Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

DR. YANGA’S COLLEGES, INC.

College of Business Administration and College of Accountancy

Contribution Report1 for T.A.S.K.S. (Time for Activities, Self-study, and Knowledge Synthesis)
Name: NAVARRO, REX LYNDON R. Academic Year and Semester: 2020-2021 – 1st
Semester
Course Code and Subject: FM 414E– FEASIBILITY STUDY Instructor / Professor: Mr. JOLO CAMINONG

Directions: DYCIan business students are expected to thoroughly studied the assigned material and to contribute actively
and meaningfully to class discussions whenever possible at least at a Developing level (2.50 = 80%). The performance
standards and grade equivalents for this report are described in the assessment rubric below in Part I. There are 5
performance components in the rubric which the student must be mindful of: conduct, ownership/leadership/, reasoning,
listening and reading.

As a basis for grading your class participation/contribution, you are required to accomplish and submit this report 1 week
before the semester ends, in PDF format. You must update the content of the report by filling one row for each class session
date cumulatively. This will be part of the requirement for every course. Non-submission will result to an incomplete grade.

1Adapted from a rubric developed for Class Participation/Contribution by the Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie M ellon University.
https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/resources/Teaching/CourseDesign/Assessment-Grading/Rubrics/DiscussionRubric.doc

The College of Business Administratio n


BEYOND PROFIT, INTEG RITY
Part I: Assessment Rubric
Sophisticated Competent Developing Unacceptable
Component
1.0 (100%) 1.75 (90%) 2.50 (80%) 5.0 (70%)

Student shows respect f or Student shows a lack of


Student shows respect f or members of the class and f or respect f or members of the
members of the class, both in the method of shared inquiry Student shows little respect f or group and the discussion
speech and manner, and f or the and peer discussion. the class or the process as process. Of ten dominates the
Conduct / method of shared inquiry and peer Participates regularly in the evidenced by speech and discussion or disengages f rom
Netiquette discussion. Does not dominate discussion but occasionally has manner. Sometimes resorts to the process. When
discussion. Student challenges dif f iculty accepting challenges ad hominem attacks when in contributing, can be
ideas respectf ully, encourages and to his/her ideas or maintaining disagreement with others. argumentative or dismissive of
supports others to do the same. respectf ul attitude when others’ ideas, or resorts to ad
challenging others’ ideas. hominem attacks.

Takes responsibility for


Rarely takes an active role in
maintaining the f low and quality of Will take on responsibility f or
maintaining the f low or
the discussion whenever needed. maintaining f low and quality of Does not play an active role in
Helps to redirect or ref ocus direction of the discussion.
discussion, and encouraging maintaining the f low of
Ownership/ discussion when it becomes When put in a leadership role,
others to participate but either discussion or undermines the
Leadership sidetracked or unproductive. of ten acts as a guard rather
is not always ef f ective or is ef f orts of others who are trying
Makes ef f orts to engage reluctant than a f acilitator: constrains or
ef f ective but does not regularly to f acilitate discussion.
participants. Provides constructive biases the content and f low of
take on the responsibility.
f eedback and support to others. the discussion.
Contributions to the discussion
Arguments or positions are are more of ten based on
opinion or unclear views than Comments are f requently so
reasonable and supported with Arguments or positions are
on reasoned arguments or illogical or without
evidence f rom the readings. Of ten reasonable and mostly
positions based on the substantiation that others are
deepens the conversation by going supported by evidence f rom the
readings. Comments or unable to critique or even
Reasoning beyond the text, recognizing readings. In general, the
questions suggest a difficulty f ollow them. Rather than
implications and extensions of the comments and ideas contribute
in f ollowing complex lines of critique the text the student
text. Provides analysis of complex to the group’s understanding of
argument or student’s may resort to ad hominem
ideas that help deepen the inquiry the material and concepts.
arguments are convoluted and attacks on the author instead.
and f urther the conversation.
dif f icult to follow.
Always actively attends to what Usually listens well and takes Behavior f requently ref lects a
Does not regularly listen well
others say as evidenced by steps to check comprehension f ailure to listen or attend to the
Listening as indicated by the repetition
regularly building on, clarif ying, or by asking clarif ying and probing discussion as indicated by
responding to their comments. questions, and making of comments or questions repetition of comments and

The College of Business Administratio n


BEYOND PROFIT, INTEG RITY
Of ten reminds group of comments connections to earlier presented earlier, or f requent questions, non sequiturs, of f -
made by someone earlier that are comments. Responds to ideas non sequiturs. task activities.
pertinent. and questions of f ered by other
participants.
Student has caref ully read and Student has read and Student has read the material, Student either is unable to
understood the readings as understood the readings as but comments of ten indicate adequately understand and
evidenced by oral contributions; evidenced by oral contributions. that he/she didn’t read or think interpret the material or has
f amiliarity with main ideas, The work demonstrates a grasp caref ully about it, or f requently come to class
Reading supporting evidence and of the main ideas and evidence misunderstood or f orgot many unprepared, as indicated by
secondary points. Comes to class but sometimes interpretations points. Class conduct serious errors or an inability to
prepared with questions and are questionable. Comes suggests inconsistent answer basic questions or
critiques of the readings. prepared with questions. commitment to preparation. contribute to discussion.

Part II: Participation/Contribution Report


Directions: Describe in details how you participated/contributed for each session. Rate yourself on each
component based on the rubric using the percentage scale of 70-80-90-100. Give yourself an overall
rating equal to the lowest component rating. Your instructors and professors will validate your self-
assessment based on their observation of your participation/contribution and give the final official grade.
The first entry below is a sample description and self-assessment.

Session

Ownership/
Leadership

Reasoning
date

Listening
Conduct

Reading
Description of participation/contribution

Overall
grade
Week 1 Offline mode/ I answered activity 1 90 90 90 90 90 90
Week 2 Offline mode/ I answered activity 2 90 100 90 90 90 90
Week 3 Orientation/ discuss about what we will do in feasib 90 100 90 90 90 90
Week 4 I do activity. I submit research 90 90 90 90 90 90
Week 5 PRELIMINARY EXAM/ I answer exam 90 90 90 90 90 90
Week 6
Week 7

The College of Business Administratio n


BEYOND PROFIT, INTEG RITY
Week 8
Week 9
Week 10
Week 11
Week 12
Week 13
Week 14
Week 15
Week 16
Week 17
Week 18

The College of Business Administratio n


BEYOND PROFIT, INTEG RITY

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen