Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
BLR’s Human Resources Training Presentations
Advertisements

The Cost of Authoring with a Knowledge Layer Judy Kay and Lichao Li School of Information Technologies The University of Sydney, Australia.
Analyzing Student Work
You can use this presentation to: Gain an overall understanding of the purpose of the revised tool Learn about the changes that have been made Find advice.
1 Literacy Leadership Teams December 2004 Common High-Quality Differentiated Instruction for Achievement for All within The Cleveland Literacy System Module.
Designed by Alexandros Vouyouklis - Flexible Multimedia Multimedia in the language classroom. An ally or a foe? Quite a few years have passed.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL). UD in Architecture a movement of designing structures with all potential users in mind incorporated access features.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric VII: Opportunities for Deeper Learning CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products (EQuIP) Using the Tri-State Quality Rubric for Mathematics.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Module 1: Analysis of a Research Simulation Task in CTE Tennessee Department of Education CTE High School Supporting Rigorous.
Open Educational Resources Sample Communications Slides for Educators and Administrators CC BYCC BY Achieve 2015.
Supporting the Instructional Process Instructional Assistant Training.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric IV: Quality of Assessments CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
Audio-visual media in L2 teaching. What media do you use? Video (self made) With free software Jing Example 2.
Section VI: Comprehension Teaching Reading Sourcebook 2 nd edition.
Catching Quality and Collaboration with Home Base Angel Mills Lee County Schools Kenan Fellow: Leading Educators to Home Base.
EQNet Travel Well Criteria.
Standards Aligned System April 21, 2011 – In-Service.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric I: Alignment to Standards CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
Evaluating Self-Created Lesson/Units and Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects An Introduction to the Achieve OER & Quality Review Rubrics CC BYCC BY.
Welcome What’s a pilot?. What’s the purpose of the pilot? Support teachers and administrators with the new evaluation system as we learn together about.
SIOP: Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol Dr. Kelly Bikle Winter 2007.
 State Standards Initiative.  The standards are not intended to be a new name for old ways of doing business. They are a call to take the next step.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric III: Utility of Materials Designed to Support Teaching CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
MERLOT’s Peer Review Report Composed from reports by at least two Peer Reviewers. Description Section Provides the pedagogical context (i.e. learning goals,
Universal Design for Learning
Bruce White Ruth Geer University of South Australia.
EDU 385 Education Assessment in the Classroom
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects An Introduction to the Achieve OER Rubrics CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
A Network Approach To Improving Teaching and Learning Center Point High School Instructional Rounds in Education.
Integrating Differentiated Instruction & Understanding by Design: Connecting Content and Kids by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric II: Quality of Explanation of Subject Matter CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
Inclusive Education PLC November 16, 2012 Facilitated by Jennifer Gondek TST BOCES.
Assessing The Next Generation Science Standards on Multiple Scales Dr. Christyan Mitchell 2011 Council of State Science Supervisors (CSSS) Annual Conference.
Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric VI: Quality of Instructional Tasks and Practice Exercises CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013.
Education 6714 Gayla Fisher.  “ The central practical premise of UDL is that a curriculum should include alternatives to make it accessible and appropriate.
To access NCSU Wireless: Connect to “NCSU Guest” To Sign in to the Training and access the Contractor Wiki: contractortraining.pbworks.com.
Classroom Assessment for Student Learning March 2009 Assessment Critiquing.
June 22, 2011 CCSSO-NCSA Innovative Approaches to Statewide Writing Assessments 6/22/11CCSSO-NCSA.
World Book Classroom’s Social Studies Power. Social Studies Power helps you: 1) teach social studies content using interactive, engaging tools 2) evaluate.
How Much Do We know about Our Textbook? Zhang Lu.
STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS & LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS The Standards define what all students are expected.
Constructed Response Developing this writing practice as part of ongoing classroom assessment The value of constructed response is that it is teaching.
Celebrate Our Rising Stars Summit IV “From Essential Elements to Effective Practice” Strategies to Accelerate Academic Learning for English Learners Anna.
THREE DIMENSIONS OF A HIGH-QUALITY RUBRIC Created by Shauna Denson “Classroom Assessment for Student Learning”(J. Chappuis)
Common Core State Standards in English/Language Arts What science teachers need to know.
“ Public education is open to all children - no matter their ability, heritage, or economic background. It is the promise of our future ” Denise Juneau,
Smarter Balanced & Higher Education Cheryl Blanco Smarter Balanced Colorado Remedial Education Policy Review Task Force August 24, 2012.
Designing Quality Assessment and Rubrics
Instructional Practice Guide: Coaching Tool Making the Shifts in Classroom Instruction Ignite 2015 San Diego, CA February 20, 2015 Sandra
Creating Inclusive Classrooms in Online Courses using Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Principles Pamela T. Dunning, Ph.D. Troy University
Illinois State Board of Education
Open Math – Open Classroom
An Overview of the EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
Introducing the Smarter Balanced Digital Library
Pamela T. Dunning, Ph.D. Troy University
Module 6: Planning Rich Instruction with OER
The Wonderful World of Technology
Teaching with Instructional Software
Connecticut Core Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy
An Overview of the EQuIP Rubric for Lessons & Units
Illinois State Board of Education
Common Core State Standards
Connecticut Core Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy
Connecticut Core Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy
The EQuIP Rubric (Formerly the Tri-State Rubric) A Tool To Align Lesson Plans and Units to the Common Core State Standards Illinois State Board of Education.
Section VI: Comprehension
Presentation transcript:

Evaluating Open Educational Resource (OER) Objects Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity CC BYCC BY Achieve 2013

2 Open : Containing an open license - no restrictions on remixing or reusing [Having no enclosing or confining barrier; not restricted to a particular group or category of participants] Open Educational Resources: [With Webster’s Definitions] O E R Educational: Used for teaching and learning [Pertaining to the action or process of educating or being educated] Resource: Object used to support an effort or task [ A source of support or aid, especially one that can be readily drawn upon when needed]

3 What are OER? OER are teaching, learning, and research resources that contain an open license. They provide extraordinary opportunities for educators to freely share knowledge and resources. They offer great potential for instructional innovation and networks for sharing best practices. There are millions of OER objects available online. Open Educational Resources (OER)

4 OER objects may include (but are not limited to): Images Applets Games Worksheets Lesson plans Original-source texts Assessments Units Textbooks Teacher/learner support materials o NOTE: Any smaller component of a more complex object, that can exist as a stand-alone, alsoqualifies as an “object” (e.g. a unit in a textbook, a lesson in a unit, or an activity in a lesson). Open Educational Resources (OER)

5 The Achieve OER Evaluation Rubrics How and why were the Achieve OER Rubrics created? Educators using the vast system of sharing need a method for filtering OER to meet the needs of their students. The purpose of the rubrics is to provide a structure for evaluating an online resource in a systematic, purposeful and comprehensive way. There are two ways of approaching the evaluation of a resource: o Holistically evaluating the object with a single rating, (similar to the star-rating systems used on Netflix, Yelp and Amazon) o Separately evaluating each of the components of quality, as with the Achieve OER Rubrics. The rubric criteria are based on Achieve protocols used to assist states in alignment and quality review studies. The Achieve OER Evaluation Tool, hosting the rubrics on OERCommons.org, allows a user to identify, evaluate and sort objects based on the specified essential elements of quality.

6 How do the Achieve OER Rubrics work? The rubrics represent an evaluation system for objects found within Open Educational Resources. They are hosted as an online evaluation tool on the repository, OERCommons.org, but can also be used independently. They are applied to any content area. o NOTE: At this stage only Common Core Standards for English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics are available in the Achieve OER Evaluation Tool. Content standards for History, Social Studies, Sciences, and technical subjects are not yet available. Each rubric is applied independently to an object. They rate the potential, not the actual, effectiveness of an object. They use a five-point scoring system to describe levels of quality. Applying the Achieve OER Rubrics

7 This presentation will focus on Rubric V: Rubric I. Degree of Alignment to Standards Rubric II. Quality of Explanation of the Subject Matter Rubric III. Utility of Materials Designed to Support Teaching Rubric IV. Quality of Assessment Rubric V. Quality of Technological Interactivity Rubric VI. Quality of Instructional Tasks and Practice Exercises Rubric VII. Opportunities for Deeper Learning o NOTE: Sometimes one or more of the rubrics may not be relevant to a particular object. In those cases, a rating of N/A is appropriate. The Achieve OER Evaluation Tool Rubrics

8 How and Why is Rubric V Applied? “Interactivity” is used broadly to mean that the object responds to the user, or one that behaves differently based on what the user does. Applied to objects that are designed with a technology-based interactive component, Used to rate the degree and quality of the interactivity of that component (Not a rating for technology in general but for technological interactivity), For interactive objects designed for student use, the rubric is applied to the entire object. For objects designed for teacher use, for example lesson plans, which may include interactive components for use by students, the rubric is applied only to those interactive parts. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

9 When does Rubric V not apply? Rubric V is not applicable if an object does not have an interactive element. This is not a rating for technology in general, but only for technological interactivity between the user and the object. The rubric does not apply to how students interact with each other, but rather how the technology responds to an individual student user. Does not apply to objects where interaction with the object is limited to, for example, opening a PDF attachment. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

10 3: An object is rated superior only if all of the following are true: The object, or interactive component of an object, is responsive to student input in a way that creates an individualized learning experience. This means the object adapts to the user based on what s/he does, or the object allows the user some flexibility or individual control during the learning experience. The interactive component is purposeful and directly related to learning. The interactive component of the object is well designed and easy to use, encouraging learner use. The interactive component of the object appears to function flawlessly on the intended platform. For example an interactive student-directed game is considered superior for Rubric V because it responds to individual students by increasing the level of challenge when students successfully complete sections of questions and offers hints when incorrect answers are given and moves the student to intervention questions when they are unable to give the correct answer. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

11 2: An object, or interactive component of an object, is rated strong if it has an interactive feature that is purposeful and directly related to learning, even if it does not provide an individualized learning experience. Similarly to the superior objects, strong interactive objects must be well designed, easy to use, and function flawlessly on the intended platform. For example an object has a component that reads aloud sections of text, making it easier for some students to stay focused or to hear the voice in a passage of literature. Even though this interactive feature is well designed, purposeful, and directly related to the learning, there is no personal feedback or individualized response. This object is considered strong for Rubric V. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

12 1: An object, or interactive component of an object, is rated limited if its interactive element neither relates to nor detracts from learning. This kind of interactive element might be designed to increase student motivation and to build content understanding by rewarding or entertaining the learner and extending the time the user engages with the content. For example even though the interactive element of a student-directed game may motivate the student to maintain the connection with the object, it is still considered limited for Rubric V. The game’s interactive feature includes earning points, leading to achieving levels, as a reward for correct answers. The interactivity component does not connect directly to the subject matter, provides no opportunity to learn from incorrect answers, or, in some cases, even to recognize when an incorrect answer was given. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

13 0: An object, or interactive component of an object, is rated very weak or no value if it has interactive features that are poorly conceived and/or executed. The interactive features might fail to operate as intended, distract the user, or unnecessarily take up user time. For example in a student-directed game a group of clowns tumble across the screen with each correct answer, distracting the student and slowing their progress. This interactive feature is considered very weak or of no value. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

14 N/A: This rubric is not applicable (N/A) for an object that does not have an interactive technological element. Rubric V is not applicable if there is no interactive feature in the object or if technological interaction with the object is limited to, for example, opening a user-selected PDF. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity

Using the Achieve OER Evaluation Tool On OERCommons.org Rubric V

o NOTE: Specific instructions for Using the OERCommons Website to search for and evaluate objects, using all of the rubrics, can be found in another slide presentation of this training package. 16 Achieve OER Evaluation Tool on OERCommons.org OERCommons.orgOERCommons.org hosts the rubrics as the Achieve OER Evaluation Tool

17 Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity Achieve OER Evaluation Tool Using OERCommons.org to evaluate an object for its quality of technological interactivity:OERCommons.org After you have evaluated an object using Rubrics I through IV, you should be ready to apply Rubric V. Begin by clicking on at the end of Rubric IV or on the title line for Rubric V.

18 To view a video about Rubric V click here… Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity Achieve OER Evaluation Tool

19 Hover over the rating numbers to see an abbreviated version of the rating descriptors. Review the object with your focus on the quality of the technologically interactive feature(s) included in the object and select the appropriate rating. Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity Achieve OER Evaluation Tool

20 To download a full text version of the rubrics click here: Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity Achieve OER Evaluation Tool

21 Rubric V: Quality of Technological Interactivity Achieve OER Evaluation Tool Across the bottom of Rubric V you see options to: Leave a [+ Comment], Clear rating, [Save & Go to the Next Rubric] (You can also click on any rubric title to leave Rubric V, but your ratings will not be saved.)

22 Now you are ready to rate the object using the Achieve OER Evaluation Tool’s other rubrics. Rubrics can be used in any order and can be selected by simply clicking on the rubric title. Remember to click after each rubric to ensure that your work is saved. You can tell if your work was saved by the symbol at the beginning of each rubric title: indicates not yet rated or rating was not saved indicates your rating has been saved Achieve OER Evaluation Tool on OERCommons.org: Rubric V

Slides developed by Achieve: th Street, NW / Suite 510 Washington, DC 20036