 |
 |
Dear Collegues, Thanks for all your valuable comments and insights about the issue. I have really gained satisfactory responses and thank you for allowing me to reach relevant valuable studies that you conduct. It is good to know about the eloboration on this particular subject. Setting learning outcome priorities, using rubrics and the many other methods you mention are very useful in dealing with the complexity of transforming the quality to quantity. But maybe still resting as a rhetoric issue in my mind: the possibility of calibrating the quality. Thanks again. Kind regards. On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Dennis Cheatham < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > Esra and Colleagues, > > "Point values" are necessary for many of us where our institutions require > a numerical score to reflect competency. Our colleagues on the list have > presented some very thoughtful and helpful approaches to this in the thread > (competency-based, rubrics, etc.). I'll avoid repeating their insights for > the sake of brevity but themes of transparency and clarity echoed in > responses reiterate how pre-stated learning outcomes and rubrics are > valuable tools for assessment. > > I've found the *words* used in that rubric are paramount—their point > values less significant (but necessary). This includes: > > - Clear, plain, measurable learning outcomes for an aspect of an > assignment (think writing a good research question that can be answered) > - Clear rubric labels with discussion of what they mean > > Learners in our design programs have responded positively to the following > rubric words: > > Exemplary, Mastery, Developing, Beginning, Incomplete, Missing > > The goal for each learner is to *master* the learning outcome. I won't go > into point values for these here to save everyone reading a treatise on > computation (though these all coincide to point values that align with GPA > point values, percentage grades, and letter grades that are common at our > institution. > > The labels are the key to avoid "point watching." I have made an effort to > use these words in critique, discussion, and in marking papers, which has > helped them to become common vocabulary to assist communication between > learners during critique and discussion. I'm still working on this though > and plan to measure its efficacy in coming semesters. Examples: > > "The thoroughness of the theoretical framework portion of the paper was > completed at a developing level... good progress." > > "Integrating the images the way you did in the poster was exemplary... we > didn't expect that combination but it communicates the concept clearly and > powerfully." > > The key with such a rubric is making sure everyone knows what "exemplary" > or "mastery" etc. mean (typically listed in a syllabus and made real during > evaluation and critique). Then point values can be assigned for each and > all that computation rigmarole to equal a score. > > Regardless of if quality or quantity are most important (write the > learning outcomes to drive this), the rubric words can be used to assess > how well learners completed the task. > > --- > > Dennis Cheatham > Lead Faculty, Communication Design > Graduate Director, Experience Design MFA > Miami University | Oxford, Ohio > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > -- Esra Bici Endüstri Ürünleri Tasarimcisi ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------