Rubric

This past week we’ve been looking at rubrics. In our groups we shared our individual rubrics we had created, then looked at the question, “In what ways does the purpose of the ePortfolio shape the assessment rubric and is reflected in it?”.  Below is a summary of my group’s discussion:

  • At master’s level everyone should be meeting expectations, so we plan on using 2 columns/options (meeting/exceed) – this is a personal choice, however, based on how rubric is designed
  • If writing for k-12 students would use other ratings (needs improvement, etc.).  Audience makes a difference
  • Purpose helps to define the content (ie: reflection component)
  • Requirements from TQS (some mandatory components) for those who must meet their criteria
  • Depth of Reflection appears as a significant criteria in all of our rubrics , but is not necessary a critical factor for all portfolios
  • Emphasis on academic presentation (APA citations for example) is included in our rubrics and this goes back to the academic audience and the purpose of creating the e-portfolio
  • Metaphor in and of itself doesn’t make our e-portfolio professional, but rather the depth and quality of reflection as that connects with the metaphor is what establishes its integrity. None of our rubrics explicitly states that the e-portfolio IS or IS NOT professional – rather it is implicit that the quality of discourse makes the e-portfolio a professional showcase of learning
  • Rubric serves as a self-reflection and expresses to others what’s meaningful about one’s MET experience. Rubric helps guide how we will express that learning to others and help them to understand it, even though such learning is highly personalized
  • Blogging throughout the uncovering of artifacts will help to document learning and assist with reflection aspects of e-portfolio. Blogging helps to provide more personalization and intimacy with the reflective piece and creates balance with the professional, academic requirements of the e-portfolio

(Group members: Devinder Doel, Davide McInnesValerie Wells, and Heather Wik)

Based on our discussions, I have edited my assessment rubric. I have kept my “fillable forms” format which I decided to learn how to use for this activity, so in the “Rating” section of my form my evaluators have a toggle option to select “meeting expectations” or “exceeding expectations”. Still in draft form, it looks like this:

  Criteria Rating Comments
Design Professional appearance
Intuitive navigation
Guided tour that enhances navigation
Aesthetically pleasing
Clear audience and purpose
Metaphor Integrated throughout eP
Enhances understanding of learning journey
Connects artifacts
Original
Content Demonstrates deep understanding of educational concepts, themes, and issues
Reflective of full program
Diverse artifacts that are well situated in theme and highlight both technical skill and understanding of theories
Reflections Consistently woven throughout eP
Show transformative growth in learning
Collaboration Evidence of peer and faculty feedback used to improve eP
Reflected in artifacts
Mechanics Professional writing
Copyright upheld
Other Comments:            
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s