AssessmentThere were four components of the assessment process for this
test case of the Networked Student Model: (1) Ongoing performance
assessment in the form of weekly assignments to facilitate the construction and
maintenance of the personal learning environment, (2) rubric-based assessment of
the personal learning environment at the end of the project, (3) written essay,
and (4) multimedia synthesis of topic content.
Points were earned for meeting the following requirements:
Identify ten reliable resources and post to social bookmarking account. At
least three new resources should be added each week.
Subscribe and respond to at least 3 new blogs each week. Follow these blogs
and news alerts using the reader.
Subscribe to and listen to at least two podcasts (if available).
Respectfully contact and request a video conference from a subject matter
expert recognised in the field.
Maintain daily notes and highlight resources as needed in digital notebook.
Post at least a one-paragraph reflection in personal blog each day.
At the end of the project, the personal learning environment was
assessed with a rubric that encompassed each of the items listed above.
The student's ability to synthesise the research was further evaluated with a
reflective essay. Writing shapes thinking (Langer & Applebee, 1987), and the
essay requirement was one more avenue through which the students demonstrated
higher order learning. The personal blog provided an opportunity for regular
reflection during the course of the project. The essay was the culmination of
the reflections along with a thoughtful synthesis of the learning experience.
Students were instructed to articulate what was learned about the selected topic
and why others should care or be concerned. The essay provided an overview of
everything learned about the contemporary issue. It was well organised,
detailed, and long enough to serve as a resource for others who wished to learn
from the work. As part of a final exam, the students were required to access the
final projects of their classmates and reflect on what they learned from this
exposure. The purpose of this activity was to give the students an additional
opportunity to share and learn from each other.
Creativity is considered a key 21st century skill (Partnership for 21st
Century Skills, 2009). A number of emerging web applications support the
academic creative process. Students in this project used web tools to combine
text, video, audio, and photographs to teach the research topics to others. The
final multimedia project was posted or embedded on the student's personal wiki
page.
Analysis and assessment of student work was facilitated by the very
technologies in use by the students. In order to follow their progress, the
teacher simply subscribed to student social bookmarking accounts, readers, and
blogs. Clicking through daily contributions was relatively quick and efficient.
Misha Miller on 20 May 13"Conversation is key . Sawyer succinctly explains this principle: "Conversation leads to flow, and flow leads to creativity." When having students work in groups, consider what will spark rich conversation. The original researcher on flow, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, found that rich conversation precedes and ignites flow more than any other activity.1 Tasks that require (or force) interaction lead to richer collaborative conceptualization. Set a clear but open-ended goal . Groups produce the richest ideas when they have a goal that will focus their interaction but also has fluid enough boundaries to allow for creativity. This is a challenge we often overlook. As teachers, we often have an idea of what a group's final product should look like (or sound like, or…). If we put students into groups to produce a predetermined outcome, we prevent creative thinking from finding an entry point. Try not announcing time limits. As teachers we often use a time limit as a "motivator" that we hope will keep group work focused. In reality, this may be a major detractor from quality group work. Deadlines, according to Sawyer, tend to impede flow and produce lower quality results. Groups produce their best work in low-pressure situations. Without a need to "keep one eye on the clock," the group's focus can be fully given to the task. Do not appoint a group "leader." In research studies, supervisors, or group leaders, tend to subvert flow unless they participate as an equal, listening and allowing the group's thoughts and decisions to guide the interaction. Keep it small. Groups with the minimum number of members that are needed to accomplish a task are more efficient and effective. Consider weaving together individual and group work. For additive tasks-tasks in whicha group is expectedtoproduce a list, adding one idea to another-research suggests that better results develop
Cached
