Assignment 2 | Co-Created Rubrics for Evaluating Digital Learning Resources (Team)

To learn more about this Team assignment, review the 7 minute video below.

 Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to provide you and your team an opportunity to design a rubric for the assessment of digital learning resources. As part of your Unit 2 reading, you are encouraged to explore what “students as knowledge creators” means and the idea of a renewable assignment is presented. The rubric you and your team will use for this assignment is intentionally selected as an open education resource (OER) with an open license. This means that you and your team (and others with whom you share your work, privately or publicly) may use the rubric you adapt for their own contexts if they wish as long as you attribute the original work according to Creative Commons attribution rules. Your work on this project should help you make connections between what you are creating as your digital learning resource for this course and evidence-based quality criteria for the design of digital resources. Peer review of resources, in the context of graduate education is a critical component of collaborative learning learning. This assignment will support you and your team to practice researching and debating what criteria may be used to evaluate quality. This assignment helps determine your achievement of course Learning Outcome C – critique a digital learning resource.

Instructions

Use the Team Forums discussion area to connect with your team for this assignment.

For this assignment, you will review an existing and highly detailed online course design rubric called the Quality Online Course Initiative (QOCI) rubric designed by staff at the University of Illinois, Springfield. Using the existing QOCI rubric, review the seven large-scale categories and sub-items in the rubric and create a shorter list of relevant review criteria for the design of digital resources. Decide which categories and items to keep, feel free to edit any way that suits your team’s discussion. Limit your team rubric to 15-20 items that might be used as a checklist to evaluate the quality of a broad range of digital resources (not just online courses). Also consider the “Level of Performance” criteria included with the QOCI rubric (Non-Existent, Developing, Meets, Exceeds). Discuss with your team and decide if these levels are useful with your shortened rubric and what, if anything you would change.

The following tasks will constitute completion of Assignment 2:

  • Review the QOCI rubric individually and as a team. Complete any other relevant readings or research related to quality criteria for the design of digital resources
  • Create a shorter rubric (between 15-20 items) based on the QOCI rubric that seems relevant to the design of digital resources in this LRNT527 course
  • Record a short team presentation (5 minutes max) describing your process for reviewing the rubric, debating what to include and what to leave out, and selecting your shorter list of categories and criteria
  • Post your video and rubric in the Unit 2 Share Your Rubrics discussion forum and review and comment on the videos and rubrics from other teams
  • Hand in the final rubric that and your team believe is an effective tool for designers and reviewers to use when considering how to design digital resources

Part 1 – 10% – Post your video and rubric in the Assignment 2 Discussion Forum.  In addition, turn in your rubric to the Assignment 2 Co-Created Rubrics Dropbox

The Team deliverables for part 1 will include the following:

  • Your team rubric based on the QOCI rubric only shorter (15-20 items maximum)
  • A short video (no longer than 5 minutes) describing your team process for reviewing the QOCI rubric and citing any relevant literature that informed your discussion and collaboration
  • Discussion and feedback in the Assignment 2 Discussion Forum on the work of other teams
  • Adherence to APA 7 standards for citations and references in the video presentation, rubric, and discussion

Part 2 – 5% – Submit Individually to the Assignment 2 Personal Reflection Moodle Dropbox

Individual Reflection – Along with your team’s agreed-upon rubric and video, you will include a personal reflection of the process you and your team engaged in to determine your final design and what you learned about creating rubrics and evaluating the quality of digital learning resources (100 words or fewer for the reflection).

Total Value for Assignment 2: 15%

Ten percent of the grade will be assigned to the Team for the quality of the rubric and video. Five percent of the grade will be for your individual reflection.

Assign a Team Member to submit the Team Rubric to the Assignment 2 Co-Created Rubrics Dropbox in Moodle. Submit your Assignment 2 Personal Reflection to the Assignment 2 Personal Reflection Moodle Dropbox  in Moodle.

Rubric for Evaluating the Team-Designed Rubric and Summary (meta rubric)

Course Learning Outcome/Assessment Criteria Excellent
(A+ to A)		 Proficient
(A- to B+)		 Satisfactory
(B to B-)		 Unsatisfactory
(F)
Rubric Design The distilled list of rubric items clearly aligns with a variety of named learning theories and instructional design principles. There is evidence that the Level of Criteria used to evaluate each item in the rubric has been considered and discussed and the team has arrived at an objective solution for communicating to a designer the quality of their design. The distilled list of rubric items clearly aligns with a variety of named learning theories and instructional design principles. There is evidence that the Level of Criteria used to evaluate each item in the rubric has been considered and discussed and the team has arrived at an objective solution for communicating to a designer the quality of their design. The distilled list of rubric items somewhat aligns with learning theories and instructional design principles. The Level of Criteria used to evaluate each item in the rubric may have been considered but there is little evidence of conversation or decision-making on this element of the assignment. The distilled list of rubric items somewhat aligns with learning theories and instructional design principles. There is little evidence of a thorough discussion of choices the team has made. The Level of Criteria is unchanged.
Video of the Team Rubric Design Process The quality and content of the video conveys excellence in media standards (audio, editing, images, concepts). The Team process for creating the assignment may be considered a professional framework for collaboration. Current and relevant literature are referenced that successfully ground the team’s rationale for the final product. The video is concise (5 minutes or fewer) and clearly describes the academic and debate process the Team used to create their final product (the shortened rubric). The video references the literature and other web resources used to create the final rubric. The video is concise (5 minutes or fewer) and clearly describes the academic and debate process the Team used to create their final product (the shortened rubric). There are a few references to the literature used to create the rubric. The video is long (over 5 minutes) and does not clearly describe the academic and debate process the Team used to create their final product (the shortened rubric). There are a few (if any) references to the literature used to create the rubric.
APA Citations and Referencing All citations and APA format are correct. Most citations and APA formatting are correct. Some citations and APA formatting are correct. Few citations and APA formatting are correct.