Skip to main content

 iRubric for Sakai

iRubric: Teaching Application Rubric

iRubric: Teaching Application Rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Teaching Application Rubric 
Teaching Application Rubric
This Rubric will be used to evaluation students use of the Teaching Application and their discussion of it in the Teaching Applications Discussion Forum.
Rubric Code: CXWA3X6
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Music  
Type: Assessment  
Grade Levels: Graduate

Powered by iRubric Teaching Application
  Poor

0 pts

Fair

2 pts

Good

4 pts

Excellent

5 pts

Timeliness
5 pts

The timing of participation in this forum encouraged meaningful dialogue on the topic.
Poor

All postings to this discussion were made Sunday afternoon or evening eliminating opportunity for meaningful dialogue.
Fair

The initial post was made late Saturday or on Sunday. The timing of responses to others and follow-up posts seriously limited opportunity for dialogue.
Good

The initial post was made by mid-day Saturday so others could respond. Responses to others and follow-up posts were made within a time-frame that permitted some dialogue.
Excellent

The initial post was made by Friday, allowing ample opportunity for others to respond. Responses to others and follow-up posts were made within a time-frame that permitted ample dialogue.
Application of Methodology
10 pts

The description of the Teaching Application and subsequent discussion indicated participants understanding of and skill in using the tool and/or method for investigating human interactions with music.
Poor

The description and dialogue indicate a lack of understanding of this method/tool for investigating interactions with music.
Fair

The description and dialogue reveal confusion or mis-understanding of the method/tool use to investigate this particular interaction between people and music.
Good

The description and dialogue provide evidence that the student has a some understanding of this method/tool for investigating interactions with music. The student "gets the point" but there is some lack of clarity.
Excellent

The description and dialogue provide evidence that the student has a clear understanding of this method/tool for investigating interactions with music.
Understanding
10 pts

The postings to this discussion indicate that the participant has an understanding of the "psychological principle" that is the focus of this Teaching Application.
Poor

The description indicates only a vague understanding of the "Psychological Principle" It appears that the student is "missing the point" in this exercise.
Fair

The description and dialogue suggests that the student has has general but vague understanding of the "psychological principle" involved. Lack of clarity or incompleteness may be evident.
Good

The description and dialogue suggests that the student has some understanding of the "psychological principle" involved. The dialogue suggests a lack of depth in understanding.
Excellent

The description and dialogue provide evidence that the student has a clear and comprehensive understanding of the "psychological principle" involved.
Contribution to Dialogue
10 pts

There is active participation in dialogue with responses to 2 or more other students. Responses expand ideas and/or ask questions that move the dialogue forward.
Poor

There is little or no participation in dialogue or the ONLY responses are shallow or off topic.
Fair

Meaningful responses are offered to at least 2 others in the group.
Good

There is some engagement in dialogue.
Responses that add ideas or ask questions are offered to at least 2 other members of the group. Follow-up "answers" are offered to others responding to student's initial post.
Excellent

There is active participation in dialogue with multiple exchanges with others in the group. Postings add ideas to expand and focus discussion and/or ask questions to encourage depth.
Communication
5 pts

All postings reflect a professional level of discourse with respect and sensitivity to diverse ideas and experiences of colleagues. Writing consistently reflects graduate-level command of language and mechanical skill.
Poor

Insensitive or disrespectful comments are made and/or there are frequent mechanical errors in writing.
Fair

The postings in this forum reflect sub-professional communication. There is some lack of respect of and sensitivity to colleagues. Word choice, sentence structure, grammar and other mechanics matters inhibit the clarity of communication.
Good

An acceptable level of communication is evident in this forum. Responses are usually respectful of and sensitive to thoughts and feelings of colleagues. The quality of writing is adequate,but may not be consistently at the level expected of graduate students.
Excellent

A professional level of communication is maintained throughout the description of the Teaching Application and the dialogue. The communication in this forum is clearly what would be expected of graduate students.



Keywords:
  • MUS 6685

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


iRubric and RCampus are Trademarks of Reazon Systems, Inc.
Copyright (C) Reazon Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved
n98