Thread:Discussion archive (2)

Feedback
Magda Nagora
 * Ben, this is a great start. You may wish to add more instructions to the process, like how the class is going to team up. You may wish to add a few resources to get help the student. In addition, it is helpful to have a rubric for the evaluation. It is also helpful to add a teacher page for teachers and add a lesson plan. --Nellie Deutsch 14:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nellie for your feedback!--Benjamin Stewart 14:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Add more instructions to the process.
 * I will certainly consider this suggestion. But since the target learners are undergraduate, English language learners, I wonder if I define the process too much, if I will lose an opportunity to negotiate this part of the learning experience that oftentimes can help motivate students to be more active in the learning process.  Since there will be a face-to-face competent to the class, I like to leave some aspects of an activity ill-defined.  But I am curious as to what others think and will continue to contemplate your suggestion!--Benjamin Stewart 15:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Benjamin, you wrote, "As a whole group, all the different tourist attractions where you live will be determined beforehand." Can you change this to sound like an instruction. For example: You will determine... You may wish to consider how you envision the students to go about doing this? How will they be teamed up? Students need very specific clearly stated directions in the process. What makes a good WebQuest? These resources may help: Tech Learning, A rubric on evaluating a good WebQuest, Instant Steps
 * Thanks for the references. I now am presenting the process section as a list, basically saying the same thing as before, but am finding the process section of a webquest to be a struggle against my own educational philosophy.  I look at the criteria for making a good webquest and I see my shortcomings, but I just do not approach teaching this way.  For example, if I present the process section as I have here and the students want to do it a different way that is just as good if not better than what I have here...then what?  And am I dictating how they should learn by explicitly stating how they should progress through the learning process?  Am I restricting their own imaginations and their skill in thinking for themselves, resolving cognitive conflict with their peers, and learning how to work through ill-defined problems...ones usually seen in the real world?  I can see where distance courses with little-to-no live communication may benefit from a very explicit process section, but if I am the teacher, facilitator, and coach, I would prefer to use the process of developing a webquest as a goal as well.  Sure, provide an idea of the process but leave it open for them to work through the process themselves, having the teacher as well as other experts found online and within the classroom to assist.--Benjamin Stewart 12:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ben, you are only providing guidelines in the process. You can tell your students that the process only provides guidelines and explain that they are open or encouraged to make changes and do things their own way. --Nellie Deutsch 13:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Add a few more resources for students.
 * Will review.--Benjamin Stewart 14:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Add an example of the rubric.
 * The rubric I had in mind comes from the book on scoring rubrics mentioned in the reference section, but will need to see if I have rights to publish the rubric in WE under a Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA). Regardless if I include an example of the rubric here, the idea is to share the rubric with the students before, during, and after the learning process.--Benjamin Stewart 14:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The rubric used for this webquest will be depend on the group (i.e., teacher and students) but should assess the performance, product(s), and purpose (i.e., student self-knowledge).
 * Add teacher page.
 * My teacher page is actually the signature link that I have included above. Perhaps I could include a link to my guest book directly in order to make it a bit more user friendly should students need to contact me.--Benjamin Stewart 14:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ben, a teacher page is for other teachers. It usually consists of a lesson plan. A WebQuest has to have clear instructions. If you want your students to have full freedom to do as they wish or to negotiate things then they need to understand that that's what's expected of them. Peer evaluation or any evaluation is great. In fact, you may wish to ask your students to create the evaluation rubric, but you need to put that in the instructions (process). --Nellie Deutsch 19:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ben, your evaluation rubric looks great, but you may consider defining some of the terms you use to make sure the students understand what they are required to do to get 100. Thank you. --Dr. Nellie Deutsch 21:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I added the six facets of understandings to the rubric which would also be reinforced throughout the entire learning progression (including assessment and instruction of enabling knowledge and subskills). --Benjamin Stewart 23:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is a wonderful way for students to see how they are going to be evaluated. This is just a thought, but would you consider clarifying some of the descriptors? For example, I am not sure I understand your use of the term "professionalism". But then, maybe it's just me and your students would not need any clarifications. Thank you. --Dr. Nellie Deutsch 02:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean Nellie, but the actual rubric and much of the webquest for that matter would actually be created by the students and me as part of the assessment and instruction leading up to the webquest. I really find it difficult to come up with a sound rubric for a hypothetical group.  I will be creating webquests this semester for an academic writing class (in WE) so I will know more as to how this approach will work.  To answer your question, yes, my students would need clarification of what the word professionalism means, but I would clarify it during the learning progression leading up to the webquest (as opposed to stating explicitly what the word means in the rubric).  Their learning of the term would be more experiential and would emerge through a series of activities where they would have to show evidence of their understanding of the word in a variety of contexts.  By the time they conduct the webquest, my hope would be that they will have understood the term.  In some webquests where different products are possible, I am not sure how helpful a long and varied descriptor (as an alternative of the word professionalism) would be.  I typically avoid the word actually, but there's something about including it in the lower two scales of this criterion that perhaps would remind students that their performance should be as authentic as possible. --Benjamin Stewart 03:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps you would model the use of less generic words for your students. Although I am open to changes, I try to follow a backward design approach. To be honest, in the past 30 years, I have always changed my lesson plans to suit situations that arise and cater to the needs of my students. I am always flexible. --Dr. Nellie Deutsch 04:09, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a big fan of Wiggins and McTighe's (2005) Backward Design. I would like to believe that there is room for setting up assessments before instruction but still leaving room for modifications, adaptations, etc. based on the needs, interests, and learning preferences of the students.  This is where being flexible as an educator is crucial.  Thanks Nellie for your level of questioning and forcing me to explain myself.  There is no better way to learn. --Benjamin Stewart 04:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Great job, Benjamin. You may like to add some assessment tools such as a rubric or a check list for students' self-evaluation
 * Fantastic job, Ben. I am pretty happy to learn from you reading your WebQuest.
 * Thanks for your comments! --Benjamin Stewart 11:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Nagora for your comments.--Benjamin Stewart 17:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)