Rubrics for designing and evaluating online asynchronous discussions Export

@article{citeulike:5432062, abstract = {The purpose of the study reported on in this paper was to identify performance criteria and ratings in rubrics designed for the evaluation of learning in online asynchronous discussions (OADs) in post-secondary contexts. We analysed rubrics collected from Internet sources. Using purposive sampling, we reached saturation with the selection of 50 rubrics. Using keyword analysis and subsequent grouping of keywords into categories, we identified 153 performance criteria in 19 categories and 831 ratings in 40 categories. We subsequently identified four core categories as follows: cognitive (44.0\%), mechanical (19.0\%), procedural/managerial (18.29\%) and interactive (17.17\%). Another 1.52\% of ratings and performance criteria were labelled vague and not assigned to any core category.}, address = {Faculty of Education, Memorial University, Canada}, author = {Penny, Lana and Murphy, Elizabeth}, citeulike-article-id = {5432062}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.x}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/121429353/ABSTRACT}, doi = {10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.x}, issn = {1467-8535}, journal = {British Journal of Educational Technology}, keywords = {asynchronous, discussion, online, rubrics}, number = {5}, pages = {804--820}, posted-at = {2009-08-13 14:10:06}, priority = {2}, title = {Rubrics for designing and evaluating online asynchronous discussions}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.x}, volume = {40}, year = {2009} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:5432062 L3 - citeulike-article-id:5432062 N2 - The purpose of the study reported on in this paper was to identify performance criteria and ratings in rubrics designed for the evaluation of learning in online asynchronous discussions (OADs) in post-secondary contexts. We analysed rubrics collected from Internet sources. Using purposive sampling, we reached saturation with the selection of 50 rubrics. Using keyword analysis and subsequent grouping of keywords into categories, we identified 153 performance criteria in 19 categories and 831 ratings in 40 categories. We subsequently identified four core categories as follows: cognitive (44.0%), mechanical (19.0%), procedural/managerial (18.29%) and interactive (17.17%). Another 1.52% of ratings and performance criteria were labelled vague and not assigned to any core category. IS - 5 JF - British Journal of Educational Technology SN - 1467-8535 AD - Faculty of Education, Memorial University, Canada EP - 820 TI - Rubrics for designing and evaluating online asynchronous discussions VL - 40 SP - 804 KW - asynchronous KW - discussion KW - online KW - rubrics AU - Penny, Lana AU - Murphy, Elizabeth PY - 2009/// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00895.x ER -