Module 10 - Consider the rubrics. What are your initial thoughts? How could you see yourself using any aspects of these in collaborative planning? Think about how you could use aspects of these in your planning unit—assignment 3.
I am often reminded by my administrator that "assessment drives instruction." True, but I would include that "assessment intertwined with collaborative planning (e.g. What are the big ideas?) drives instruction and is integral for students to develop strong critical thinking skills." When I was an early-career teacher, I will admit that assessment was not my forte; I focused mainly on summative assessment strategies. Presently, I value and know the importance on how formative assessment enriches students' thoughts - they are able to use the provided feedback and demonstrate higher-order thinking skills. However, for students to become more active with their learning they must be taught how assessment works and need to be involved in the creation of rubrics.
This module provides a look at three distinctive types of rubrics to use with inquiry projects.
Galileo.org - Rubric for Discipline-Based and Inter-Disciplnary Inquiry Studies
As mentioned above, students must be involved in the creation of rubrics. Therefore, this extensive rubric will be too difficult for elementary students to fully comprehend; the language itself will have its drawbacks. Using terminology such as " authenticity" and "academic rigor" has no true meaning to younger students and they may feel overwhelmed during the investigative process. I do feel the 'big ideas' from this rubric can be used during the collaborative process with a colleague. Using the four levels (beginning, developing, emerging, and aspiring) can be part of a 'working skeleton' between a teacher-librarian and teacher.
Personal rating: May be too difficult for an elementary setting. Use during collaborative process. Once collaborative team feels more comfortable with inquiry-based learning, the goals outlined in this rubric can be used but re-written to match the curricular goals of the collaborative team and students.
Mindset Works - Effective Effort Rubric:
This rubric assesses the learning process - the effective effort that a learner applies. Though assessing inquiry throughout the process is an absolute must, I feel the language used in this rubric might come across with mixed reactions. The structure outlined can be used during mini-conferences - the teacher and student can discuss areas that work well and areas for improvement. Personally, I do not like to see words such as "see mistakes as failures" on a rubric or any assessment strategy. The inquiry process is meant for enriching students' knowledge and not putting them down emotionally. Also, I would avoid using "you" on a rubric as struggling students may feel this as a personal attack and may disengage from the entire activity. On a positive note, I do agree with the content skills and learning goals (e.g. taking challenges, accepting feedback, asking questions, taking risks, etc.).
Personal rating: Good for weekly check-ins; however, language can be too negative. Use learning goals to create a 'working skeleton.'
Space Planning Rubric:
This simple and familiar style of rubric outlines the prescribed learning outcomes for both writing and science. Currently, this format is what I use with my students. They are familiar with its simplicity and fully understand what is expected from them to accomplish. During the collaborative process with my colleagues, we would discuss possible final projects but more importantly, which learning outcomes the unit and tasks will cover.
Personal rating: Familiar criteria and language. Simple to use. May need to include learning goals from the "Galileo" rubric.
This module provides a look at three distinctive types of rubrics to use with inquiry projects.
Galileo.org - Rubric for Discipline-Based and Inter-Disciplnary Inquiry Studies
As mentioned above, students must be involved in the creation of rubrics. Therefore, this extensive rubric will be too difficult for elementary students to fully comprehend; the language itself will have its drawbacks. Using terminology such as " authenticity" and "academic rigor" has no true meaning to younger students and they may feel overwhelmed during the investigative process. I do feel the 'big ideas' from this rubric can be used during the collaborative process with a colleague. Using the four levels (beginning, developing, emerging, and aspiring) can be part of a 'working skeleton' between a teacher-librarian and teacher.
Personal rating: May be too difficult for an elementary setting. Use during collaborative process. Once collaborative team feels more comfortable with inquiry-based learning, the goals outlined in this rubric can be used but re-written to match the curricular goals of the collaborative team and students.
Mindset Works - Effective Effort Rubric:
This rubric assesses the learning process - the effective effort that a learner applies. Though assessing inquiry throughout the process is an absolute must, I feel the language used in this rubric might come across with mixed reactions. The structure outlined can be used during mini-conferences - the teacher and student can discuss areas that work well and areas for improvement. Personally, I do not like to see words such as "see mistakes as failures" on a rubric or any assessment strategy. The inquiry process is meant for enriching students' knowledge and not putting them down emotionally. Also, I would avoid using "you" on a rubric as struggling students may feel this as a personal attack and may disengage from the entire activity. On a positive note, I do agree with the content skills and learning goals (e.g. taking challenges, accepting feedback, asking questions, taking risks, etc.).
Personal rating: Good for weekly check-ins; however, language can be too negative. Use learning goals to create a 'working skeleton.'
Space Planning Rubric:
This simple and familiar style of rubric outlines the prescribed learning outcomes for both writing and science. Currently, this format is what I use with my students. They are familiar with its simplicity and fully understand what is expected from them to accomplish. During the collaborative process with my colleagues, we would discuss possible final projects but more importantly, which learning outcomes the unit and tasks will cover.
Personal rating: Familiar criteria and language. Simple to use. May need to include learning goals from the "Galileo" rubric.