AACU Value Rubrics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Rita
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
AACU Value Rubrics PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
AACU Value Rubrics

play fullscreen
1 / 11
Download Presentation
AACU Value Rubrics
321 Views
Download Presentation

AACU Value Rubrics

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

    1. AACU Value Rubrics Stephen R. Acker Emeritus Professor, The Ohio State University Director of Learning Technologies, CELLT

    2. A Voice and a Force for Liberal Education in the 21st CenturyA Voice and a Force for Liberal Education in the 21st Century

    3. The Essential Learning Outcomes Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World Intellectual and Practical Skills Personal and Social Responsibility Integrative Learning AACU LEAP http://www.aacu.org/leap/ Liberal Education and America's Promise (LEAP)Liberal Education and America's Promise (LEAP)

    4. Lifelong Learning Rubric Criteria Curiosity Initiative Independence Transfer Reflection Reviews prior learning with great depth (4) to superficially (1) , revealing significantly clarified meaning and indicating a significantly broader perspective about what happened. Definition Framing Language 4-point scaleDefinition Framing Language 4-point scale

    5. Creative Thinking Criteria Acquiring competencies Taking risks Solving problems Embracing contradictions Innovative thinking Connecting, synthesizing, transforming Next slideNext slide

    6. Seeking reliability and validity (on): Criteria Innovative Thinking Novelty or Uniqueness (of Idea, Claim, Question, Form, etc.) Levels (4, 3, 2, 1) Performance Indicators (4) Extends a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product to create new knowledge or knowledge that crosses boundaries; (3) Creates a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product; (2) Attempts to create a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product; (1) Relies on existing ideas, questions, formats, or products. Other commentsOther comments

    7. Pornography Rubric (Criteria?) “Hard-core pornography" is hard to define, but "I know it when I see it.” Potter Stewart (Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)) Miller v. California (1973) definition of Community Standards For example, in the 1964 case Jacobellis v. Ohio, involving whether Ohio could ban the showing of a French film called Les Amants (The Lovers), the Court ruled that the film was protected by the First Amendment, but could not agree as to a rationale, yielding four different opinions from the majority, with none garnering the support of more than two justices, as well as two dissenting opinions. In his concurring opinion in Jacobellis, Justice Potter Stewart, holding that Roth protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography," famously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."For example, in the 1964 case Jacobellis v. Ohio, involving whether Ohio could ban the showing of a French film called Les Amants (The Lovers), the Court ruled that the film was protected by the First Amendment, but could not agree as to a rationale, yielding four different opinions from the majority, with none garnering the support of more than two justices, as well as two dissenting opinions. In his concurring opinion in Jacobellis, Justice Potter Stewart, holding that Roth protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography," famously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

    8. Rubrics as Community Standards AACU invited panels of disciplinary experts to construct rubric definitions, criteria and performance indicators A subsequent, diverse background, panel was then asked to validate Do the experts and laity agree? How do rubrics and criteria correlate? Greater reliability on scales/subscales?

    9. QSort or ordinal data? Reliability defined as within one level (4-1) on a criteria QSort methodology as alternative Successive “piling” into four groups Uses internal, comparative standards not application of external assessment tools

    10. Discussion Questions Should we develop rubrics as macro meaning or as sets of related criteria? Under what circumstances do expert communities and lay communities agree? What are the pros/cons of assigning numeric ordinal scores vs. using sorting algorithms? Without national standards (vs. local concurrences) do we have a viable response to standardized tests?

    11. Contact Steve Acker (acker.1@osu.edu) http://cellt.org