Evaluation
The purpose of this page is merely to describe how your participation in this activity will be evaluated. If you have been working in a computer lab in groups (with each group writing and editing one single literary piece), or if you have been working individually, the grading system (rubric) below will still apply in the same way. It is not meant to be a strict reflection of absolute performance, but rather a general guide to what you should be able to accomplish and learn from this activity.
|
Beginning 1 |
Developing 2 |
Very Good 3 |
Exemplary 4 |
Score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Editing of the "GettingStartedPage" on the Wiki site
|
Student was not able to find the page without assistance, or edit the page without help. |
Student was able to find the page, but needed minor assistance in discovery and/or in editing the page. |
Student was able to find the page, open the editor, and add their name to it without assistance. |
Student added their name to it without assistance, and also added some fancy formatted text. |
|
|
Create a new wiki page named "FirstnameLastname" and edit it to include original content.
|
Student was not able to create a new page without help, and was not able to edit the page without help. |
Student needed help with either creating the page or editing it, but was generally able to complete the task once they got minor help. |
Student was able to create the page and edit it to include their own original content. |
Student created new page, added contents, and included several types of formatting and/or hyperlinks to additional resources. |
|
|
Editing of pages created by peers in a manner that respects opinions and revises or modifies only the facts.
|
Student was not able to find, open, and edit the original works (pages) created by any other group or individual. |
Student was able to find, open and edit the original works of others, but needed guidance on discrimination of fact from opinion. |
Student edited and contributed in a useful fashion to the facts of original works, and clarified where necessary the opinions therein. |
Student was able to make artful and scientific examination of the relationship between science and belief. |
|
|
Group discussion displayed metacognitive reflection and deep level processing. |
Student did not participate in the group discussion even when prompted to do so. |
Student offered their insights and honest opinions, although the commentary was transparent and/or shallow. |
Student contributed to the discussion in a manner revealing their genuine analysis and probing into the understanding of these concepts. |
Student offered novel and creative interpretations, was willing to disagree and/or debate ideas, was respectful of others and/or initiated new questions. |