PEER EVALUATION RUBRIC_CINEMATIC POETRY VIDEO

CRITERIA 6 5 4 3 2 1
(Superior) (Strong) (Adequate) (Marginal) (Weak) (Incompetent)
● Active Addresses the task Clearly addresses Accurately interprets Distorts or neglects Indicates confusion Suggests an inability
participation in
clearly and responds the task, but may the task, but may aspects of the task about the topic or to comprehend or to
completing the
project effectively to all respond to some slight some aspects neglects important respond
● Valuable aspects of the task aspects of the task of the task aspects of the task meaningfully to the
contribution in more effectively given tasks
the
conceptualization than others
and making of
the project
● Effort and the
level of
acceptable
thought
contributed
● Timely
accomplishment
of the assigned
tasks
● Level of
engagement or
involvement in
making the
project
● Level of interest
in creating and
accomplishing
the project
● Contribution of
constructive
ideas
GROUP LEADER ESCAL, ELOISA MARIE D.

GROUP MEMBERS SCORE REMARKS/COMMENTS

Christian Jason BELOSO 6 Was able to complete his assigned tasks effectively
and on time. Helped in video editing and
conceptualizing.
Eloisa Marie ESCAL 6 Was able to complete her assigned tasks effectively
and on time. Led the team in accomplishing and
delivering the project. Helped in conceptualizing,
and writing the poem and literary criticism.
Bryan Andrew PEREZ 6 Was able to complete his assigned tasks effectively
and on time. Helped in writing the poem and
literary criticism.
Conrad Arman VERGARA 6 Was able to complete his assigned tasks effectively
and on time. Helped in conceptualizing.
John Andronicus YAP 6 Was able to complete his assigned tasks effectively
and on time. Helped in writing the literary criticism.

Rubric adapted and modified from:

https://nps.edu/documents/111693070/112865214/Holistic+scoring+rubric+for+written+work.pdf/77c39be3-2482-ce2f-f61c-c0d29042ff15?t=1591993560795