Transformation: The Rubric Paradigm Gary Brown The Center for Teaching, Learning & Technology.
-
Upload
berenice-sims -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
2
Transcript of Transformation: The Rubric Paradigm Gary Brown The Center for Teaching, Learning & Technology.
Transformation:The Rubric Paradigm
Gary BrownThe Center for Teaching, Learning & Technology
Copyright Statement
• Copyright Gary Brown, 2002. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author.
We should not expect the guidance for change of this magnitude—in institutional culture and values—to come from the faculty ranks. After all, faculty are deeply rooted in the traditional values of higher education. Fundamentally, this is a leadership issue. --Carole Barone, Vice President
Educause
Student Enrollments in WSU Online Learning Spaces
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
The Goals, Activities, and Practices
• Invite faculty to join in the process of formulating the assessment.
• A series of two short, online surveys designed to provide formative assessment: one instructor survey and one student surveys.
The Assessment Gold Standard
Participants Who Used Data to Inform Change
563
10655 16 2
0
300
600
Invited faculty Faculty who tookinstructor survey
Faculty w/ studentresponses
Faculty w/ >50%student response
rate
Faculty who usedthe data
Transformation?
• Rubrics—a road map AND a compass• Help faculty grade student performance• Help students understand expectations• Provide measures of growth• Help inform policy
What is a rubric?
The Rubric Paradigm
Critical Thinking and Measures of Growth
Scant _____________________________ Substantial
Identifies and summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or the source's position).
Does not identify and summarize the problem, is confused or identifies a different and inappropriate problem.
Does not identify or is confused by the issue, or represents the issue inaccurately.
Identifies the main problem and subsidiary, embedded, or implicit aspects of the problem, and identifies them clearly, addressing their relationships to each other.
Identifies not only the basics of the issue, but recognizes
nuances of the issue.
7 Dimensions of Critical Thinking1. Identifies and summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or
the source's position).
2. Identifies and presents the STUDENT’S OWN perspective and position as it is important to the analysis of the issue.
3. Identifies and considers OTHER salient perspectives and positions that are important to the analysis of the issue.
4. Identifies and assesses the key assumptions.
5. Identifies and assesses the quality of supporting data/evidence and provides additional data/evidence related to the issue.
6. Identifies and considers the influence of the context * on the issue.
7. Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences.
Critical Thinking:one course/two semesters
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Prob
lem
Stu
dent
View
Oth
er V
iew
s
Cont
ext
Evid
ence
Ass
umpt
ions
Impl
icat
ions
Ave
rage
Entomology--spring 99 Entomology--spring 00
One Particular Finding
• The faculty questionnaire revealed a singular focus on grading over fostering critical thinking for broader life-long learning.
• If we want our constituencies to value what we do, we might consider how to make what we do more valuable….
Dimensions of Transformation
1. Purpose2. Data 3. Application4. Dissemination
Premise—”High Standards” is not the same as standardization
Criteria for Prioritizing Scoring Form
Rater: Project:
* Faculty * Designer
* Student * Assessment Specialist
* Community Colleague * Administrator
* Other _________
Rating
Assessment Purpose
Data & Data Acquisition
Application
Dissemination
Bonus—Faculty Rewarded for Assessment
Total Score
Comments:
The Scoring Form
U#1 U#2 U#3 U#4 U#5 DimensionAverage
Purpose 3 3.1 3.6 4 3 3.34Data 2.4 3.5 3.8 3.5 3 3.24Application 2.5 3.4 3.7 3.5 4.5 3.52Dissemination 3.3 3 3.5 2 4.5 3.26University Average
2.8 3.3 3.7 3.3 3.8 3.343.38
Pilot Findings
Pilot Findings
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
U # 1
U # 2
U # 3
U # 4
U # 5
Reviewers’ SuggestionsU#1
• Include faculty more in this process; audience is clearly the upper echelon of the institution and future employers.
Reviewers’ Suggestions U#2
• Not many rewards for assessment.
• No feedback to faculty and students.
Reviewers’ Suggestions U#3
• Assesses key concern: learning to learn.
• No plan to apply or fund results of findings. Faculty support neglected.
Reviewers’ Suggestions U#4
• Assumes that tech alone causes transformation
Reviewers’ Suggestions U#5
• Good start but…