The table below is a summary of the assessment in the course. For more detailed information on each assessment, see 2. Assessment Criteria.
Assessment Summary and Criteria
1. Assessment Summary
Assessment Task
Description
Weighting
Video review
Each student creates a video review of either a media (a movie or a game) or product. The video should be 5 minutes, uploaded on Youtube, and made accessible to everyone. In the video review, students should demonstrate their insightful opinion and critical judgement on the selected media or product.
30 %
Text review
On an online platform, students write a text review of a media (a movie or a game) or product. While the writing style could be flexible, depending on the website/platform to which they contribute, the language produced should be fairly extensive (at least 300 words) and roughly similar to what other reviewers have written on the platforms.
30 %
Learning reflection
Students write two learning reflections (for the 1st half and the 2nd half of the course). The purpose of this task is for them to critically reflect on their learning experience inside and outside the classroom. The length of a reflection is of their choice (although it should be long enough to cover important issues and properly meet the marking criteria).
40 %
2. Assessment Criteria
2.1 Video reviews
Products:
- An individual video review (30%)
​
Task guidelines:
- A high quality 5-minute video can take 5-10 hours to produce. This “planning document” will help students plan and organise their video reviews.
- Students should research and explore existing video reviews that match their preferences, goals, and expectations.
- Adding subtitles to the videos is not compulsory, but students may do so if they think the subtitles would help viewers understand their reviews better.
- To ensure clear and comprehensible reviews, students should prepare a script beforehand. The lessons on how to write a script are
available in Week 11.
- As with the goal of the languaging curriculum which attempts to help students use the language for real-world purposes, the video reviews
should be made visible to a worldwide audience and uploaded on a real-world platform (Youtube).
​
Marking
Criteria
Description
Language comprehensibility (10%)
Content (10%)
Presentation (5%)
Design (5%)
The language is always comprehensible throughout the video (9-10)
The video excellently demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into the media/product being reviewed
(9-10)
The video is very clearly explained, and is very easy to follow (5)
The video involves excellent use of multimedia element (5)
The language is usually comprehensible throughout the video (7-8)
The video very well demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into the media/product being reviewed
(7-8)
The video is clearly explained, is easy to follow (4)
The video involves very well use of multimedia element (4)
The language is sometimes comprehensible throughout the video (5-6)
The video fairly well demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into the media/product being reviewed
(5-6)
The video is somewhat clearly explained, is somewhat easy to follow (3)
The video involves fairly well use of multimedia element (3)
The language is seldom comprehensible throughout the video (3-4)
The video poorly demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into the media/product being reviewed
(3-4)
The video is rather vaguely explained, is rather difficult to follow (2)
The video involves fairly poorly use of multimedia element (2)
The language is rarely comprehensible throughout the video (1-2)
The video very poorly demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into the media/product being reviewed
(1-2)
The video is vaguely explained, is difficult to follow (1)
The video involves poorly use of multimedia element (1)
2.2 Text review
Products:
- A text review of either a media or product (30%)
​
Task guidelines:
- Some platforms to post text reviews: imdb.com, rottentomatoes.com
- The link to the review should be submitted along with screenshots of the student’ review
​
Marking
Criteria
Description
Language intelligibility (5%)
Clarity (5%)
Content (5%)
The language is always intelligible throughout the review (5)
The text review is very clearly explained and is very easy to follow (5)
The text review excellently demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into their selected product/media
(5)
The language is usually intelligible throughout the review (4)
The language is sometimes intelligible throughout the review (3)
The language is seldom intelligible throughout the review (2)
The text review is clearly explained and is easy to follow (4)
The text review is somewhat clearly explained and is somewhat easy to follow (3)
The text review is rather vaguely explained and is rather difficult to follow (2)
The text review very well demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into their selected product/media
(4)
he text review fairly well demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into their selected product/media
(3)
The text review poorly demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into their selected product/media
(2)
The language is rarely intelligible throughout the review (1)
The text review is vaguely explained and is difficult to follow (1)
The text review very poorly demonstrates the evidence of student’s insight into their selected product/media
(1)
2.3 Learning reflection
Products:
- Learning reflection 1 (20%)
- Learning reflection 2 (20%)
​
Task guidelines:
Some issues to be included in the reflections:
​
- Recalling and describing the experience (e.g. “What happened?” and “What have you learned?”)
- Analysing and interpreting the experience (e.g. “Why is it valuable?”)
- Thinking about implications (e.g. “Can apply what you have learned? “and “If yes, how?”
- Other interesting issues (e.g. “What things that may not be (directly) relevant to learning but worth including in the reflection?”)
** There is no need to provide answer to each of the questions. **
​
Marking