Technologies for Learning - Rubrics

Rubrics allow educators to communicate expectations, and provide feedback (Flinders University, 2013). However, they can also be used to evaluate digital learning resources (DLR). Having conducted research, design considerations had to be made. These steps were essential in evaluating the Scootle DLR.

Researching DLR rubrics required a systematic approach that was a positive experience. Several rubrics were used as an example to create another rubric. Firstly, a list of search words were made that would yield the results needed. There were no issues encountered in this planning step as prior reading and web-surfing helped. Secondly, information was gathered. According to Shelly, Gunter, & Gunter, (2012), teachers should consider the credibility of sources. It was easy to decipher which were/were not credible. Most sources gathered were not affiliated with professional educational organisations and these were filtered out.   Finally, the information collected was organised. It was important at this stage to think about how the final product was to be structured.  Taking a systematic approach to research by planning, gathering, and organising collected knowledge, and data was a positive experience. Without this approach, it could have been a time consuming and less rewarding experience that may have resulted in a product not suitable.

Designing the rubric was not easy. According to Education Services Australia (2013), rubrics should be used to make performance levels explicit for the teacher. This was a difficult because, in order to create a DLR rubric, it was important to know what to evaluate, and write performance descriptors to identify differences between the levels. The first step in designing a DLR rubric was listing characteristics to evaluate. This was difficult as there were many to consider. It was necessary to consider research on tangential learning and games based learning. Considering these may result in students being engaged or motivated (Breuer & Bente, 2010). However, according to Squire and Jenkins (2003), to motivate students it is necessary to find a balance between entertainment and learning.  The second step in designing the DLR rubric was deciding on the numerical levels. This also proved to be a difficult because a thorough familiarity with the highest quality DLR resource needed to be understood, and the range of capabilities of what is available on the internet. The final step was to ensure that the words used in the rubric were not valueless. According to Moskal (2000), standards in the rubric need to be clearly defined. This may have been achieved in the DLR evaluation rubric as the words used in the rubric allows for detailed analysis of the DLR.

Evaluating the selected DLR resource proved to be an interesting aspect of this entire process. What seemed like an ideal resource, turned out to be a resource that was below average for learning. It has been discovered that criteria such as tangential learning and games based learning in DLR’s are important criteria’s. Having experienced this, an awareness of the importance of such evaluative practices has been instilled.

In conclusion, the process of researching, designing and evaluating a DLR’s has produced a rubric with unique criteria’s such as tangential and games-based learning. It was a rewarding experience yet at the same time a difficult task when designing. Most importantly, it has been discovered that spending time creating a quality rubric to evaluate DLR’s to promote learning.