Session+Four

= __**​SESSION FOUR: REFLECTION ON FEEDBACK AND ASSESSMENT**__ =

=
As you think back to your previous facilitation experience, describe one challenge you have faced in terms of providing appropriate feedback or in assessing the learning of your participants. Read over the challenges posted by your fellow colleagues and suggest strategies for addressing these challenges in future courses.=====


 * ~ Challenges ||~ Strategies ||
 * //Use the rows in this column to describe challenges you have faced with feedback and/or assessment.​// || //Use the rows in this column to suggest strategies for the challenges posted by others.// ||
 * (Connie) One challenge I faced was with a teacher of children with very special needs. She felt her children could not complete any tasks that were web based. This challenge was compounded by the fact that I had a specialist in that area in the same course and was working with a National Board candidate who taught students with many of the same problems. I kept in close contact with her over the course by email within the course and outside of the course. I attempted to put her into contact with resources and people who were specialists in the area of disability she described. I encouraged her with positive feedback for the resources she chose and completed assessment on her project with her students in mind. I completed the course and still think frequently about her frustrations locating materials she felt she could use in the classroom. She was not in a county close to mine and I could not actually visit her to help but I have seen technology have a huge impact on a special needs population. The students went from passive observers, when they were focused, to asking if they could try a task by themselves. I guess my personal experience with a classroom and motivated teacher caused my challenge.

On another note, I experienced a challenge with a participant who was of the "I put something there give me the credit" type. This person was extremely difficult to contact and maintain contact. All posts were completed around the closing of the session or later. I just did not feel that the participant was engaged with the course at all. There was a mid-term submitted that gave the appearance of hasty selection (I realize that I may be way off with that assumption). I made several comments and suggestions at Mid-term about the "usefulness and usability" of the product. I know the feedback was read, from the dropbox information but the exact project was submitted as the final product for grading. I had records of email attempts, comments, and phone call attempts to contact this person but no success. This is one time I asked Donna for assistance when determining how to grade this project. || (Jim) I share your pain with the participant who is difficult to contact and engage meaningfully in the course. As noted in my post, one of the strategies I sought to use, at least in support of discussion participation and assessment was to introduce the discussion rubric being used in this course. While it did not have the desired effect for this particular participant, I am thinking that in future courses to introduce the "qualitative" rubric at the beginning and to use it in support of giving "incompletes" to encourage more thoughtful and meaningful participation in the discussion. I have a participant who submitted a final project with seeming total disregard for the feedback given at mid-course. I sent another e-mail today with hopes that she will see the light. I am wondering if a "do or die" message would be appropriate, e.g., your project is unacceptable and as it stands now you have not met the expectations of the course for a certificate or graduate credit. You have 48-hours to resubmit. Sounds a bit harsh. (Connie) Jim, I have done that (this last session) with Donna's blessing and support. We both were in contact with the individual and they did turn in a better project.

(Kathy) I have had good results with the use of an "I" for the grade on a particular session. My emails go unheaded at times, but when the "I" appears, I seem to get their attention. I also tell participants in my email about discussion expectations that I can see the number of messages they have read and authored, and remind them of the need to access the course often and post on the Discussion Board early in the week. I include a statement that the more you participate, the more dynamic the discussions become and everyone will learn more that way.

(Patsy) As a former Special Educator Connie I can understand this teacher's concerns. It is very hard for many of this population to complete these task without major assistance. A big problem though is that even the students that might have the ability to accomplish this do not have technology at home so the concepts are foreign to them. || ​ (Brandy) Here is an idea for you-I have thought of doing this myself. In the discussions under "settings" there is a checkbox for "message ratings" which allows users to rate the quality of the postings. Maybe if we enabled that function and address the discussion board rubric at the same time we could (and I know this sounds bad) shame the minimal quality poster into stepping up. I have not used it yet but I might after I research it a bit.
 * (Jim) Discussion assessment is my largest concern. I start courses emphasizing that the learning opportunities and value of the online course is primarily three-fold: session resources and readings, the final project and in discussion. With an engaged cohort, they get it and evolve quickly into a mutually-supportive learning community. I myself learn from the information shared in energetic and engaged discussions. However, in my most recent course, there seemed to be an even split between the engaged and the "punch my ticket" participants. I tried to introduce a "qualitative" perspect using the discussion rubric found in our course, but it did not seem to phase or resonate with the "punch my ticket" crew. The fallback assessment of course is the final project, and measuring whether or not the expected learning outcomes of the course are reflected in the final product. Nevertheless, I am struggling with how to encourage and/or force meaningful and thoughtful participation in discussion. || (Debbie) It is a real shame that we can't remove the "punch my ticket" participants and replace them with those who really want to take the course. They are as bad as those that take a seat for a few weeks then drop off the face of the computer, never to be heard from again! I don't think I could offer you any advice beyond what you have tried. The only thing you didn't mention was a gentle nudge with a personal email indicating your expectations. Have you tried that?

(Jim) Debbie - I have used personal e-mail, incompletes, and the grade book feedback tool, but in the most recent course I facilitated there was a very unresponsive element. I think in retrospect I should have been more insistent at the beginning of the course and rejected inane and light posts. Brandy - I like the notion of using message ratings. || **(Tina) Each week in my mid-week reminder e-mail, I remind participants of the requirements each week and stress the importance of checking their gradebooks for incompletes and comments. I try to stay very current in the gradebook and this seems to help keep most folks on track. I do have those that let things go and I always send them at least one “gently nudging” e-mail. Spending the extra effort up-front seems to help get everyone on track by mid-course. If they know I am going to continue to “nudge” they begin to complete everything successfully without my prodding.**
 * (Patsy) I think we all seem to share the same concern. In whole, the discussions are usually great and contain great information and sharing. Unfortunately, there is always a student or two who are there to get their 3 hours and do the minimum possible. I'm not sure we are able to control this because think back to face to face classes you've been in and you always have a few of these students. I try to correspond with these students and nudge them to participate but often it is not enough. They usually wait till the last minute to complete anything and then don't understand when things are left undone why they do not get credit. || (Rhonda) In my midweek email I include a friendly reminder of the requirements of the course. I also explain early in the course why it is important to post early and I try to build up this great learning community we are developing. Again I haven't facilitated that long and most of my participants have been those enthusiastic, dedicated teachers who are lifelong learners themselves.

(Jim) Tina, I like the focus you suggest on the "up-front" effort. I guess in my short tenure of facilitating I worked under the assumption that all participants were here for the right reason, including as Rhonda mentions "enthusiastic, dedicated teachers who are lifelong learners themselves." It makes me think of the value of strategies that create early in the course learning community norms and expectations that derive from and are influenced by those of the ilk that Rhonda describes. || Having only facilitated for a short time I have not had to many challenges when it comes to assessment. I have had some projects and lesson plans that when submitted at midterm were weak or off track. As a result I tried to provide direct feedback and refer them back to articles in the course, provide additional resources, or provide direct examples from my experience. In most cases this has resulted in a positive change but of course I've had a few that do the bare minimum to receive credit. || (Jim) In addition to direct feedback at mid-course, I think engaged students benefit from benchmarking the work of their colleagues, more so with formatting and with depth of treatment of the project's components. I think I have been hesitant to say, "Hey dummy, look at how so and so completed the assignment. She is no smarter than you. She is just willing to put in the work." Perhaps, on second thought, this would not be a good strategy in any instance. I do encourage participants to review the work of others. || (Barb) Cyber Safety is a bit different since it isn't tied to a specific group or course. It's been fantastic to have such a variety of people in the courses - school nurses, guidance counselors, administrators, coaches, teachers, substitutes, etc and some have the question of to whom do I present my work to? The variety of answers has been wonderful. Administrators design their presentations for teachers, other administrators and parent-teacher groups. Most teachers design their work for their students; some teachers of young students include the parents as well. Guidance counselors, librarians and school nurses generally provide their work for the general population of the school including teachers, administrators and students and often include plans to share with parents or to send resourse lists and other handouts home to parents. Subs have the most difficult problem determining an audience -- I generally suggest they talk with an administrator where they frequently sub or ask to share their work in the classroom of one of their own children. ||
 * ( Rhonda)
 * (Debbie) I have been facilitating, like many of you, for quite some time and I pride myself in providing appropriate and prompt feedback. However, each session usually brings a challenge. The most difficult are the courses for an administrator or other school level personnel that is enrolled in a course for teachers and they don't have a group of students to work with. Helping them complete the project in a way that does not waste their time is the biggest challenge I usually face. I am interested in seeing how others address this same challenge, provided it exists for others. || (Kathy) I have faced this problem too. I have had several substitutes or teachers who are taking a few years off take my course and they do not have an actual class to work with. I ask them to compete the project for a class in their teaching field, with the assumption that if they do work full-time, they will be able to use the strategies, technologies and techniques from the course if not with that exact lesson, with similar lessons. These folks have usually been willing to follow my suggestions, and complete the project well. They do usually ask more questions and email me more about specifics concerning their situation.
 * ** (Tina) Like others, the biggest problem I have is with the discussion board. As many have stated, some folks tend to just put an obligatory “”I agree” or “Great idea”. No matter how many times I remind them that we need reflective responses, I still don’t get a lot of strong discussion development. Another concern is that many wait until after the Tuesday night deadline to post – I realize things can occasionally come up that will cause someone to post late, but it is usually the same few each week. They get by with it so they continue (a vicious cycle!). In my messages, I have started to put the following: // It is important to remember to try to post early in the week so that we all have plenty of time to read and reflect. It is hard to scramble and read lots of posts late on Tuesday night or even after our session end date, making our discussions less productive. // This has helped, but there are still a few … ** || (Peggy) I think all of us have the few who do not actively engage in the discussion board. I post email messages at the beginning of the course that state "I agree" or "I really like your idea" are not sufficient responses. I also utilize questions to "force" additional responses from them in the weekly sessions. I agree that the procrastinators also hamper the integrity of the weekly discussion. Most of the other participants have moved on to the next session and do not always go back to read the late posts.

(Jim) Perhaps some thought should be given to a strategy that addresses the "chronic" tardies and late filers. As it is now, they have two sessions to complete work before facing removal from the course, and there are those who work this quantitative measure to their benefit. Perhaps a "qualitative" measure that focuses on two sessions of inane or thoughtless participation could be grounds for removal. Of course, some participants do have extenuating circumstances that should be taken into consideration for posting late at times, but the quality of their posts should meet expectations. I agree with Peggy that the chronic late poster is not in a discussion with anyone, as students move on. || Janet has given me an excellent example she lists each item that should be completed so that the participant can go down the list and see if they have completed each one and check it off. ** (Linda) For sessions where there is a lot to remember to do, I make a separate news message with a bulleted or numbered list of what needs to be done and I also include it in the emails for those sessions. I think the more places we remind them what needs to be done the better chance we have of it getting done. || Also, I found it hard to assess according to the rubric and take into account the limitations the template provided. For example: differentiated instruction strategies were weak because the template limited the response. The template and rubric were standard and not ones I made for the course. So I could not exactly hold it against the participants for a lazy answer. || (Nona) I have found that when I grade on the rubric (mid-term), students tend to be more observant of the assignment requirements for the final product. ||
 * (Peggy) One of my biggest challenges is getting participants to complete certain required components of the midcourse. Some will submit (after several reminders) a draft version that is lacking in completion of required sections and/or additional components (such as a rubric). It takes several emails before some complete the task, which can be as late as Session Five or Six. Additionally, I find that many rubrics are not specific to the project but simply the canned ones generated on the rubric websites. I then have to send requests to make the criteria match the project. || ** ( Tyann)
 * (Brandy) I found that when I graded my participants lessons it was obvious to me that several had never looked at the rubric. Thing would be missing and then they would be "surprized" that their projects were not complete. I would like to come up with a way to ensure that participant really assess themselves before they post their projects (both at mid-course and final.)
 * (Kathy) I have similar problems with the Discussion Board as those already mentioned.

I did have a problem with assessing a participant who would not do the final project as specified. The assignment was basically to create a lesson plan showing how it would be adapted for English Language Learners in the classroom, including the use of technology and various strategies discussed during the course. The participant in question emailed me that he taught Spanish, therefore he was going to do his lesson on teaching a lesson in Spanish to English speaking students. I pondered this and considered emailing Donna to get her take on it. Finally I told the participant that this would not be acceptable. The whole point of the class is to show how a teacher would make accommodations to address the needs of ELLs in the class. My decision was not well received even though I made suggestions of ways to complete the assignment as it was.

Another problem that I am aware of is that some participants do not read or look at the exemplars provided. The course includes several projects on the elementary and secondary levels that past participants have submitted. I think this resource is quite valuable for the struggling participant, however, I can tell that some have not looked at the examples at all. I have even copied and pasted parts of previous final projects into an email so the participant can see what is required. || (Barb) By using the final project rubric to provide feedback, I can highlight criteria that are not met (in yellow) and identify the items that have been addressed (blue text) so participants know where they are with respect to meeting the stated criteria.

(Linda) I would think, as a Spanish teacher, he would know of some language technology resources that he could have used in the other direction to help ELLs and would have been more receptive to working with language differences. I think you were right to have him do the project as assigned. I have also had people who don't work directly with students want to do a project for a professional portfolio for themselves. They usually are quite understanding when I let them know they have to follow the directions for the project as is. I (and Donna) have been flexible when the circumstances warranted, but I always check with her to make sure what I want to tell the participant is the right thing to do, plus having it come from someone higher up than me usually seals the deal with them:) || One of the challenges I have is experienced is trying to put into words or text positive and constructive ** ** comments about postings, projects, or just statements. I really like reading some of the postings that you all have posted because you are able to express yourself very well. ** || ( ||
 * (Barb) A challenge I have experienced is, as many of you have stated, trying to get participants to utilize the rubric criteria to guide their submissions. I have added directions along with the rubric, checklists in the weekly news items, items lists in the weekly welcome and updates and still some do not meet the stated criteria. || (Barb) I utilize the course rubric to craft my responses for midterm and final project. This last time, I also utilized the rubric to provide feedback for each session's work. Amazingly, some who provided the information during the session failed to include the information in their final projects . Of course, these were the minority; several stated they appreciated the additional guidelines and some really great products were created! ||
 * ** (Tyann)
 * (Nona) A challenge that I have faced as a facilitator is in assessing the quality of a lesson plan when dealing with a group of participants with varied experience and job assignments. Most teachers have no problem completing the lesson plan template as they do lesson plans on a daily basis. Guidance, administrators and paraprofessionals often struggle with this portion as many have not written plans for an extended period of time if ever. It is hard to be uniform in grading via the rubric when course participants are so varied in experience. || (Katie) I also posted this as a challenge, but I tried to look at beginning point and access improvement. I had to work throughout the course to build confidence. ||
 * (Linda) One challenge I have is assessing the quality of the projects with regard to other subject areas. This last time I facilitated I actually had three other Spanish teachers in the course, but sometimes I don't know how well I review projects in other subject areas, especially math. I love seeing what they want to do in their areas, but I'm not sure (in the high level math courses especially) I can give enough feedback. That's why I like the peer evaluating built into our courses- sometimes there are teachers in the same field that can help me in that area. ||  ||
 * (Katie) My greatest challenge is timely assessment. As much as I know that is is important, I get busy with lots of things and fill my plate too full. I look forward to session 6 and some insights for management. Another challenge i faced was differentiating expections when participants enter the course with very low tech literacy. They may attain the minimum requirements, but not up to the level of others in the class. ||  ||