Those new to my website may not know that my journalism classes in the Diederich College of Communication – otherwise known as #loweclass – have become adept at live tweeting campus events. Last summer, I wrote a lengthy article for Poynter.org that explained how that came to be and shared some tips. (I also have a number of blog posts about live tweeting events and my students success at it at herblowe.com/live-tweeting.html.)

Always looking for a new challenge for #loweclass – and myself – my two classes last fall combined to live blog from polling places on and near Marquette University during the general election on Nov. 6. Afterward, I was generally pleased with the students' efforts, especially since it was their first time using CoveritLive and live blogging and, as I shared before, the experience was eye-opening in terms of their uneasiness in approaching strangers.

Yesterday, my Digital Journalism III (JOUR 2100) class live blogged from a campus event that was part of the university's annual weeklong devotion to the exploration of its Catholic and Jesuit mission. This particular event's title: "Caring for Our Neighbors Locally and Globally: Addressing Health Care Disparities and Community Health Initiatives." It promised to have eight Opus Prize winners and representatives as panelists on stage for 90 minutes.

It was the first live blogging experience for most of the 18 students. I'm still forming my thoughts about the class' performance. However, at first blush it seemed that too many of them forgot about the greater audience witnessing their activity via the official #MissionWeek hashtag, not to mention all those who know about #loweclass ...

More to come ... 

Once again this semester, I have assigned each student in #loweclass a media company website to cover as his or her semester-long beat. They write a blog post each week that evaluates their respective website's successes and misfires, based on either class discussions and the biggest national news story. Their second post, for example, focused on President Obama's second inauguration, while the one due today reviewed Super Bowl coverage.

The BBC, The Indianapolis Star, Orlando Sentinel and The Salt Lake Tribune have been added for the first time to the 30 or so websites assigned during previous semesters. Last week, the class and I engaged in a lengthy review of the assignment's opportunities (for example, learning to do media critiques and cover a beat) and challenges (being mindful of not needlessly offending anyone given that blogging is so public and rife with journalistic dangers).

A few students have made it clear they wish to cover a site that interests them personally. I want to be sensitive to such concerns. Aspiring journalists must learn early on they won't always get to cover what they want. Indeed, it's how they apply themselves to lesser beats that determines how quickly they advance to more choice assignments.

Anyway, what follows is a long-overdue effort to help #loweclass produce better media critiques. Unlike with most other journalism education assignments, there isn't definitive help on the Internet concerning rubrics for evaluating individual student blog posts. This is what I have come up with – I'm still tweaking this rubric, but hoping it helps:

CONTENT (3 points): Either excellent (focused and well organized analysis; succinct and confident writing; engaged with the topic; demonstrates appreciation/awareness of course/assignment objectives); or satisfactory (reasonably focused and or organized analysis; moderately engaged with the topic; fewer connections between ideas; writing for the professor, not a greater audience or community); or unacceptable (unfocused or disorganized analysis; limited engagement with the topic; post consists of one or two disconnected paragraphs or sentences; not really interested or interesting). Excellent, of course, means 1 point, while satisfactory and unacceptable are 2 and 1, respectively.

MECHANICS (1 point): Avoids errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation or Associated Press style; no form errors or obvious layout concerns (line breaks, errant spacing, widows or orphans); demonstrates quality proofreading.

HEADLINE (1 point): Clear and able to stand on its own with no other context; contains likely search words; compels readers to risk a click. Lacks wordiness; avoids puns and oblique references, obscure words or orphans. Mindful of style issues, creativity and variety; written for people, not Google.

VISUALS (1 point): Proper use of image(s) or screenshot(s) or embedded media (video, interactive graphic, etc.); effective caption(s) — see headlines; hyperlinked to content elsewhere for additional engagement.

HYPERLINKS (1 point): Four minimum. Where do they link to? Relevance? Organization? Appearance? Everything that should be linked is. They add to the story without being too wordy. Show – don't tell.

(Each student must do 14 media critiques this term; each post is worth seven points toward a possible total of 98.)

That's it. My students' first indications are that they appreciate it. We'll see what happens. What do you think?