EA3 PEER EVALUATION OF WR2
OBJECTIVE - Briefly describe what someone should reasonably be able to do as a result of reading the report (consider the purpose of the report). Do NOT use words like "Know", "Understand", "Learn" or "Appreciate".
Anyone who reads this report should be able to identify topics and tasks that would be appropriate to use for a course in Legal Assisting.
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT - Using words like "Good", "Very Good" and/or "Excellent", briefly describe two things relating to how well the report was written, that you feel are worthy of praise.
Edna - Good organization: your memo follows the required format (with the exception of item 2 of the criteria, noted below). You did a very good job of abstracting the occupational description.
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM - Considering things like the content, format, literary style, etc., make one specific suggestion that clearly and specifically describes how something about the report could be improved.
Edna – I suggest that you double-check the criteria for written assignments; item 2 is that the format emulate the Fudrucker example with your own content. I also suggest that you have someone proofread your work for you. I notice that the course title was listed as "Illegal Assisting" in three places; and, in task 2, the phrase "examples briefs and pleadings," is not clear. Also, I suggest that you consider replacing topic 5 and task 5, which deal with making coffee, with a topic and task that are more directly related to the job duties of a paralegal.
EA3 PEER EVALUATION OF WR2
OBJECTIVE - Briefly describe what someone should reasonably be able to do as a result of reading the report (consider the purpose of the report). Do NOT use words like "Know", "Understand", "Learn" or "Appreciate".
Anyone who reads this report should be able to identify topics and tasks that would be appropriate to use for a course in Introduction to Linux.
POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT - Using words like "Good", "Very Good" and/or "Excellent", briefly describe two things relating to how well the report was written, that you feel are worthy of praise.
Bueford - Good organization: your memo follows the required format (with the exception of item 2 of the criteria, noted below). The list of topics is excellent.
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM - Considering things like the content, format, literary style, etc., make one specific suggestion that clearly and specifically describes how something about the report could be improved.
Bueford – I suggest that you double-check the criteria for written assignments; item 2 is that the format emulate the Fudrucker example with your own content. I also suggest that you have someone proofread your work for you. I notice that the date on your memo is October 35, that there is a reference to instructing dog handlers in the description of the occupation, and that Linux is misspelled as Linus in the title of the report. Also, I suggest that you rewrite task 1 so it clearly states what the student should be able and specific criteria on how student performance will be evaluated. I suggest that you rewrite task 3 so it relates directly to the corresponding topic and clearly states what the student should be able to do.
| Return to EVOC 501 Assignment List |
|