RUBRIC FOR ASSESSING COURSE WIKI TED 377 Management in Secondary Education Group Activity High (10) Moderate (5) Low (1) Collaborative effort Evidence of editors working together to add and organize material. Editors worked together to a lesser degree. Editors added their own contributions without collaboration with others. Organization Wiki is highly organized, with information presented in a logical fashion, organized under headings. Wiki is somewhat organized. Some information is listed in no particular order and/or without headings. Wiki is disorganized, and has much information listed in no particular order. No headings are used. Visual appeal Graphics, fonts, and layout adds visual appeal for the reader. Wiki is somewhat appealing visually, evidenced by some graphics, fonts, and good layout of material. Wiki is not visually appealing. No graphics are used. Layout of text material was not considered. Breadth of topics Material presented represents a broad exploration/survey of information. Material presented represents a somewhat broader view of the information, but does not adequately explore management. Material presented represents a narrow view of the information, and only focuses on one or two aspects. Beyond class materials Material presented goes beyond re-presenting materials. Evidence of adequate additional research. Material presented was mainly what was discussed in class. Some additional research was added. Material presented was limited to only that which was presented in class. No additional research was performed. Value of product The product produced makes a valuable contribution of information to the teaching profession, and will be valuable to and in-service teachers. The product produced makes a moderate contribution of information to the teaching profession. Pre-service and teachers will likely not find much value in using it. The product produced makes a no real contribution of information to the teaching profession. Pre-service and teachers would likely choose not to use it as a resource.
Individual Contribution High (10) Moderate (5) Low (1) Amount of contribution Individual added several pieces of information. Individual a moderate amount of information. Individual added very little information. Quality of contribution Contributions were of high quality in terms of information substance. Contributions were of medium quality in terms of information substance. Contributions were of low quality in terms of information substance. Communication ability Contributions were written in a clear, sophisticated fashion, with no grammar or spelling errors. Contributions were written somewhat ambiguously, and/or contained grammar or spelling errors. Contributions were not written in a clear and understandable fashion, and/or contained many grammar or spelling errors. Participated/contributed in a timely manner Individual added to the wiki early in the process, and revisited the wiki later for editing and refining. Individual added to the wiki after a significant amount of contributions had already been made, and revisited the wiki after most editing had been done. Individual waited until most contributions had already been done, and so was not able to function as a collaborator in this project.