Our group’s evaluation rubric can be consulted here.

Group work

Carrying out this first assignment allowed me to pose a critical judgment on my school board’s LMS, or which I am the administrator.  All team members collaborated well in order to complete this task.  At first, we had an asynchronous brainstorming session in our group’s discussion Forum section of Connect.  It was a challenging task for us because of the different time zones.  We were never able to have a synchronous work session.  I was impressed at how, even though we were working asynchronously, all team members contributed ideas for our evaluation rubric.  After doing some research to see what already existed, we opted for an evaluation rubric similar to the ones teachers co-construct with students to better guide them in assignments and evaluation.

Our Rubric

We opted to construct our rubric around the criteria from SECTIONS (Bates, 2014).  We felt like Bates addressed most of the imports points that needed to be considered to thoroughly evaluate which  LMS would best suit Athabaska University’s needs.  We then took selected components from SECTIONS that applied to our scenario.  We included a 4 points scale to allow the ad hoc committee evaluation the different LMS to pin point how effectively it met each criterion (4= exceeds expectations, 1= does not meet expectations).   When selecting evaluation criteria for our rubric, we considered the upcoming expansion of Athabasca University’s programs to the South Asian Market. The main concern was accessibility, which is addressed with the Student component of the SECTIONS model.

References

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a Digital Age/ (Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework). Retrieved January 29, 2016 from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage