Skip to main content

iRubric: Blogs Peer Review rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Blogs Peer Review 
Rubric Code: H252793
By Donquixote14
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Education  
Type: Assessment  
Grade Levels: (none)

Powered by iRubric Criteria
  (5) Excelent

5 pts

(4) Good

4 pts

(3) Satisfactory

3 pts

(2-0 )Insufficient

2 pts

Form Creation & Setup

(5) Excelent

The Google Form has a professional title, a clear explanation of its purpose, and a logical structure.
(4) Good

The form includes a title and all the required sections. It works well, but its design is simple.
(3) Satisfactory

The form has been created, but it does not have a title or description. The layout is also unclear and could be better organized.
(2-0 )Insufficient

The form has not been created, or you may have used a different tool.
Inclusion of Required Questions

(5) Excelent

The form includes all the required questions (a, b, c, d, e). The student also provided clear instructions or context for each one.
(4) Good

All the required questions— a, b, c, d, and e— are included.
(3) Satisfactory

One question is missing from the list.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Two or more required questions are missing.
Question Formatting

(5) Excelent

Each question uses the right answer type, like a Linear Scale for ratings or a Paragraph for longer responses. The form’s logic also makes entering data simple.
(4) Good

Most questions use the right answer types. There are a few small issues, such as using "Short Answer" instead of "Paragraph" in some places.
(3) Satisfactory

The system uses the wrong answer types, such as offering 'Multiple Choice' when a detailed explanation is needed. This makes it difficult to enter a review.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Some question types make the form hard to use, for example, there is no space to write text.
"15-Second Rule" Analysis

(5) Excelent

The review gives a clear and direct assessment of whether the blog’s purpose is obvious right away. The feedback focuses on what appears at the top of the page.
(4) Good

The review answers whether the aim is evident. The observation is accurate but lacks detail.
(3) Satisfactory

The response is vague (e.g., "Yes, it's clear") without explaining what makes it clear or unclear.
(2-0 )Insufficient

The question is answered incorrectly or skipped.
Readability & Accessibility

(5) Excelent

Reviews the font size, style, and contrast, and points out specific accessibility problems. For example, it notes that grey text on a white background is hard to read.
(4) Good

Assesses readability accurately and makes general comments on the font and color.
(3) Satisfactory

Recognizes that the text is readable but overlooks clear problems.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Does not evaluate readability or accessibility.
Multimedia Usage

(5) Excelent

Give a detailed analysis of how images or videos help or distract from the text. Also, note if the media is high-quality and relevant.
(4) Good

Check if there is any multimedia included and note whether it supports the content.
(3) Satisfactory

Only answers with "Yes" or "No" and does not explain how the multimedia influences the reader's experience.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Ignores the multimedia aspect entirely.
Qualitative Feedback

(5) Excelent

Names one clear strength and one area that could be improved. Gives feedback that the blog owner can use and that helps them grow.
(4) Good

Identifies a Strength and Area for Improvement, but they are somewhat generic
(3) Satisfactory

Feedback can sometimes be too vague.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Missing either the Strength or the Area for Improvement.
Structure Evaluation

(5) Excelent

Carefully review the latest post to see if it has a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Also, pay attention to how well the ideas connect and flow from one part to the next.
(4) Good

Review the recent post to make sure all three parts are included. Let me know if any part is missing.
(3) Satisfactory

The assessment of the post’s structure is unclear and sometimes mistakes the introduction or conclusion.
(2-0 )Insufficient

Does not evaluate the structure of the recent post.
Justification of Ratings

(5) Excelent

It is important to provide a written explanation for all numerical scores, especially those below 5. Make sure to clearly explain the reasons behind each score.
(4) Good

Most ratings have clear reasons, but one or two scores do not include much explanation.
(3) Satisfactory

The reviewer provided numerical scores but did not explain their reasoning. They did not clarify why a low score was given.
(2-0 )Insufficient

There was no explanation given for the scores, and the numbers appear to have been chosen without a clear basis.
Submission & Functionality

(5) Excelent

The link you provided works well. The permissions are set so that anyone with the link can view it.
(4) Good

The link works, but permissions required a request for access (View/Edit issues).
(3) Satisfactory

The link arrived late, and I had to try several times before I could access it.
(2-0 )Insufficient

The link is broken, or the wrong file was submitted.




Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.

n112