The way of evaluate in CMC's class

I like the way of evaluate in CMC's class, although it would change some things.

To evaluate we use a picture with three faces, the first face is smiling and it correspond with a good qualification; the second one is a bit less smiling face and it correspond with a regular qualification; and finally, the third face, is a sad face and correspond with a bad qualification.

If I had understood very well what my partner was explainig I will put a cross in the smiling face, but if his/her presentation has lasted a lot of time, I will put a cross in the sad face.
And this is the way to evaluate.

But there are a thing that I don't like, and it is that we only can qualify a good, regulate or badly. If someone has not explained well his article but not the sufficient for a good, but badly enough for the regular one either, I think that there should be a box with a face between the one that corresponds to the good and the regular and another between the regular one and the bad.

Except for this, I like much the way of evaluate in class and furthermore it is an original way of evaluate.. The topics on that they have commented have been very interesting and we all can take part doing questions, which does the most amusing class.