You are required, in your learning theory group to to create a collaborative document in Google Docs describing, analysising and discussing your group’s chosen learning theory. You are expected to make equeal contributions to the research and creation of your wiki document. At least two of your wiki contributions must be a new and original contribution and two may edit or add to an existing contribution. You are expected to use the template in Google docs (link on the Moodle site.
You need to allocate yourself to a group of 4-6 students in week one via the choice button on Moodle and then click on the link to Google Docs (in the Moodle site) and create a copy of the template for your group.
A Wiki is a website that allows a group of people to create and edit (ussually website) contents without any special technical knowledge or tools. Wiki wiki is Hawaiian for quick.
1 | P a g e
Assessment Due Date
Week 5 Thursday 4/4/2019 17.00hrs
Return Date to Students
Within 15 working days from submission
Weighting
40%
Assessment Criteria
This assessment will be marked with the assessment criteria in the rubric on the following page
Referencing Style
Word Limit
Use APA referencing
5000 – 6000 words for the entire wiki document (not inc references)
Submission
You are expected to make equal contributions to the research and creation of your wiki document. At least two of your wiki contributions must be a new and original contribution and two may edit or add to an existing contribution. Submit via eLearning into the Turnitin Dropbox
Subject Learning Outcomes Assessed
1,2,3
1 | P a g e
1 | P a g e
SNPG 960 Assessment Task 1 – Wiki
Wiki Rubric adapted from University of Wisconsin uwstout.edu
Marking rubric assumes task requirements of minimum of two original contributions and two contributions adding to an existing post
Element
Content 50%
Provides a fresh and balanced perspective on the chosen learning Ptrhoevoidreys comprehensive insight, understanding, and reflective thought about the topic.
Explains all ideas clearly and concisely in a logical progression with effective supporting evidence.
Provides original ideas with a minimum of personal bias.
Provides a moderate amount of insight, understanding, and reflective thought about the learning theory.
Explains most ideas clearly and concisely with supporting evidence.
Provides one or two original ideas with a minimum of personal bias.
Provides evidence of some understanding, and reflective thought about the learning theory.
Explains some ideas, but not all, clearly and concisely but with little supporting evidence.
Provides one or two original ideas which include some personal bias. Provides only minimal understanding, or reflective thought about the lesrning theory.
Incompletely explains ideas and does not effectively use supporting evidence.
Does not provide any original ideas and personal bias is obvious. Provides no understanding or reflective thought about the learning theory.
Fails to explain ideas clearly, and does not use any supporting evidence.
Absent
50
42
36
25
14
0
Present ation 20%
Presents all information in a style that is appealing and appropriate for the intended audience.Easy to read
Includes diagrams or images or links to
websites or documents l that enhance the i information presented.
Presents information in a style that is generally appropriate for the intended audience.
M a y i n c l u d e diagrams, images or links t o w e b s i t e s o r documents, but not all inks enhance the nformation presented.
Presents information in a style that is not consistently appropriate for the intended audience .
Includes some links to websites or documents, or images or diagrams less than half of which enhance the information presented.
Presents information in a style that is often inappropriate for the intended audience.
Includes some links to websites or documents, or images or diagrams which add li5le value to the information presented.
Presents information in a disjointed, unpolished style which is inappropriate for the intended audience.
Does not include any links, or links selected are of poor quality and do not add any value to the information presented.
Absent
20
17
14
10
6
0
Group Collabor ation
10%
Contributes equally with other group members in researching, writing, and editing.
Exhibits appropriate wiki etiquette when editing and respects the work of others.
Assists group members with most of the researching, writing and editing.
Exhibits appropriate wiki etiquette when editing most of the time and respects the work of others.
Assists group members with some of the researching, writing and editing.
Exhibits appropriate wiki etiquette most of the time and generally respects the work of others.
Provides minimal assistance to group members in researching, writing and editing, and does not follow through with all tasks Exhibits a minimal knowledge of wiki etiquette and often fails to respect the work of others.
Provides no assistance to group members in any of the researching, writing and editing and does not follow through with any of the tasks.
Exhibits no knowledge of wiki etiquette and fails to respect the work of others.
Absent
10
8
6
4
2
0
Organis ation 10%
Uses a consistent organizational structure that includes grouping related information, defines specialized vocabulary and/or provides a table of contents.
Makes frequent and effective use of headings, fonts, bullet points and white space to enhance the content’s visual appeal and increase readability.
Uses an organizational structure which groups most related information, defines specialized vocabulary and/or provides a table of contents.
Makes use of headings, fonts, bullet points and white space to enhance the content’s visual appeal and increase readability.
Uses an organizational structure which groups some but not all, related information, defines specialized vocabulary and/or provides a table of contents. Makes occasional use of headings, fonts, bullet points and white space to enhance the content’s visual appeal and increase readability.
Uses a loosely defined organizational structure which attempts to group similar items. Makes minimal use of headings, fonts, bullet points and white space to enhance visual appeal and readability.
Fails to provide a consistent organizational structure, and information is difficult to locate.
Makes no use of headings, fonts, bullet points or white space to enhance visual appeal and readability
Absent
10
8
6
4
2
0
Writing mechan ics
10%
Edits the text with no errors in grammar, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Keeps within word limit
Edits the text with minor additional editing required for grammar, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Keeps within word limit
Edits the text with some additional editing required for grammar, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.
Keeps within word limit
Edits the text, but errors in grammar, capitalization, punctuation and spelling distract or impair readability.
(three or more errors). more than 10% difference from word limit
Edits the text but numerous errors in grammar, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling repeatedly distract the reader and major revision is required.
(more than five errors)
Absent
10
8
6
4
2
0
Referen cing 10%
Accurately cites all sources of information to support the credibility and authority of the information presented.
Most sources are cited accurately, and support the credibility of the information presented.
Some sources are cited accurately, and support the credibility of the information presented.
Few sources are cited accurately, and they fail to adequately support the credibility of the information presented
Does not provide any accurate information about sources used.
Absent
10
8
6
4
2
0
2. Assessment task 2
Assessment Title
Concept Map and reflection
Task Description
Building on the content in your group’s wiki – create a concept map relating learning theories in adult education to a facilitative model. In addition, write a 500 word reflection on your understanding of facilitation and how this understanding impacts on your work in the future.
Your main or key concept should be easily identified as your chosen facilitative model and sub-concepts – describing learning theories – should branch appropriately from main idea to a complexity of at least four (4) concept levels (sub-concepts). Graphically describe the relationships between your chosen learning theories in relation to facilitation. Use the map to connect concepts and facts (nodes) and to demonstrate relationships between concepts – i.e. between facilitation and theories of learning Your map should contain appropriate descriptive links between nodes (short phrases or specific/descriptive words describing the relationship between concepts). Do not repeatedly reuse the same link; construct a variety of links that describe the unique relationship between specific nodes and include specific examples that clarify the meaning of a given concept. Include cross-links which demonstrate the complexity of the relationships.
In your reflective commentary provide a description and reflection of the development of the concept map. Do not simply describe the map.
Consider how undertaking this assessment task has impacted on your understanding of what facilitation is and means to you in your practice. Consider how the development of this assessment task has impacted on your understanding of facilitation and theories of learning. Include a
reference list and a bibliography if appropriate, relating to the concept map. You may create your concept map using concept mapping software but you must save and submit as a jpeg orpdf.
You may hand draw your concept map, take a photograph and upload as a jpeg.
See marking rubric below for further details
Assessment Due Date
Week 11 Thursday 23/05/2019 17.00hrs
Return Date to Students
Declaration of results
Assessment Length
A minimum depth of complexity of 4 layers of sub-concepts + 500 word reflective commentary
Weighting
60%
Assessment Criteria
This assessment will be marked with the assessment criteria in the rubric on the following page
Referencing Style
Concept map – Numbered (Vancouver)
A summary of the Vancouver system can be accessed in the online guide on the Library website at: http://uow.libguides.com/refcite
Reflection (if required) Author – Date (Harvard)
A summary of the Harvard system can be accessed in the online guide on the Library website at: http://uow.libguides.com/refcite
Submission
Upload your concept map as a jpeg or pdf into the assessment drop box in eLearning
Upload your Reflection as a word document into the Turnitin Assignment Dropbox. See this resource: http://www.uow.edu.au/dvca/ltc/tel/resourcehub/students/index.html
3 | P a g e
Subject Learning Outcomes Assessed
1-4
4 | P a g e
SNPG960 Assessment Task 2 – Concept Map
Concept Mapping Rubric adapted from University of Wisconsin uwstout.edu
Element
Arrangement of Concepts (10%)
All subconcepts branch
appropriately from main idea
Main concept easily identified; most subconcepts branch from main idea.
Main concepts can be somewhat easily
identified; some subconcepts branch from main ideas with some linked ideas.
2 main concepts can be identified; few subconcepts branching from from main ideas or linear design
only one concept identified or 2 main concepts not
clearly
identified; subconcepts not consistently linked to main
Absent
10
8
6
4
i2dea or other concepts.
0
Links and linking lines (5%)
Linking lines connect related terms/point in correct direction; linking words accurately describe relationship between concepts; hyperlinks effectively used
Linking lines connect related terms/point in correct direction; most linking words accurately describe the relationship between concepts; most hyperlinks effectively used.
Most linking lines connect properly; most linking words accurately describe the relationship between concepts; some hyperlinks effectively used.
Linking lines not always pointing in correct direction; linking words don’t consistently clarify relationships between concepts or simplistic with few links
Linking lines not always pointing in correct direction; linking words don’t clarify relationships between concepts; Simplistic with very few concepts or links
Absent
5
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0
Content (40%)
Reflects all essential information; is logically arranged; concepts succinctly presented; no misspellings or grammatical errors
Reflects most of the essential information; is generally logically arranged; concepts mostly succinctly presented; 1 or 2 misspellings or grammatical errors.
Reflects most of the essential information; is mostly logically arranged; most concepts presented without too many excess words; fewer than 4 misspellings or grammatical errors.
Reflects some essential information; some sections are logically arranged; most concepts presented without too many excess words; more than 4 misspellings or grammatical errors
Contains extraneous information; is not logically arranged; contains numerous spelling and grammatical errors.
Absent
40
34
28
21
12
0
Text (5%)
Easy to read/ appropriately sized; no more than three different fonts; amount of text is appropriate for intended audience; boldface used for emphasis.
Text is easy to read; uses no more than four different fonts; amount of text generally appropriate for intended audience.
Most text is easy to read; uses no more than four different fonts; amount of text generally fits intended audience.
Font somewhat difficult to read easily; more than four different fonts used; text amount is too much for intended audience.
Font too small to read easily; more than four different fonts used; text amount is excessive for intended audience or is absent.
Absent
5
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0
Design (5%)
Clean design; high visual appeal; four or fewer symbol shapes; fits page without a lot of scrolling; color used effectively for emphasis. Complexity evident
Mostly clean design; good visual appeal; four or fewer symbol shapes; fits page without a lot of scrolling; color used effectively for emphasis
Design is fairly clean, with a some exceptions; diagram has some visual appeal; four or fewer symbol shapes; fits page well; uses color effectively most of time.
Cluttered design; low in visual appeal; requires a lot of scrolling to view entire diagram; choice of colors lacks visual appeal and impedes comprehension.
Very clu(ered design; difficult to read or understand. Or simplistic empty design, lacking in elements; difficult to understand or very linear design
Absent
5
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0
Referencing (5%)
Accurately cites all sources of information to support the credibility and authority of the information presented.
Most sources are cited accurately, and support the credibility of the information presented.
Some sources are cited accurately, and support the credibility of the information presented.
Few sources are cited accurately, and they fail to adequately support the credibility of the information presented
Does not provide any accurate information about sources used.
Absent
5
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0
Reflection (30%)
Many original ideas presented; evidence of in- depth analysis and reflection; effective use of reflective model evident but not explicitly named
Some original ideas presented; evidence of some analysis and reflection; effective use of reflective model evident but not explicitly named
Some original ideas presented ; evidence of some reflection and analysis but largely descriptive; effective use of reflective model evident
Few original ideas presented ; little evidence of reflection or analysis but largely descriptive
No original ideas presented ; no evidence of reflection or analysis ; descriptive;
Absent
30
26
20
15
8
0
10 | P a g
