Assessment: I’ve read all of your stories twice and, as I stipulated in the syllabus, assessed them based on the grading scale of Excellent (5 points), Very Good (4 points), Good (3 points), Average (2 points), Poor (1 point), on the following five criteria:
- Story interest (5 points)
I’ve looked into how important or interesting the story is to the public and what your angles (focuses) are. In other words, I’ve evaluated how much you understood about “what makes news.”
- Quality of research and background information (5 points)
In this criterion I’ve paid particular attention to the information that you’ve included and not included in the story. To put it in another way, I wanted to see how much context you have given to the story and whether or not the public is given a bigger picture.
- Appropriateness of quotes and sources (5 points)
Both the sources quoted in your story and the sources that should have been quoted or consulted are taken into consideration here. When we say “sources” we are not just talking about the people you can talk to but also the sources of information such as government records, academic papers and news media.
- Attribution and accuracy (5 points)
I have looked for some evidence that suggest you’ve gone through the process of verification appropriately, which should be clear and transparent in your writing.
- Story structure, grammar, spelling, punctuation (5 points)
Your language, tone, style and other elements that determine the overall impression of your story are examined in this criterion.
I am not sure why, but many of you did not write the story to make it read like a proper journalistic profile piece that you normally see in newspapers and news magazines. There are a number of stories that read like an entry for your personal diaries or an article in a travel guidebook. Worse, some of them read like a pure advertorial.
With that said, I can also see that most of you tried to incorporate the concepts we discussed in the lectures and tutorials by making sure to include the information about the sources and be transparent about your process of verification.
Continue reading »