EEND676 Artifact 1 - Collaborative Web Tools Rubric

The first artifact from EEND676 that I chose to reflect on was the collaborative web tools rubric assignment. I don’t have much experience making rubrics, so this assignment challenged me. Rubrics I have worked with in the past are generally created by district curriculum teams, not rubrics I generate myself. I enjoyed the challenge and this assignment actually forced me to get used to using rubric generators online. This was a secondary benefit of the overall assignment objective: learning how to evaluate collaborative tools.

The rubric I created to score collaborative tools is below:

Domain	Developing (1)	Approaching (3)	Effective (5)
User Friendliness	Students need step by step directions from their teacher to use the tool. Students are not able to work at their own pace due to the necessity of the group staying together.	Students are able to work at their own paces; however each step must be explained by the teacher. There may be down time for students if they need to wait for assistance navigating the tool.	Students are able to navigate the tool by relying on their intuition and instinctive nature. Step by step guidance is not needed by the teacher.
Safety for User	The tool is free to use and students have the ability to interact with anyone from anywhere. It is unclear whether the teacher can determine who the students are interacting with.	The teacher knows exactly who the students are interacting with (another class, within the class, etc,) but does not have access to watch all interactions.	Teacher can ensure the interactions occurring between students are safe and appropriate. They are able to “see” all interactions to ensure safety.
Ability to differentiate/ accommodate/modify work	Tool may allow for modifications and accommodations when all group members require the same adjustments. Group members must be grouped by ability.	Teachers are able to modify work within the same group to meet the needs of lower level learners. It is apparent to all group members that some students are completing a modified assignment.	Teachers are able to modify work within the same group in order to allow learners of all abilities to work at their full potential (remediation to extension). All student accommodations can be met when using the tool. Modifications to individual work are seamless from student to student.
Critical thinking skills demonstration	Students are provided an authentic problem and possible solutions for them to chose from. Students are asked to justify when they chose the solution they did.	Allows students to demonstrate ability to develop solutions to problems posed to them in an authentic way. Students are given an opportunity to reflect on their learning and summarize their responses.	Allows students to ask critical questions that center on authentic issues. Allows students to develop their own solutions through higher level thinking skills. Students are asked to reflect on their learning and justify their responses.
Assessment for individual and group work	Tool does not allow for student work to be evaluated against standards.	Teacher is able to assess the group as a whole and evaluate their progress toward standards.	Teacher is able to monitor group contributions on an individual and group level.

The challenge to creating this rubric was figuring out what to include in order to make the evaluation beneficial. I ultimately decided on the categories you see above. I chose these categories because when thinking about my students in my classes, these are the features and functionalities I would want the tools to have before engaging in their use. For the assignment, I chose to evaluate the use of Twiddla and Padlet. You can find their scores here. The benefit of having to complete this assignment was not just to evaluate these two tools. In fact, the rubric I created can be used to evaluate all collaborative web tools in the future. This is not necessarily a rubric I would give to students, so it wouldn’t be used directly in my classroom, but I do anticipate using it to help be decided whether a tool is appropriate and beneficial to bring into my classroom. I could also share it with my students to get their feedback on their use of a tool, or to help them find new tools to use to collaborate on assignments in which they have student choice in tools.

Previously to this assignment, I am not sure I would’ve really evaluated a tool in this manner before introducing my students. I would’ve have made some initial judgement calls and then had students try it. I am thankful to have something I can use in the future to help me make a decision on including a tool into my class.