session10group1

=Group 1: Assessment = Group Members' Names: Tara Parr and Stephanie Curry

Here is what you enter on this wikipage:

1. How will you assess your learning experience (in your final project)? How will you know if your goals (learning goals) were met? Provide enough information so that your partner (and I) can understand and provide feedback.

=
2. Begin to create your assessment on this wikipage - use the info from the Andrew Churches link on the previous page. This is just a BEGINNING - a DRAFT. ======

=
(Suggestion: You can create it as text only (make a bulleted list) or make your table (most rubrics are in tables) in Word and then copy and paste into the wikipage. (***I find it difficult to edit tables in wikispaces. For some reason adding rows and columns once you split/merge cells is difficult. However, if there aren't split/merged cells then you should be fine!).** =====

4. It's up to you how you want to organize this page with your partner! 5.  ***Don't forget to click SAVE after you edit your work! 6. Please place your names above your work so that we can identify your work, too!
 * 3. Collaborate with your partner. Give feedback in BLUE.

__TARA__ - (I like the "role of technology" section of your rubric. This is so important. I'm wondering if "online experience" is similar to "role of technology"? Both are key in the assessment piece! How do you decide the "in between" (2-4)? --Dr. Fritz) Good point. I'm wondering if "online experience" is similar to "role of technology"? My thought is that "role of technology" encompasses any/all technology tools- as indicated on their lesson plan- that may be involved. Basic computer skills, creating multi-media or digital stories ( changes depending on the level they are instructing) where as online learning is specific to using the Internet in a meaningful way. (~Tara) How do you decide the "in between" (2-4)? I agree! This is such a gray area! In the past, I had very specific indicators in these slots. However, with ssoooo many levels in my class (24 people, all at different levels in using technologyand access to types of technology, all teaching different levels of learners, and all in different disciplines!) I found it helpful to create a "lenient" middle ground. I am still thinking about best way to move forward...I am not completely "sold" on this rubric. I will begin grading projects this weekend...I may have more to offer after that. ;-) (~Tara)

For the final project, I am instructing educators on how to create online learning experiences for their students. For example, a WebQuest. To model, the project guidelines will be in the form of a WebQuest. As part of their project, my student-educators will need to create a WebQuest activity, complete a lesson plan overview, generate a "product" sample, and (after implementing) reflect on the process. I will provide a rubric as a way to assess their work. Here is a PDF version of the Rubric. And, here it is, copy/pasted from Word:
 * || 1  || 4 Total:20 pts ||
 * ** Student Learning Goals ** |||| There are no clearly stated learning goals. || Educational objectives are clear, age appropriate, and measurable. These goals accommodate different learning styles and abilities. ||
 * ** Project Design ** |||| The project seems incomplete or poorly conceived. The project’s scope is too large or too small. The teacher has not considered student learning needs. || The project is complete, deep, well-scaffolded and adaptable. Students have opportunities to actively engage with the concepts and with technology by creating or designing a product themselves. ||
 * ** Role of Technology ** |||| The project's use of technology treats students as passive recipients of information, is not well-defined, does not support student learning, or is a trivial or inappropriate use of the medium. || The project's use of technology helps students achieve learning objectives and is both an appropriate and creative use of the medium. The choice and integration of technology is age appropriate and supports different learning styles and abilities. Student learning, thinking and communication skills show improvement as a result of this use of technology. ||
 * ** Online Experience ** |||| There is no online experience for the student. || There is an online experience; it is relevant to the project and contributes greatly to the learning experience. ||
 * ** Assessment ** |||| There are no clear plans for formative or summative assessment or the forms of assessment do not match curricular goals. || The teacher employs assessment strategies which directly correlate to educational objectives. The assessment strategies are logical, fair, and clearly articulated. Students reflect on their own experiences and learning. ||

Steph (I'm assuming this rubric is going to be used solely by the teacher to evaluate. Will you also have the students evaluate their work? -Dr. Fritz )

I am having my students use VoiceThread as a tool for increasing Oral Reading Fluency. I have used our ESAR (report card) indicators as the performance indicators in or rubric. The ~ is beginning, / is approaching, + is profiecient, and ++ is above average. I have also included a .pdf version of the rubric. The wpm will be assessed through a running record taken from their VoiceThread project. Stephanie, I like that you recognized many skills in your rubric - not only those centered around technology. It seems, by what you stated above, that your main goal is to increase their ORAL reading. It also seems to me that you are not //grading// them as much as //assessing// them....You are reporting what they can do- not penalizing for something they can't. You may be able to add one more performance- possibly centered around organization (of words) or thoughts that not only are relevant but contribute positively. (just a thought). If a child is not a strong reader, it might be beneficial to add another piece so they are not discouraged as they working on their oral skills. (~Tara)

VoiceThread Rubric Student Name: _ Date:

Passage Title: _


 * Voice || The voice recording was not clear or understandable. || The Voice recording was mostly clear, but at times was not understandable. || The voice recording was clear and understandable but lacked expression. || The voice is clear and understandable and read with expression. ||
 * Speed || The reading was significantly below the benchmark of wpm. || The reading was below the benchmark of wpm. || The reading was at the benchmark of wpm. || The reading was significantly above the benchmark of wpm. ||
 * Accuracy || There were many mistakes made when reading the passage aloud. || A few mistakes were made when reading the passage aloud, but they did affect meaning. || A few mistakes were made when reading the passage aloud, but they did not affect meaning. || No mistakes were made when reading the passage aloud. ||
 * Fluency || Words were read one at a time with long pauses between each word and lack of punctuation. || Mostly read word by word, but with some longer phrases and use of punctuation. || Words are read mostly in longer phrases with attention paid to punctuation. || Words read in long, meaningful phrases and great attention to punctuation. ||
 * Comments
 * Comments

Commenting on: _

_ || The comments made are not relevant to the VoiceThread passage. || The comments made are relevant but are vague. || The comments made are relevant and offer exact in their description. || The comments made are relevant and offer exact in their description, and also give suggestions and/or insights. ||