114 25 GROUPS

6 Group_Names [A-Z] Member #1 Member #2

5 1 Academic Achievers Rogelio Jr. Dimakiling NOLAN KIRK ESTRELLA
4 1 Assessment Quartet Andrea Dela Paz Retchin Mae Egipto
5 1 Assessors REGINE FERNANDEZ Mary Rose Guan
5 1 Bayanihan Terence Balaoing Jellie Cabas
5 1 BIG5 SHERIDAN YVONNE ALABA Catherine Kaiser
4 1 Darwin's Defenders Agnes Bo Jepanibing Enrique
5 1 Five For Fighting GRACE MOLENO MIKE JERICHO MONJE
4 1 Gems Bond LYKA MARIE SUZANNE ASAY MARY AILEEN DEL FONSO
5 1 KaSiyensya August Anthony Balute John Michael Bayocot
5 1 Lakbay Elaine Bailon Margielyn Batugal
5 1 MABUHAY Reymark Catindoy Reign Gonzales
4 1 Mahinahon Alyssa Micah Esteban Marifel Lapusque
5 1 Masikap Melissa Ann Empig Dexter Gabica
5 1 Mindful Mentors AL ADVINCULA Liezel Bantatua
5 1 Molders Jeun Marianne Alba Jenefer Joy Ferrer
4 1 Motivators Jason Bolima Ilonah Christine Garcia
4 1 New Jeans Jana Clarice Ocampo Daina Marie Quitalig
5 1 OPEN MINDS Jessa Mae Casanoba Ronniel Ena Dizon
5 1 Padayon Joselyn Joy Arciaga Eloisa Bondoc
4 1 Scaffolders Emely Diaz Danilo Hernandez
1 1 SIKHAY MA. JAYANNE MAPUGAY
5 1 Tara Let's Manilene Almendares Desiree Balmes
5 1 Teamwork Jasmin Agtutubo Dorothy Grace Alcantara
5 1 The 5th Power Bernadette Columbres Katrina Dela Fuente
5 1 TheMagic5 Marian Rovilyn Agulto Jonielee Charmaine Bandola
Ω SOLO FLIGHT It's just me.

Note to Students: Request your FIC to initiate the THREAD {"question"} for your group in the Self and Peer Assessment S
When making a request identify your group. If the request is done in the messaging cabinet, include
 Member #3 Member #4 Member #5
Michiko Estreller PRINCES LUCAS Isabel Mediavillo
Sean Angela Oaperina Llo Francis Pasco
Jasmine Stephanie Mendiola VICTOR GERALD SALGUET RONALD LEVY SANTOS
SHANNON JOEBELLE MARANA AMERAH SULTAN Sunita Venkatesh
Maria Kathrina Manucot Rachel Pahilagmago Germiline Fei San Pedro
Mark Anthony Escabarte Brent Fallarcuna
KIMBERLY MORENO KRISTINA LOU NOBLES Merylle Queral
GEMMA ORDOYO MARK DIZON RITUAL
Jarod Ivan Palla Aryl Cris Pasquin Ave Marinella Sulayao
Jeferson Juan Mhaquel Maureen Mañebo Evangeline Nicolas
MARIA KATRINA SANTIAGO EMMA SURIAGA Samantha Abbygail Tio
Eunice Samson Glory Joy Ting
Jashamier Magarse Lester Piedad Mera Taguchi
Savier Liron Catura Fides Anne San Juan Emil Roi Villanueva
Yuliana Handoyo Darren Lucena Ivy Grace Sarmiento
Mikhaella Javier Filipina Lingat
Bryan Rillorta Danielle Simbajon
DIVINE GRACE HENDERIN Noel Llamar Dessa Marqueses
Lea Salameda NELSA SUVILLAGA Charmaine Torres
Jhea Nica Roxas Yuriko Maikaelle Santos

Maricres Butal CLEO JOHN CASTILLO Veronica Fulleros

LOCEL ALFARO Estelle Kathleen Castelo Acsilyn Miyazaki
Carnalynne Doncillo Clarissa Joy Maribbay ASHLEY-ANN SMITH
Alexander Conde Anna-Marie Esmeralda FATIMA LAGUMBAY

Self and Peer Assessment SUBMISSION forum if you are unable to post your feedback & upload the form.
messaging cabinet, include the Asst or Exercise# and the Course/Term
 Member #6

ad the form.
 Go to Data Entry Sheet
PERFORMANCE RATING
Weight Criteria
30 CONCEPTS:
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
30 HIGH-ORDER THINKING:
Integration; Practical Connections encompassing. Holistic grasp of
20 BEHAVIORS:
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
20 ARTICULATION:
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas
Go to Summative Report
Distinguished; Well-integrated
(1.0-1.25)
Ideas are well-integrated and
personally synthesized. Rich
elaboration clearly demonstrates deep
understanding of theory.
Analysis is systematic, logical,
relationships to explain events and
situations. Stimulates further
applications & explorations,
innovations. Offers noteworthy
solutions to pertinent issues.
Significantly keeps the tasks in motion.
Mindful of schedule and posts on
time. Can always be counted on.
Mostly responsible for organization of
ideas. Concise without prejudice
against clarity. Excellent articulation,
grammar and construction. Inspiring.
Eloquent. Stimulates reflection and
further exploration.
 Competent; Proficient
(1.26-2.0)
Demonstrates good comprehension
& able to contribute to the
clarification of theoretical concepts.
Expresses ideas in original ways.
Good practical connections.
Recognizes current issues and
provides resolutions, which are
good but rather common
(predictable, expected) rather than
innovative. Analysis is very good
but may have a few flaws or may
lack breadth.
Usually facilitates motion. Typically Shows interest to support the group, Needs much prodding and reminding.
prompt and can be relied on.
Good assistance in the
organization of ideas. Good
articulation, grammar and
construction. Reader-impact is good
but not exactly stimulating.
Elementary
(2.01-2.75)
Superficial processing. Seems to
understand key concepts but tends
to echo (or sound like) text from
learning resources, e.g., as direct
responses to questions.
Analysis tends to be narrow and
shallow. Perspectives consider only
the immediate context or
environment. Connections to
practice are either weak or too
common (e.g., drawn from
literature or general discussions):
lacks fresh ideas.
but needs prodding. Typically Responses are too late to be beneficial to
delayed contributions/responses. the output.
Poor grammar, mechanics.
Organization affects the effective
communication of ideas.
Marginal
(2.76-3.25)
Personal comprehension cannot be
ascertained due to ambiguity or lack of
originality (copy-paste). Ideas are mostly
opinion or folk-knowledge rather than
anchored on theoretical concepts &
principles. Some misconceptions.
Strongly bound in the context of the
resource material studied. [Fresh] personal
perspectives and connections not
incorporated in thought processes.
Analysis lacks substance.
Poorly articulated. Difficult to read/
comprehend. May not invite readership.
 Inadequate Inactive
(3.26-4.25) (4.26-5.0)
Offers personal opinion that lacks
theoretical basis or is inconsistent
with principles. Misconceptions
strongly evident.

Concepts are not integrated into

explanations or solutions of

Insufficient indicators to merit credit

practical situations. Or
inappropriate connections. May
stimulate disagreement from MKOs.
[FAIL]

Tends to pull back the progress of

the group.

Lacks logical organization.

Inconsistent. Incoherent.
INSTRUCTIONS: Use the dropdown list to fill in the BLUE BOXES (Items in the list below are hyperlinked; click to go
(* Click here to go to Rubrics)
STEP 1. Identify your GROUP from the dropdown list. The corresponding boxes will then be automatically filled in by the
STEP 2. For each member, fill in the PERFORMANCE LEVEL per criterion (this hyperlink leads to the 1st member only, light
STEP 3. Fill in the GRADE to the right of each performance level item (this hyperlink leads to the 1st member only, darker
STEP 4. Go to Summative Report Page and justify the grades. (Some data are auto-filled from this page.)

Please complete the data; form not ready for submission.

1 BIG5 <<< Select your group from the drop-down

Member #1 SHERIDAN YVONNE ALABA 1.325

Item
Criteria Performance Level Grade
CONCEPTS: Distinguished 1.25
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING: Competent 1.5
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES: Distinguished 1.25
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
WRITING SKILLS: Distinguished 1.25
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas

Member #2 . Catherine Kaiser 1.375

Criteria Performance Level

CONCEPTS: Distinguished 1.25
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING: Competent 1.5
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES: Competent 1.5
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
WRITING SKILLS: Distinguished 1.25
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas

Member #3 . Maria Kathrina Manucot 1.325

Criteria Performance Level

CONCEPTS: Distinguished 1.25
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING: Competent 1.5
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES: Distinguished 1.25
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
WRITING SKILLS: Distinguished 1.25
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas

Member #4 . Rachel Pahilagmago 1.375

Criteria Performance Level

CONCEPTS: Distinguished 1.25
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING: Competent 1.5
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES: Competent 1.5
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
WRITING SKILLS: Distinguished 1.25
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas

Member #5 . Germiline Fei San Pedro 1.575

Criteria Performance Level

CONCEPTS: Competent 1.5
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING: Competent 1.75
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES: Distinguished 1.25
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
WRITING SKILLS: Competent 1.75
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas

Member #6 . ---

Criteria Performance Level

CONCEPTS:
Theoretical Clarity/ Elaboration
HIGH-ORDER THINKING:
Integration; Practical Connections
ATTITUDES:
Diligence, initiative, timeliness,
cooperation
ARTICULATION:
Eloquence; Reader impact;
Organization of ideas
OXES (Items in the list below are hyperlinked; click to go to the respective cells.)

orresponding boxes will then be automatically filled in by the names of the members of the group.
per criterion (this hyperlink leads to the 1st member only, light blue boxes). Avoid flat/ same scores.
evel item (this hyperlink leads to the 1st member only, darker blue boxes). Avoid flat/ same scores.
s. (Some data are auto-filled from this page.)

<<< Select your group from the drop-down menu. Then fill in the blue boxes below, light blue before da

Performance Description
Ideas are well-integrated and personally synthesized. Rich elaboration clearly demonstrates deep understanding of theory.

Good practical connections. Recognizes current issues and provides resolutions, which are good but rather common (predictab

Significantly keeps the tasks in motion. Mindful of schedule and posts on time. Can always be counted on.

Mostly responsible for organization of ideas. Concise without prejudice against clarity. Excellent articulation, grammar and co

Performance Description
Ideas are well-integrated and personally synthesized. Rich elaboration clearly demonstrates deep understanding of theory.

Good practical connections. Recognizes current issues and provides resolutions, which are good but rather common (predictab

Usually facilitates motion. Typically prompt and can be relied on.

Mostly responsible for organization of ideas. Concise without prejudice against clarity. Excellent articulation, grammar and co

Performance Description
Ideas are well-integrated and personally synthesized. Rich elaboration clearly demonstrates deep understanding of theory.

Good practical connections. Recognizes current issues and provides resolutions, which are good but rather common (predictab

Significantly keeps the tasks in motion. Mindful of schedule and posts on time. Can always be counted on.
Mostly responsible for organization of ideas. Concise without prejudice against clarity. Excellent articulation, grammar and co

Performance Description
Ideas are well-integrated and personally synthesized. Rich elaboration clearly demonstrates deep understanding of theory.

Good practical connections. Recognizes current issues and provides resolutions, which are good but rather common (predictab

Usually facilitates motion. Typically prompt and can be relied on.

Mostly responsible for organization of ideas. Concise without prejudice against clarity. Excellent articulation, grammar and co

Performance Description
Demonstrates good comprehension & able to contribute to the clarification of theoretical concepts. Expresses ideas in origina

Good practical connections. Recognizes current issues and provides resolutions, which are good but rather common (predictab

Significantly keeps the tasks in motion. Mindful of schedule and posts on time. Can always be counted on.

Good assistance in the organization of ideas. Good articulation, grammar and construction. Reader-impact is good but not ex

Performance Description
 Please complete the data; form not ready for submission.

>

###

r than innovat
###

###

. Eloquent.###
S

###

###

r than innovat
###

###

. Eloquent.###
S

###

###

r than innovat
###

###
. Eloquent.###
S

###

###

r than innovat
###

###

. Eloquent.###
S

###

###

r than innovat
###

###

###

###

###

###

###

###

###
 SUMMARY REPORT
Except for blue boxes, this sheet is AUTO-FILLED from the Data Entry Sheet.

Group: 30% 30% 20%

1 BIG5 GRADE CONCEPTS HOTS ATTITUDES
SHERIDAN YVONNE ALABA 1.33 1.25 1.50 1.25

Catherine Kaiser 1.38 1.25 1.50 1.50

Maria Kathrina Manucot 1.33 1.25 1.50 1.25

Rachel Pahilagmago 1.38 1.25 1.50 1.50

Germiline Fei San Pedro 1.58 1.50 1.75 1.25

--- - - -

^ When indicated, member's pledge pending and may not be enlisted in the group at the time this form was prepared.
Sheet.
20%
ARTICULATION
1.25
Justification
required-->

1.25
Justification
required-->

1.25
Justification
required-->

1.25
Justification
required-->

1.75
Justification
required-->

-
Justification
required-->
 Go to to Rubrics
Return to Data Entry. Form not ready for submission.
TYPE IN A BRIEF JUSTIFICATION FOR YOUR ASSESSMENT (10-400 characters @blue box)
Yvonne was are major editor from Draft to Final documents. She exemplifies good written skills as well as kwoledge for concepts.

CK started the group and led us to start our exercise format. She shared informations that are valuable in the activity. She works well with
us and updated us from time to time.

kath also share all her inputs and thoughts regarding parts of the activities such as validity and reliability

Rachel is a good editor as well on what to be changed and removed.

For me , I just share introduction part as well as some purposes of assesment and conclusion.