade. Most people are lazy, so if someone does okay, then no one would bother write an explanation. An explanation would be written iff that person does REALLY BADLY. </p>
<p>The purpose of classmates rating is so that the grade would not be based on only one person.</p>
<p>braintrauma is straight ballin man</p>
<p>“The purpose of classmates rating is so that the grade would not be based on only one person,” but if the grade is too different, it won’t count?</p>
<p>Although it may seem like a good idea to have them write sentences, do you really think they’d like it that you first gave them bad grades, and now you’re making them write sentences?</p>
<p>I know that is not your intention, but just make sure you think about the repercussions of these suggestions. Don’t worry though. Even Washington has trouble with this part…</p>
<p>What do you mean, BattleForLA? </p>
<p>This was not the first time that this happened. This happened also way back in 5th grade in a more extreme form. My teacher gave our group 97 while the classmates’ rating was 55.8. (not a typo).</p>
<p>I recently got my scores per category. </p>
<p>In the first presentation, I got 5 in all categories except that I got a 3 or both pronunciation and overall impact. (my classmates rated me an average of 2 in overall impact for some reason… I think that that is the only category that you could pull down someone’s grade without needing a justification or a reason. I mispronounced I think two words, but my classmates rated me an average of 2.5 for pronunciation (again, not much justification is needed for this)). </p>
<p>I’ll ask for the breakdown for the second presentation soon.</p>
<p>@neutron031: Wait, the one who is going to write sentences is the rater, to justify why such a low score is given.</p>
<p>I see in other forms of the school that this is being applied. </p>
<p>When at the parents observation week, the parents rate the teacher’s teaching, or other aspects of the school, if the score is 3/5 or below, the parent has to write an explanation. </p>
<p>In conduct grades, when a grade of C+ or below is given, an explanation should also be written. </p>
<p>That’s why I think that this is a good idea.</p>
<p>Yes, and the rater is the student, and now you’re making them do more work.</p>
<p>Only of the student gives a 2 or a 1. Or only a phrase is needed like “I did not understand anything” or “too soft, can’t hear” or “was looking at the floor the whole time”</p>
<p>I’m sorry. I took this:</p>
<p>"I’ll suggest this: for every category that has a grade of 3 (or 2) or below, the student has to write a 1-sentence explanation on why did he give that grade. "</p>
<p>to mean if it deviates by two from the teacher’s standards. Sorry, I didn’t read it right. I think that’s fair.</p>
<p>Also, could you tell me how to do the quote box? It might help me a bit more than by just putting it in quotes! Haha!</p>
<p>Click reply then click quote message in reply.</p>
<p>What do you mean that it deviates by two? </p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Oh great, thanks! :)</p>
<p>I took it to mean that, say the teacher gives the student a 5, but you give them a 3, you would have to justify. Or, if the teacher gave a student a 1, but you gave a 4, you would have to justify.</p>
<p>
[quote=neutron031 ]
Also, could you tell me how to do the quote box?
[/quote ]
</p>
<p>@neutron031,</p>
<p>In my idea, there is no relatedness with the teacher’s grade. I think that a 3 need not to be justified, but a 2 or 1 has to be justified. Or what is more fair in your opinion to be the benchmark? Obviously the students don’t want to write too many sentences or explanations , but then students could just give straight 3s to everyone and explanations would not be needed. </p>
<p>I plan to propose this to the teacher on Monday. </p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>P.S. nvmnd braintumour</p>
<p>Its the Bloom Taxonomy. Know - Comprehend - Apply - Analyse - Synthesise - Evaluate.
Evaluating requires a much deeper level of understanding and mastery of the material. </p>
<p>With justifying, we have never really had a problem with that. The rubrics are straight forward and clear. Presentations either fit one cell of the rubric or they dont. That is, very rarely can you say that a presentation could be evaluated as a 5/5 in one aspect or a 3/5 in another. in the end the totals are very close to each other. When students are evaluating, and their own grade is on the line, they are more objective.</p>
<p>I think that 2 and below is fair, like you said.</p>