Teaching with Sakai Innovation Award Evaluation Rubrics

Criteria

Not Applicable

Not Evident

Somewhat Effective

Effective

Excellent

Innovative Practice

Reflection

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Reflective activities are present but only somewhat effective. Participants are often not directed to link reflections to detailed evidence of learning or fail to do so when asked. Reflections display limited insights and generally do not increase in depth over time.

Participants are guided to reflect upon their actions at some but not all appropriate opportunities. Reflections may or may not be linked to detailed evidence of learning. There is some evidence of reflections showing increased insight and depth over time.

Participants are guided to reflect upon their actions at all appropriate opportunities. Reflections are linked to detailed evidence of learning. Reflections show increased insight and depth over time.

TWSIA applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Integration

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Integrative activities are present but only somewhat effective. Participants are often not directed to integrate their learning across curricular and co-curricular domains or fail to do so when asked. Artifacts created in one domain provide limited evidence of learning in new domains. There is little or no evidence of learning across domains increasing in sophistication and depth over time.

Participants are guided to integrate their learning across curricular and co-curricular domains at some but not all appropriate opportunities. Artifacts created in one domain only occasionally provide evidence of learning in new domains. There is some evidence of learning across domains increasing in sophistication and depth over time.

Participants are guided to integrate their learning across curricular and co-curricular domains at every appropriate opportunity. Artifacts created in one domain provide evidence of learning in new domains. Evidence of learning across domains increases in sophistication and depth over time.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Social Connection

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

A community of practice has not yet been established.  Participants may or may not receive formative feedback and do not self-evaluate or provide feedback to others. Evaluator feedback is primarily more summative. Much more could be done to fully integrate participants into the community of practice.

A community of practice is established but not fully explored.  Participants receive formative feedback but may not be asked to self-evaluate or provide feedback to others. Evaluator feedback tends to be more summative than formative. Participants internalize some aspects of membership in the community of practice, but more could be done to fully integrate them into the community.

A community of practice is established in which participants receive formative feedback and are guided to self-evaluate and offer feedback to others at all appropriate opportunities. Evaluator feedback is supportive as well as critical. Participants learn to be effective members of the community of practice.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Teaching and Learning

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Portfolio activities are peripheral to the teaching and learning context and could be more fully integrated into educational activities. Participant learning may include reflective and integrative activities in a community of practice but could be much more effective.

Portfolio activities are part of a teaching and learning context but could be more fully integrated into educational activities. Participant learning is supported by reflective and integrative activities in a community of practice.

Portfolio activities are fully embedded in the teaching and learning context. Participant learning is markedly enhanced by reflective and integrative activities in a community of practice.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Assessment

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Learning outcomes are less than effectively integrated with portfolio activities to provide data on participant learning and participants could be more fully involved in the assessment process. Assessment data is only sometimes used to improve the context of learning and could be applied much more effectively.

Learning outcomes are integrated with portfolio activities to provide data on participant learning, but participants could be more fully involved. Assessment data is used to improve the context of learning but could be explored and applied more effectively.

Learning outcomes are fully integrated with portfolio activities to provide data on participant learning. Assessment data is effectively used to improve the context of learning.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Showcase

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Participants produce a showcase of learning and accomplishments but may or may not be guided in producing a one that represents the values of the community of practice Self-expression may not be encouraged. The showcase is shared with others but may not support participant success.

Participants are guided to produce a showcase of learning and accomplishments that represents at least some of the values of the community of practice and allows some opportunity for self-expression. The showcase is shared with others to support participant success.

Participants are guided to produce a showcase of learning and accomplishments that represents the values of the community of practice and allows ample opportunity for self-expression. The showcase is effectively shared with others to support participant success.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Virtual Identity

TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Participants organize and preserve some of their educational and professional records but do not understand how this relates to managing their virtual identity. Participants mayor may not learn about appropriate actions and use of language in digital contexts, and are only somewhat aware of how their data in the portfolio site may be accessed and used by others.

Participants organize and preserve their educational and professional records but may or may not understand how this relates to managing their virtual identity. Participants learn appropriate actions and use of language in digital contexts, and are aware of how their data in the portfolio site may be accessed and used by others.

Participants are guided in learning to manage their virtual identity by organizing and preserving their educational and professional records, making effective decisions about the appropriateness of language and activities in digital contexts, and monitoring the use of their personal data by others.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the portfolio site in relation to this criterion.

Not Applicable

Not Evident

Somewhat Effective

Effective

Excellent

Innovative Practice

Student Engagement and Community Building

 TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

 There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Instructor encourages exchange of information among students (e.g., bio, background, experiences) designed to increase communication and social rapport.

Students are encouraged to collaborate, share learning resources, and assist each other with learning, but explicit supports are not provided.

60% or more of the students reply to messages from the instructor and other students, both when required and on a voluntary basis. Replies are usually on topic but often are brief, wordy and rambling.

Note: messages include all communication forms—synchronous and asynchronous (email, discussion forums, wikis, chats, webconferences, instant messaging, recorded messages, etc.)

Instructor encourages exchanges of information among students and also interacts with students on a social/peer basis to model community.

Some structures (technologies and strategies) are provided (e.g., links and other resources) to support collaborative student learning in group communities.

80% or more of the students reply to messages from the instructor and other students both when required and voluntarily. Replies are usually on topic and sometimes contain additional resources to other readings, community agencies, or links to other course/project/job experiences that can be shared for the good of the class members.

Instructor encourages exchanges of information in both student to student and instructor to student interactions through a variety of ongoing course/project structures designed to promote social rapport and community.

The course/project is designed to support collaborative student learning with clearly defined technologies and strategies. Links to outside resources and both structured and ad hoc internal and external learning communities are supported.

90% to 100% of the students reply and initiate messages to the instructor and classmates both when required and voluntarily. Replies are thought-provoking and on topic and frequently contain information on other readings, community agencies, or links to other course/project/job experiences that can be shared for the good of the class members.

Students are encouraged to bring their own interests and discoveries into the course/project when relevant.

Student reflection on their learning is built into the course/project. Student and instructor engagement with these shared outside resources are evident. Students assisting each other and learning from each other is evident.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the course or project site in relation to this criterion.

Communication

 TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

 There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

The instructor provides sufficient opportunities for instructor to student communication. However, the course/project offers limited opportunity for communication from student to student.

Standards for instructor responsiveness and availability to students are loosely defined (e.g., turn-around time for email, grade posting, assignment feedback, etc.). Lag time between student questions /assignment submission and instructor response may be lengthy (e.g., turn-around time for email, grade posting, assignment comments, etc. exceeds 48 hours or is undefined).

The course/project provides an instructor introduction to students. Standards for instructor response to student queries are somewhat defined with basic contact information/hours provided. Turnaround time between student question and instructor response is generally within 48 hours (e.g., for email, grade posting, assignment comments, etc.).

Instructor provides somewhat regular analysis of student contribution/work and suggestions for improvement.

Technologies are used for two-way asynchronous communication exchanges of primarily written information (chat, wiki, Google Docs, blogs, etc.) relating to specific course/project topics.

In addition to instructor-to-student communication, standards for student-to-student interactions are somewhat defined. This may include netiquette, responsiveness requirements to postings, as well as group work (e.g., peer reviews, discussion participation, etc.)

The course/project is structured with multiple technology options for communication from instructor to student and student to student with the aim of community building. These may include a variety of one-way and two-way written, voice, and visual communications tools. Standards are clearly stated for all interactions. Evidence is offered of instructor-to-student, student-to-instructor, and student-to-student interactions both replying to and initiating messages.

Options are available for students to control interactions (e.g., presentations, leading discussions, sharing group work).

Expectations for both student and instructor responsiveness and availability are clearly articulated both in engagement with material and individual assignments,

as well as in group work (e.g., turn-around time for emails, peer review of assignments, participation in discussions, etc.) Instructor provides rapid feedback, including analysis of student work and suggestions for improvement.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the course or project site in relation to this criterion.

Learning Materials and Strategies

 TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

 There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

The course/project provides few structural or easily identifiable learning components, and/or navigation beyond a Sakai tools menu is difficult such that the components are not easily found. There is little evidence of interactivity in the design of learning activities.

Sequencing and expectations around access and use of materials are minimal or unclear.

Technologies are primarily used for two-way asynchronous exchanges of primarily written information (e.g., Wiki, Google Docs, blogs, discussion forum, etc.)

Navigation is clear, and key components of the course/project content are identified and easily accessible, such as the Syllabus, a reading list, assignments and due dates, basic contact information. There is some basic interactivity built into the course/project (e.g., interactive presentations, short quizzes that follow a learning sequence).

Instructions as to sequencing and expectations are provided. Basic resources are provided to meaningfully enhance the content.

In addition to technologies used for written two-way asynchronous communication, additional technologies for two-way voice and/or visual communication of learning materials are used.

Navigation is clear, and key components of the course/project content are identified and easily accessible. Additional aesthetic visual cues are provided to increase ease of use for the student.

Active learning strategies are built into the course/project. Instructional activities focus on learner input, and reward paired with group interaction.

Students are expected to explore and use primary sources in as wide a range of media as possible, along with secondary sources such as books and articles.

Student reflection is an integral part of the course/project. Via the visual design, as well as written material, students can clearly understand all components, structure, sequencing, and expectations. Roles are clearly delineated in written, auditory, and visual form. Resources are provided to address the content in multiple ways, taking into account student learning styles or abilities and levels.

Technologies allow for a variety of one-way and two-way written, voice, and visual communications between instructor and students and among students relating to specific course/project topics.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the course or project site in relation to this criterion.

Learning Outcomes and Assessment

 TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

 There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Course/project objectives and outcomes are vague or incomplete. Alignment of outcomes with content and assignments/assessment is not always evident.

Course/project provides limited activities to help students develop critical thinking/judgment, and problem solving skills, and digital literacy as they relate to the course/project objectives/outcomes and at the appropriate level of skill.

Opportunities for students to receive feedback about their own performance are infrequent and sporadic.

Course/project objectives and outcomes are clearly defined and aligned with content and assignments/ assessment.

Some activities are designed to develop critical thinking/ judgment, problem solving skills, and digital literacy as they relate to the course/project objectives/ outcomes and at the appropriate level of skill.

Opportunity is provided for student feedback about their own performance. Students are encouraged to share their knowledge with others. There is some opportunity for students to relate the learning to real-life applications.

Course/project objectives/ outcomes are clearly defined and aligned with content and assignments/ assessment.

Interaction and communication between students, peers, faculty, and content are provided in a variety of ways with choices sometimes available.

Activities to help students gain critical thinking/judgment and problem-solving skills are integrated into every aspect of the course/project. This includes opportunities for students to relate the learning to real-life applications.

Multiple assessment strategies, including ones that attend to student styles and needs, are used to measure content knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Feedback about student performance is frequent and timely throughout the course/project, and provides clear opportunities for improvement and encouragement to excel.

Students are required to become self-reflective learners and are given feedback on their reflection. Other forms of feedback such as peer review or feedback from experts is encouraged.

Students are encouraged to generate course/project content using traditional or new media.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the course or project site in relation to this criterion.

Learner Support

 TWSIA applicant explains persuasively why this criterion is not applicable to this entry.

 There is no evidence of applicant attention to this criterion.

Course/project or project contains limited information for online support and/or links to campus resources.

Course/project contains basic information for online support and links to campus and/or  -specific resources.

Course/project contains extensive information about the online and/or campus environment and requirements for this particular course/project. A variety of resources and contact information is clearly presented.

Support through online orientations, practice technical/learning assessments, and/or a mechanism for supplying on demand support material is developed/ provided throughout the term as needed.

Applicant provides a description of the innovative aspects of the course or project site in relation to this criterion.