On team work and rubrics….
My Reflection….
I do enjoy collaborating on small projects with small groups. I was a few days late to join the dialogue with my team for this project but I jumped in head first and added all of my thoughts and perspectives. There didn’t seem to be a plan of attack so I proposed a ‘divide and conquer’ approach which everyone seemed fine with. In the end, i was personally satisfied with our end-product. We produced a highly-detailed and comprehensive evaluation tool that could be applied to any LMS comparison. Next time- have a plan for the final count-down as I couldn’t contact any but one of the group members in the last 36 hours of the project. I would propose a 2-3 person ‘pass-it-on’ final edit. Note to self- formatting is not my forte, but I’m getting better!
Evaluation Rubric for Selecting an Online Delivery Platform: Assessing LMS Options
Group#2- Amy Frank , Kathryn McGregor , Shelley Pike , Ryosuke Suzuki , Diana Wilkes
Précis:
The South Island Distance Education School’s (SIDES) Secondary program on Vancouver Island is a provider of distance learning home school program which is attracting interest from an increasing international contingent. SIDES is anticipating up to 200 students for their next enrolment who will graduate with a BC Dogwood High School Diploma.
Rubric: How to select an Online Delivery Platform for SIDES
|
Level 4 – Superior |
Level 3 – Proficient |
Level 2 – Adequate |
Level 1 – Emergent |
|
| Students | ||||
|
The technology is suitable for all students based on their initial skills The technology is suitable for students of all backgrounds (culture, age, level) Clear and thorough support enables transparency to the community (administrators can always allow guest access) |
It is suitable for most students based on their initial skills It is suitable for students of most backgrounds Through clear support the technology enables transparency to the community (administrators can frequently allow guest access) |
It is suitable for some students based on their initial skills The technology is suitable for students of some backgrounds It enables minimal transparency to the community (administrators can sometimes allow guest access) |
The technology is suitable for most students based on their initial skills It is suitable for students of most backgrounds It does not enable transparency to the community |
|
Students can always access the LMS from home-computers easily Technology has a variety of useful, accessible educational advantages (chat rooms, knowledge building, review) Assignments can always be submitted and feedback received through the LMS |
Students can usually access the LMS from home-computers easily Technology has many accessible educational advantages (chat rooms, knowledge building, review) Assignments can frequently be submitted and feedback received through the LMS |
Students can access the LMS from home-computers with minimal difficulty Technology has some accessible educational advantages (chat rooms, knowledge building, review) Assignments can sometimes be submitted and feedback received through the LMS |
Students can access the LMS from home-computers but with difficulty Technology has few accessible educational advantages (chat rooms, knowledge building, review) Assignments can rarely be submitted and feedback rarely received through the LMS |
|
The interface has an extensive range of tools for assisting ESOL students, has excellent scaffolding opportunities and it enables a variety of learning activities to meet the learning needs of students | The interface has many tools for assisting ESOL students, provides good scaffolding opportunities and it enables many learning activities to meet the learning needs of students | The interface has some tools for assisting ESOL students, provides some scaffolding opportunities and enables some learning activities to meet the learning needs of students | The interface has few tools for assisting ESOL students, provides few scaffolding opportunities and enables minimal learning activities to meet the learning needs of students |
| Ease of Use | ||||
|
Intuitively easy for students and teachers to use in all areas | Intuitively easy for students and teachers to use in most areas | Intuitively easy for students and teachers to use in some areas | Intuitively easy for students and teachers to use in few areas |
|
LMS includes tutorials in depth and full online support | Users have access to online support when they are necessary (orientation and tutorials for students, course templates and guides for instructors) | Some or limited tutorials and online support are available for users | LMS does not have adequate tutorials and online support. Users have to seek solutions on their own |
|
LMS can be integrated into existing IT systems without any issues | LMS can be integrated into existing IT systems without any major issues | Integration of the LMS requires some modifications to existing IT systems | Integration of the LMS requires major modifications to existing IT systems |
| Interaction and Interactivity | ||||
|
Includes a high quality and variety of communication tools meeting diverse learning styles; consistently supports higher level thinking; and has frequent opportunity for knowledge building Chat rooms are always available for constructivist activities and discussion Students can create an individualized homepage in all courses Students can always access internal email and real time chat |
Includes a good quality and variety
of communication tools that meet the diverse learning styles of students; communication tools often encourage higher level thinking; and many opportunities for knowledge building Chat rooms are consistently available for constructivist activities and discussion Students can create individualized homepage in most courses |
Includes a few good quality but limited types of communication tools meeting the needs of most but not all students; communication tools sometimes encourage higher level thinking; and some opportunity for knowledge building exists for students Chat room may be available for constructivist activities and discussion |
Includes a limited quality and variety of communication tools meeting the needs of a select group of students only; communication tools rarely encourage higher level thinking; and few opportunities for knowledge building exist Chat rooms are ineffective or missing Students are unable to create an individualized homepage in courses Students have insufficient access to internal email and real time chat |
|
Opportunities to develop a sense of community consistently available through a variety of opportunities (forums, wikis, virtual/real time field trips, links etc.) | Opportunities to develop a sense of community often available through a variety of opportunities | Opportunities to develop a sense of community occasionally available through a variety of opportunities | Opportunities to develop a sense of community never or inconsistently available |
|
Has a variety of assessment tools (self/teacher tests, clear learning objectives and success criteria) Feedback from different sources (peer/teacher review, portfolios, presentations) and access to current grades is consistently available |
Provides some variety of assessment tools available from peers and instructor within the interface Some feedback from different sources (peer/teacher review, portfolios, presentations) and access to current grades is available |
Has limited types of assessment with some feedback delivered by instructors within the interface | Has assessment of learning only, feedback ineffective, untimely or missing |
| Organizational Issues (includes support systems and deployment issues) | ||||
|
There is cross-functionality and it supports all courses provided by organization | Supports most courses provided by organization | Supports a limited number of courses provided by organization | It is not cross-functional and will not support any other courses provided by the organization |
|
Operates from and reports to one common unit. There is clear and logical communication | Operates from and reports to multiple units with clear and orderly communication | Reporting is difficult to identify, and communication is unclear from one unit to another | Operates from and reports to multiple points from within the organization, reporting is not logical, and communication breaks down |
|
Entrance points are clear and meet a variety of school calendars Registration is not a teachers responsibility and is handled by in- house support staff |
Entrance points are clear with some flexibility, on a 10 month school calendar Registration is not a teachers responsibility and is handled by limited in-house support staff |
Entrance points specific on a 10 month traditional calendar. Registration partially a teachers responsibility with some support staff |
Entrance points are limited to two times per 10 month school calendars Registration is either a teachers responsibility or handled off site by a contracted service |
|
Deployment of platform is provided by the vendor | Deployment of platform is provided by the vendor; however, technical support is required to communicate with the interface | Deployment of platform requires is the responsibility of the organization; however, technical support if available through the vendor | Deployment of platform is solely the responsibility of the organization |
Justification:
As the instructors who deliver this online program we have the task of finding the most appropriate online platform. We have decided to create an evaluation rubric to facilitate our decision making process. This evaluation rubric will be a criteria-based assessment tool that will enable an objective assessment of the online learning platforms available to SIDES.
Bates and Poole (2003) argue that an effective organizational system is required to make technology-assisted teaching feasible. Our SIDES site currently supports a variety of online elements and courses including internet resources, online discussions, online grades, and the option to submit assignments online (SIDES). SIDES clearly supports the use of technology: we utilize Elluminate as a presentation and communication tool; students can login to their courses through the SIDES website where technical assistance is available for students and staff; and we already have an established interface and login point. Furthermore, we want to optimize the programs that we can offer our distance education learners by selecting the online platform that will complement our existing infrastructure.
We need to discover which LMS will most effectively meet our needs. The criteria we felt were the most important and valuable for evaluating possible online platforms came from the Bates and Poole (2003) SECTIONS model: Students, Ease of use, Interaction and interactivity and Organizational considerations. We selected these four of the eight SECTIONS criteria to focus on because they are the most pertinent to our program needs. We decided to use four levels of descriptors so we could generate a quantitative value to clearly identify a degree of difference.
John Egan explains Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS model is a “comprehensive, systematic and manageable evaluation of educational technologies…requiring no fluency in educational technology jargon…” (Egan, 2009). Therefore, by modelling our evaluation rubric around the SECTIONS criteria and providing levelled descriptors we are enabling an unbiased, educated and clear selection.
References:
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: a Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundation for Success. (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
EduTools. (2010). CMS: Product List. Retrieved May 31, 2010 from http://www.edutools.info/item_list.jsp?pj=4
Egan, J.P. (2009). Proceedings from 5th International Conference in Open & Distance Learning. Launching an online applications course in educational technology: aligning theory, pedagogy, and design. Athens, Greece.
Elliott, C. (2003). Clear expectations, improved outcomes: using rubrics. FYI: journal of
School Libraries Association of Victoria, Spring 2003, pp. 4-7. Retrieved 31 May
2010 from http://www.linkingforlearning.com/about/publications/rubrics_article.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2004). Ontario Curriculum Grades 1-12: Achievement Charts
(draft). Retrieved May 31, 2010, from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/policy/achievement/charts1to12.pdf
Perkins, M. & Pfaffman, J. (2006). Using a Course Management System to Improve
Classroom Communication. Science Teacher, 73(7), 33-37.
Panettieri, J. (2007). Addition by subtraction. University Business, Auguston by, 58-62.
Accessed online 11 March 2009
http://www.universitybusiness.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845
SIDES Distributed Learning. (no date). Secondary Programs Introduction: Grades 8-12.
Retreived May 31, 2010, from http://www.sides.ca/secondary/index.php.