GELITPH

Multimedia Output: Podcast

SELF AND PEER REVIEW

Directions:
● Make a copy of this document
● Modify that file to reflect your responses. In case there are more members, add them by
copying and pasting the portion on peer evaluations
● Delete the directions and ratings portion of this document so that only the info after the
ratings part, i.e. your name, etc will be visible
● For the peer evaluations, consider the mini-group that you were assigned to. (i.e. which
literary text you were assigned to create a podcast on)
● Save the file with the title format
“GELITPH_SECTION_PODREV1_YourTeam_YOURLASTNAME” as doc, docx or pdf.
● Upload your file to the assignment section

Help assess the work you and your group mates did for the activity by using the following
criteria. Please try to be honest, fair and be as objective as possible in your evaluation.

5 = Excellent work; was crucial component to group’s success

4 = Very strong work; contributed significantly to group
3 = Sufficient effort; contributed adequately to group
2 = Insufficient effort; met minimal standards of group
1 = Little or weak effort; was detrimental to group*

YOUR LAST NAME, FIRST NAME

GELITPH / YOUR SECTION
ID # / COURSE OR PROGRAM
Podcast Group / Team Sinukuan
LITERARY TEXT YOU TACKLED

PART 1. Self and Peer Evaluation

SELF Evaluation (Your Name:): Aj Villaflor

4 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
4 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
4 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

GELITPH Multimedia Output Evaluation / Term 2 AY 2020-2021 Page 1 of 3

PEER Evaluation (Partner 1): Joseph Alcontin
5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

*If you put “1” or “0,” this requires further explanation.

PEER Evaluation (Partner 2): Raleigh Mendoza

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 3): Renato Samuel

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 4): Adrian Padel

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 5): Neero Regondola

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project

GELITPH Multimedia Output Evaluation / Term 2 AY 2020-2021 Page 2 of 3

5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 6): Mary Ferriol

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 7): Gladys Platon

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PEER Evaluation (Partner 8): Roby Carlos

5 Participation in developing ideas and planning project
5 Willingness to discuss the ideas of others
5 Cooperation with other group members
5 Interest and enthusiasm in project
5 Participation in leading/facilitating discussion
5 Ease and familiarity with discussion material

PART 2. Self-Reflection.

GROUP

1. Briefly describe the literary text assigned to you/r group. Why did you decide to work on
this topic for the podcast?

Maria Sinukuan is the literary text assigned to us. Maria Sinukuan is about a mythical
goddess in Arayat located in Pampanga, Philippines.

2. What was your role in the project’s completion? Describe the tasks you were in charge
of.

I was in charge of the research and voiceover.

GELITPH Multimedia Output Evaluation / Term 2 AY 2020-2021 Page 3 of 3

 3. What did you learn from the experience of collaborating with your peers on a major class
output?

Teamwork and building connections with them socially throughout the process.

4. What knowledge and wisdom have you gained from the assigned topic?

By Maria Sinukuan’s story, I learned to never abuse peoples’ kindness.

5. What were the challenges you met while working on the output? Do you think the
process went well?

There were no challenges met if you understand the literary text completely.

6. Do you think your output/project went well?

Absolutely

7. What would you have done differently, given the opportunity?

None, I am very much satistfied with our work.

8. Would you work with this particular group again?

Absolutely

9. Do you have any other comments or suggestions about the project?

None

10. PERFORMANCE Evaluation

In a scale of 0.0 - 4.0, how will you rate your team’s performance? Explain the grade you
gave.

I would give a 4 for the team’s effort to get this done.

*If you put “1” or “0,” this requires further explanation.

GELITPH Multimedia Output Evaluation / Term 2 AY 2020-2021 Page 4 of 3