Rubrics for
Discussion and Group Work
|
Advance preparation for groupwork lets the students know exactly what is expected of them from the beginning of the course. When I discuss this issue with instructors and online facilitators, I am sometimes told that this seems like a lot of hand holding. It is, and the reason for it is that as students and instructors in face-to-face classrooms we have had 20 years (and then some) of experience and training in what is expected in the face-to-face classroom. The online environment is new to many instructors and students. Many students have never taken an online class. There are different problems and protocals in this new environment. Some students are aware of "netiquette" issues, but how students are meant to engage in an academic discussion productively online and how they are supposed to work productively in online groups can still be an issue.
Rubrics are an opportunity to express what you value as an educator and give the student an idea what your expectations are for the course. The example rubric below tells the students that in order to participate successfully in the discussions, they will have to be prepared and contribute in very specific ways. Discussion is an essential part of class participation as well as groupwork. Links to rubrics for groupwork follow.
Discussion Rubric Example:
| CATEGORIES | A | B | C | D - F |
| Contributions | Routinely provides useful ideas and research (links) when participating in online discussion. A definite leader who contributes a lot of effort. | Usually provides useful ideas when participating in online discussion. A strong participant who tries hard. | Sometimes provides useful ideas when participating in online discussion. A satisfactory participant who does what is required. | Rarely provides useful ideas when participating in the discussion. May refuse to participate or ignore postings and class e-mail. |
| Quality | Always provides thoughtful work of the highest quality. | Frequently provides high-quality, edited work. | Posts responses that are occasionally off-topic and unedited. | Frequently posts responses that are off-topic and unedited. |
| Preparation | Reads all assignments in advance and has detailed comments. Thoughtfully applies readings and outside research to discussions. | Always reads assignments has detailed comments. Applies readings to discussions. | Almost always reads assignments and makes comments relevant to the discussion. | Does not read assignments before posting. |
| Netiquette | If agreeing or disagreeing with another group members' ideas, the participant states ideas clearly, yet politely, supplying detailed rational arguments. | If agreeing or disagreeing with another group members' ideas, the participant states disagreements or objections clearly, yet politely. | Reluctant to participate and needs to be prompted. The participant rarely expresses arguements clearly. |
The participant was rude or abusive to other course participants and frequently attempted to draw the discussion off-topic. Infrequently posts. |
| "Online Discussion Protocols and Rubrics" by N. Dabbagh | Dr. Dabbagh's examples cover two issues; the quality of the postings and the quantity expected. Notice that the students are expected to facilitate discussion as well. |
| "Online Discussion Rubric" by Mark S. Glassman | Dr. Glassman's rubric consists of narrative descriptions of work of various grades. The descriptions are written in the first person. I like this because it reinforces the idea in the students that ultimately they are responsible for their own grades. |
| "Class Discussion Rubric" by Rich Slatta | This face-to-face class discussion rubric uses Bloom's Taxonomy to create the criteria for assessment. |
| "Rubrics for Online Segments for Colorado Adult Educators" | This rubric for a class on how to teach adult education is divided up into different sections that represent the different methods and tools used to teach the course. |
| "Literature Circle Discussion Rubric" by R. Stephan | This is a rubric for a face-to-face class that gives us an idea of the breadth of criteria that can be assessed in a discussion. |
Effective use of groupwork assignments require a lot of advance preparation. It is important that students know exactly what is expected of them and what they are expected to do and contribute. A time table for asssignments is very helpful here. Also, every student should know exactly what role they are going to play in a group. Assignments can include a timetable, a list of group roles (facilitator, secretary, lead artist, researchers, etc.), and a rubric for judging contributions to the group. I had an instructor who would give each group 500 points and then ask the groups to divide them up according to contribution anonymously (the second example would be good for this).
Students are meant to read the rubrics along with the syllabus. They are meant to show the student, in advance, how an assignment is meant to be completed and what is expected.
| My Group Work Tasks | Good general example. Uses a wide variety of criteria that are necessary for HS students. |
| Self-Assessment Rubrics | This one is very good because members can apply it not only to themselves but to one another. |
| Self-Assessment Rubric – Group Work Antarctica Webquest | The lesson behind the webquests was that lessons for all students were more successful if the instructor had a clear idea of the expected outcome and knew the tasks necessary to complete the tasks. This rubric reflects this well. |
| Team Work Rubric for the Teacher | Rubrics can be documents that show the student how their performance will be evaluated by the instructor. |
| CoVis Rubrics Overview | Rubrics can also be used to judge the group as a whole rather than just the individual student. |
-- Geoffrey B. Cain
11/07/03