|
USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY TO GET STUDENTS EXCITED ABOUT LEARNING, PROMOTE ACCOUNTABLE TALK AND ENHANCE RIGOR
By Mr. Orlando Pangilinan 
1A:Table 1 | Rubric for participation and contribution during the drafting and planning stage | Above and beyond expectation (19 -20 points) | Sufficient contribution/participation(17- 18 points) | Minimal contribution/
participation (11-15 points) | Inconsistent participation/contribution
(10 points) | Contribution to Group's Tasks and Completion of Personal Tasks Ideas contributed to the story
| Participates actively
Models caring about goals
Helps direct the group in setting goals Helps direct group in meeting goals
Thoroughly completes assigned tasks | Participates in group
Shows concern for goals Participates in goal setting Participates in meeting goals
Completes assigned tasks | Participates inconsistently in group Shows some concern for goals Participates sporadically in goal setting
Participates sometimes in meeting goals
Completes assigned tasks | Chooses not to participate
Shows no concern for goals
Impedes goal setting process Impedes group from meeting goals Does not complete assigned task | Discussion Skills and Active Listening
| Shares many ideas related to the goals
Encourages all group members to share their ideas
Listens attentively to others
Empathetic to other people’s feelings and ideas | Shares ideas when encouraged Allows sharing by all group members Listens to others consistently Considers other people’s feelings and ideas | Shares ideas occasionally when encouraged
Allows sharing by most group members
Listens to others sometimes
· Considers other people’s feelings and ideas sometimes | Discourages sharing
Does not participate in group discussions
Does not listen to others
Not considerate of others' feelings and ideas
| | Contribution to Group's Evaluation, Problem-solving and Cohesion | Encourages group to evaluate how well they are working together
Involves the whole group in problem-solving
Actively participates in helping the group work together better | Participates in group evaluation Offers suggestions to solve problems
Demonstrates effort to help the group work together | Participates marginally in group evaluation
Offers suggestions occasionally to solve problems
Demonstrates effort sometimes to help the group work together
Does not impede group’s efforts
| Discourages evaluation of how well the group is working
Chooses not to participate in problem-solving
Promotes fragmentation of group
| | Notes: | | | | | 1B: Table 2 (9 ://intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/Rubric_Bank/WritingRubrics.pdf
1C: Table 3
| Multimedia Presentation Rubric for student jury panels and teacher (Put a check mark where applicable) | Effectively (10 points)
Please add comments | Adequately (8 points)
Please add comments | Inadequately (6 points)
Please add comments | | 1 Technical Project runs perfectly with no technical problems or error messages. | | | | Navigation
2 Navigation Users can progress in a logical path to find information. All buttons and
navigational tools work as intended | | | | Mechanical
3 Spelling & Grammar Project honors all rules of spelling and/or grammar. | | | | Completion
4 Project is completely finished | | | | Multimedia elements
5 Screen Design The combination of multimedia elements (buttons, links, and graphics) and content communicate the intended ideas clearly.
| | | | Use of Enhancements
6 All graphics, video, audio, etc are used effectively to convey the intended meaning. | | | | Information structure
7 Organization The sequence of information is logical and intuitive. Menus and paths to all information are clear and direct.
| | | | 8 Branching Project is truly multimedia, rather than linear and contains a
manageable number of appropriate choices. | | | | Documentation
9 Citing Resources
All sources are properly cited within the project. | | | | Evidence That Objectives Were Met
10 Clear evidence that project content supports stated objectives.
| | | | | Notes: For more information on this rubric, please visit http://www.ncsu.edu/midlink/rub.multi.htm | | | |
1D: Table 4
| Rubric for participation in the assessment stage | Excellent (25 points) | Good (21 points) | Average (18 points) | Poor (15 points) | | EQUAL WORK | Did a full share of the work--or more
Took the initiative in helping the group get organized | Did an equal share of the work
Worked agreeably with group member(s) concerning times and places to meet | Did almost as much work as others
Could be coaxed into meeting with other group member(s) | Did less work than others
Did not meet group member(s) at agreed times and places | | EQUAL WORK/ COMMUNICATION | Provided many ideas for the development of the presentation | Participated in discussions about the presentation | Listened to others; on some occasions, made suggestions | Seemed bored with conversations about the presentation | | EQUAL WORK | Assisted other group member(s) | Offered encouragement to other group member(s) | Seemed preoccupied with other assignments, classes, work, etc. | Took little pride in own tasks related to presentation | | TIME | Work was ready on time or sometimes ahead of time | Work was ready very close to the agreed time | Work was usually late but was completed in time to be graded | Some work never got completed and other group member(s) completed the assignment | For more information on this rubric, please visit http://www4.nau.edu/assessment/oaainfo/workshop/Rubrics/Group_Participation_Rubric.htm
1E: Table 5
| Rubric for the use of technology in the learning process | Transformational (10 points) | Effective (8 points) | Adequate (7 points) | Minimal (6 points) | | Content and Curricular Connections | The project's technology use effectively supports and links with curriculum. It affords new possibilities. The project's uses of technology directly support school and departmental goals for technology use and for student learning. | The project's technology use effectively supports content and curriculum. It also addresses school and department goals | The project has a tenuous connection to the course curriculum. The technology use addresses some but not all of the school and departmental goals. | The project has no connection to class content or curricular goals and does not support school or department goals for learning and technology. | | Student Learning Goals | Educational objectives are clear, age appropriate, and measurable. These goals accommodate different learning styles and abilities. Students are able to set their own learning goals and achieve them within the context of the project. | There are clear, age appropriate and measurable learning objectives. These goals accommodate different learning styles and abilities. | Educational goals are present but may not be appropriate or measurable. | There are no clearly stated learning goals. | | 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 is focused but does not take full advantage of the medium. Students use technology but do not learn to manipulate the technology to express ideas or concepts. | The project's use of technology is appropriate for the medium while helping students reach identified learning objectives. The choice of technology is age appropriate and supports different learning styles and abilities. | 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. Students are engaged and demonstrate a deeper conceptual understanding of key concepts. Student learning, thinking and communication skills show improvement as a result of this use of technology. | | Ethical Issues | Students do not document sources, have little or no awareness of ethical issues and are not held accountable for unethical behavior. Teacher models unethical or questionable uses of technology. | Students document sources most of the time but may be not consistent or complete. Students understand some of the ethical uses of technology. The teacher models some ethical uses of technology | Students document sources effectively and correctly. Students understand and demonstrate a range of ethical uses of technology. The teacher models ethical uses of technology. | Students document all sources effectively and correctly. Students understand, demonstrate and discuss the complexities of ethical uses of technology. The teacher consistently models ethical technology use and has designed a project or lesson to support learning about ethical issues. | | 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 may be complete, but lacks depth. It does not offer strategies or adaptations for students with special needs or learning style preferences. The class time invested in the project may be too great given its education value. | The project is complete, goes into depth as appropriate and provides some adaptations for students with special needs or learning style preferences. The teacher has considered scaffolding learning for both beginning and advanced students and fades away when appropriate. Students explore concepts by designing and creating a product. | The project is complete, deep, well-scaffolded and adaptable. It offers extensions for more motivated or experienced learners and/or adaptations for students with special needs or learning style preferences. Students have opportunities to actively engage with the concepts and with technology by creating or designing a product themselves. | | Role of the Teacher | The teacher models helpless terror in the face of new technologies and gives up with faced with a problem. The teacher issues directions without encouraging students to understand and explore. The teacher has not planned an effective lesson and has not prepared or tested the necessary hardware and software. | The teacher has planned a lesson with clear goals but has not anticipated how technology use will influence class dynamics, timing, learning and activities. The teacher may have tested some of the critical hardware and software. The teacher approaches technology with some trepidation but tries new or different approaches and asks for help. | The teacher has designed and prepared an appropriate lesson and models good problem solving techniques by trying multiple solutions and incorporating others' ideas. The teacher's role is more of a facilitator than a directive leader. | The teacher is well prepared and has planned an engaging, effective and meaningful lesson. The teacher demonstrates effective problem solving, exploration, creativity, and multiple solutions and effectively facilitates student learning and experiences. The teacher actively explores and learns with the students. | | Instructions | There are no written instructions or guidelines. | There are written guidelines but they are outdated or incomplete. | Age-appropriate written guidelines reflect most of the curricular goals, provide clear directions, and may include assessment information or resources. | Age-appropriate written guidelines reflect the overall curricular goals, provide clear directions, include assessment information and offer resources. All instructions have been tested, revised and modified to best meet student needs and to reflect overall goals. | | Assessment | There are no clear plans for formative or summative assessment or the forms of assessment do not match curricular goals. | The teacher has planned for assessment but the assessment is inadequate or incomplete, is only formative or only summative, and may not reflect or measure the learning objectives | Both formative and summative assessment strategies are clearly articulated, logical, and fair. They are closely linked to the learning goals and adequately reflect student learning. | The teacher employs multiple and alternative 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. | | Notes: For more information on this rubric please visit http://ldt.stanford.edu/~tacyt/projectrubric.html |
| | | |
4: Polls/Surveys
| |
Share this
