| Individual Work - Research Cycle |
| Aspect |
Beginning |
Developing |
Accomplished |
| Completeness |
0 points
Limited exploration of area
|
2 points
Some aspects explored
|
4 points
All aspects explored and well articulated in responses
|
| Correctness |
0 points
Understanding of aspects of area appears muddled
|
2 points
Thoughtful, but some miscues in grasping concepts
|
4 points
Skill and care taken to addressing all aspects
|
| Sophistication |
0 points
Little internalization of concepts
|
2 points
Explored basics of concepts, but fail to explore critically
|
4 points
Responses show evidence of deeper learning of concepts
|
| Team Work - Pursuasive Argument |
| Aspect |
Beginning |
Developing |
Accomplished |
| Completeness |
0 points
Only some aspects from individual roles surface
|
2 points
Most aspects present, but missing key considerations or implications
|
4 points
All four roles well represented
|
| Correctness |
0 points
Argument poorly formulated or fails to consider lessons learned from four roles
|
2 points
Argument may be well written, but may be weak or fails to apply terminology of
the field consistently and correctly
|
4 points
Argument precisely written and correctly applies terminology of the field throughout
|
| Sophistication |
0 points
Ideas do not indicate mastery of the aspects covered in the roles.
|
2 points
Ideas and positions make sense, but do not make clear or favorable argument
|
4 points
Ideas and position taken show clear understanding of pros and cons of all aspects and
make clear and winning argument
|
| Teamwork |
0 points
Little or no team work is evident
|
2 points
Teamwork is evident but contributions are unequal
|
4 points
Argument contains expertise from all four roles in good proportion
|
| Overall Focus on Instructional Design |
| Aspect |
Beginning |
Developing |
Accomplished |
| Taxonomy |
0 points
Shows little evidence of utitilizing the terms and proper
lingo of the Instructional Design field.
|
2 points
Shows evidence of learning some terms, but inconsisten or inaccurate use of
terms shows need for further mastery.
|
4 points
Consistently and accurately applies the terms and concepts found in the field of Instructional Design. Verbage
demonstrates mastery beyond simple regurgitation and can apply terms and concepts in a way that
shows clear understanding of the underlying meanings and nuiances.
|
| Design Models |
0 points
Little or no consideration is given to the competing models and their various
strengths and weaknesesses.
|
2 points
The team is able to identify the different design models, but is unable to effectively pinpoint
differences amonst the models.
|
4 points
Demonstrates an ability to critically analyze each model and effectively compare and contrast with
each other. The argument successfully attacks the weak points and down plays strong points
of the various models.
|
| Learning Theories |
0 points
Can do little more than identify the main three theories. Cannot describe how
the choice of learning theory affects the design approach.
|
2 points
Is able to identify the main learning theories, but is unable to
critically compare and contrast the theories.
|
4 points
Thoroughly demonstrates understanding of how the different learning
theories drive and shape instructional design. Can make conscious decisions on
which theories to utilize in design efforts and the effects they have on the course's design.
|
| Media |
0 points
It is unclear whether the team fully understands what is meant by media
or what the media choices are and the role media plays in instructional design.
|
2 points
The team is able to identify various media choices, but is unclear
about which media works best in given situations.
|
4 points
Shows strong consideration for the various media choices and understanding
of media's role in instructional design.
|
