1. Paste the url of the reviewed blog first.
2. Why did the blog draw your interest as you started reviewing it, why not?
3. How much care did the blog author show for her or his blog? How can you tell?
4. How would you rate the overall informative quality on a scale of 1-5 (five is high)
5. How would you rate the readability of the blog on a scale of 1-5 (five is high)
6. Compared to your own blog, is the reviewed blog better, the same, or worse?
Blog #1:
1) http://ge110alexmc.blogspot.com/
2) It seemed like a pretty complete blog with good information. Could have been better with more visual aids.
3) He definitely showed care in his blog since, most importantly, it looked like a complete blog. Also, the posts contained good information and were not just sloppily thrown together in 5 minutes. His blog shows that he put in some time and effort
4) I'd rate this blog as a 5 for informative, lots of quality information.
5) Readability is somewhere between a 3 and 4. A lot of the font and text sizes are different which makes it difficult to read. Also organization could be a little better. The blog is good overall though.
6) I think I have a bit of an edge because I put more pictures on mine and mine is a little more organized but they are pretty close.
Blog #2:
1) http://ge110brittanyba.blogspot.com/
2) The first thing that caught my attention was the background of the blog. It made the overall appeal better. Also organization of the posts was great in my opinion.
3) She showed a lot of care with her blog based on some elements that obviously took some thinking and some time. As mentioned the background was an attention getter and the organization took effort. Also the content is very thought out. Could use more pictures.
4) Informative quality would rank at 5 for me. She seemed to put in all of the work and her posts are something that can be used as a learning tool which is the goal.
5) Readability is a 5. As I've mentioned a few times, the organization is great which helps a ton with readability.
6) I'd say our blogs are very similar in the elements each of them bring to the table.
Blog #3:
1) http://ge110nathanmc.blogspot.com/
2) This blog didn't really draw a whole lot of my interest. It was pretty basic, not many pictures and the posts were shorter than my previous reviewed ones. This blog was pretty bland.
3) The posts were completed with, what seems to me, as minimal care. He obviously put in some time to complete the posts with some information but, for example, the summaries such as the ones from the Baader-Meinhof complex and chapter 9 of AQOTWF sound like a copy and paste job.
4) I'd rate as a 3 or 4 for informative. The posts do contain some good information just not a lot of it.
5) I'd rate the readability as a 4. Nothing jumps out to make it bad but, on the other hand, nothing makes it great either.
6) Personally, I do think my blog ranks above this one for having more information and effort put into each post.
No comments:
Post a Comment