BOH Wiki Project using RSDF

• We had traditionally run a ‘traditional’ group work assignment followed by PowerPoint presentations.

• Difficulty in assessing quality of group work processes

– Disparities in quantity and quality of individual input hard to monitor

– Effectiveness of group roles and processes largely based on anecdotal evidence

• In 2007 we developed an online Wiki group assessment project in first year Human Biology I OH.

• Developed an assessment rubric which based on RSDF

Rationale for change

• Engage students in the process of learning, rather than promote an outcome-focussed activity

• Utilise contemporary social technologies to foster learning communities

• Introduce collaborative research methods in the early years of an undergraduate program

• Motivate students to actively and equitably participate in a group based assessment activity.

How the Wikis worked

The Rubric

Student Posters

Student Posters

Why we think the Wiki and RSD rubric were effective in this group assessment

– Accountable Group Work through the history tab – facilitator can track quality of group contribution through edits

– Monitoring and notification facility- all posts and discussions can be monitored as they evolve

– Provides immediate peer and facilitator feedback

– Emphasis on the learning process rather than outcome-focussed

– Empowers students to make sense of their learning through active engagement

– Frequent contact - online and face to face fosters a learning community

– Promotes reflection of written work, critical assessment and peer review

Other BOH RSD-based Assessment Rubrics

Effectiveness of rubrics is well documented:• “student learning in areas that are often

vague and/or complex” (Wesley 2003)

• an assessment tool that is “more efficient and defensible” (Wesley 2003)

• “good practice communicates high expectations (Chickering and Ehrmann 1996)

• “process, progress and product may all be evaluated by means of rubrics”

(Montgomery 2002)

• Rubrics provide “exemplars to demonstrate the appropriate standard of ‘real examples’, as well as showing how mistakes can be made.

(Baron and Keller 2003)

References•Baron J and Keller M (2005) Use of rubrics in online assessment, Conference paper from Evaluations and Assessment Conference, 24-25 November, 2003 / 14p.

•Chickering A and Ehrmann SC (1996) Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as a Lever. American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) Bulletin, October, 9 3-6.

•Wesley J (2003) Designing Rubrics for Assessment, Innovative Technology Centre, University of Tennessee http://web.utk.edu/~jwei/WebQuest/5rubrics/02_background/02_definition.htm (accessed 20/5/09)

•Willison JW & O’Reagan K. (2007) Commonly known, commonly not known, totally unknown: A framework for students becoming researchers. Higher Education Research and Development 26(4).

RSD Web Site

www.adelaide.edu.au/clpd/rsd