 |
| Wordle of the instructions |
Well, it has been a while. I was expecting to finish the third installment of this wiki assignment story earlier. I got delayed for several reasons, some of them really good reasons. That includes being included by one college in an "academic leadership something" committee to encourage the adoption of innovative approches to education. I was also asked to submit a list of examples of those approaches in my classes to be showcased in a video in a faculty technology website. In another college I was asked if I would give a webinar on use of wikis and blogs in online courses. I have been learning about online teaching and pedagogy quite intensely for the past year or so, so starting to see some results feels really good.
I finished the Designing Effective Online Assessments course in a typical clueless student frenzy. The course had assignments of increasing complexity: generating SLOs (Student Learning Outcomes), designing traditional and non-traditional assignments for them, and finalize with a complete roadmap of SLOs and the assignments with a timetable. Drafts were to be posted on Wednesdays, we would give and receive feedback from other students by Friday, and revised assignments were due by Sunday. Last week's assignment instructions said to post the roadmap of at least one SLO, which I did, wondering why my team mates were posting all their SLOs. Sunday around 8pm I realized that the final submission indeed involved ALL SLOs...oopsie! Luckily I am really good at working under stress and I managed to submit the completed document just before midnight. That gave me some insight of being an online student, and why there is no such as too many warnings and reminders about deadlines.
With the draft of my new wiki developed I moved on to a fuller version. I decided to try it on a f2f class with high enrollment as a group project. I established a set of rules in order to preempt situations I had seen in group projects and used some of the advice given by Tori Bovard regarding online debates. In her presentation during OTC2011 she emphasized the need for group agreements regarding group work, such as clearly assigning responsibilities within the group (submitter, spell-checker), as well as procedures if students are MIA. Those agreements were to be submitted before the beginning of the actual project, providing not only a framework to handle future issues, but also an an exercise in collaboration and consensus. I also included requirements for group and individual postings (basically establishing that each student had to post something on a regular basis), content and quality of the wiki postings, quality of feedback to others, and possibility for extra points. It became a 3 page document and I am curious to see how it works. I will keep you posted as the assignment is planned for October this year. For my completely online course where this idea came from, I will probably use a similar rubric except that it will be an individual assignment, and it will include regular blog postings as well.
I will not bore you with the 3 page document, but here is the grading rubric:
Aspect evaluated | Poor | Good | Excellent | Max Total Points |
Content (group) | Covers less than 3 aspects of the content (see above) | Covers at least 5 aspects | Covers all aspects | 10 |
Content (quality) | Content is incomplete or incorrect | Content is not up to date, or incomplete | Content is up to date, detailed, and relevant | 10 |
Presentation (group) | Only uses text OR Uses 2 types of content, but it is hard to read/observe. | Uses 2 types of content | Uses 3 or more types of content (text, pictures, video etc) Fonts and pictures are easy to read and observe. Correct spelling and grammar, good text flow | 5 |
References | No references. | Less than 3 references, or 3 but incorrectly formatted | 3 references, correctly formatted | 5 |
Participation (group) | Only posting on week 7 | Missing one | All required postings | 5 |
Participation (individual) | Only posting on week 7 | Missing one | All required postings | 5 |
Feedback (Individual) | No or irrelevant feedback provided | Provides helpful feedback with some suggestions | Provides thoughtful and insightful feedback given with clear suggestions for making significant improvements | 5 |
Timeliness (individual) | No or late submission for original post and feedback | Late submission for either original post or feedback | Timely submission for both original post and feedback | 5 |
Total possible | 50 | |||
Extracredits (individual) | Weekly participation (2p), creative/WOW effect (2p) | 4 | ||
Dear Readers, what do you think? I would love to hear your advice and/or comments. I am still in time to change it...:)
No comments:
Post a Comment