Comments on: Test drive the Harvesting Gradebook http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/ Commentable site of the Center for Teaching Learning and Technology, WSU Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:00:02 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Harvesting feedback on a course assignment « Community-based learning http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-251 Harvesting feedback on a course assignment « Community-based learning Mon, 20 Jul 2009 18:33:52 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-251 [...] support community-based learning (see Institutional-Community Learning Spectrum). As we have been piloting community-based learning activities from within a university context, we are coming to understand [...] [...] support community-based learning (see Institutional-Community Learning Spectrum). As we have been piloting community-based learning activities from within a university context, we are coming to understand [...]

]]> By: Gathering feedback to improve course design « Community-based learning http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-172 Gathering feedback to improve course design « Community-based learning Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:48:27 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-172 [...] are also piloting work using the Harvesting Gradebook concept where the reviewers (other faculty, students and community) provide feedback on the [...] [...] are also piloting work using the Harvesting Gradebook concept where the reviewers (other faculty, students and community) provide feedback on the [...]

]]> By: Harvesting Gradebook in the Wild « Community-based learning http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-167 Harvesting Gradebook in the Wild « Community-based learning Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:53:27 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-167 [...] In Fall 2008 WSUCTLT partnered with Meriem Chida to pilot the Harvesting Gradebook in her class and in Spring 2009 with Rich King to make a publicly accessible “test drive.” [...] [...] In Fall 2008 WSUCTLT partnered with Meriem Chida to pilot the Harvesting Gradebook in her class and in Spring 2009 with Rich King to make a publicly accessible “test drive.” [...]

]]> By: David Eubanks http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-163 David Eubanks Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:26:08 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-163 Backtrack: http://highered.blogspot.com/2009/04/rules-damned-rules-and-policy.html Backtrack: http://highered.blogspot.com/2009/04/rules-damned-rules-and-policy.html

]]> By: One small step for man » Blog Archive » Extending the Ripple Effect http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-138 One small step for man » Blog Archive » Extending the Ripple Effect Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:54:30 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-138 [...] The DecSc 470 process produced artifacts that were used to credential students in that course. Last year’s Engineers without Borders produced an electronic portfolio that could been a credentialing tool. DecSc 470 worked in a threaded discussion inside a course space. Now we might advocate the course use blogs (to recruit help a la ThinkCycle), and with that more public process, we could easily add a Harvesting Gradebook. [...] [...] The DecSc 470 process produced artifacts that were used to credential students in that course. Last year’s Engineers without Borders produced an electronic portfolio that could been a credentialing tool. DecSc 470 worked in a threaded discussion inside a course space. Now we might advocate the course use blogs (to recruit help a la ThinkCycle), and with that more public process, we could easily add a Harvesting Gradebook. [...]

]]> By: Nils Peterson http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-137 Nils Peterson Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:15:24 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-137 Ken, You summarize the experience we are offering, and ask: "I can grade their work on-line. Is that about right?" I'd prefer you used the term 'assess', or 'score with the rubric'. The creation of the student's "grade" as ultimately recorded by the registrar is a process that will benefit from your scoring, but will be mediated by Rich King. You ask where your responses are being sent. Its not two places, it is one place, our Skylight Matrix Survey system. You are correct that all your judgments go to the student, unmediated. This includes your judgments about the utility of the rubric. The effect is to include the learner in the dialog about the yardstick being used to measure the learning. Peers are using this same instrument to give peer feedback so they are also joining the conversation by answering the questions about the utility of the rubric. As things stand, Rich will get a richer report of the data, just because we can do that for the instructor role. The report will help understand how different parts of the community are commenting differently, see for example our <a href="http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/different-conversations-among-course-participant-groups/" rel="nofollow">analysis of the feedback</a> last semester for ideas. As a post-hoc analysis we will also be be able to give Rich information like this from last semester, showing how <a href="http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/rich-assessment-from-a-harvesting-grade-book/" rel="nofollow">different groups raters</a> agree or differ. Thanks for asking good clarifying questions. Ken,
You summarize the experience we are offering, and ask: “I can grade their work on-line. Is that about right?”

I’d prefer you used the term ‘assess’, or ’score with the rubric’. The creation of the student’s “grade” as ultimately recorded by the registrar is a process that will benefit from your scoring, but will be mediated by Rich King.

You ask where your responses are being sent. Its not two places, it is one place, our Skylight Matrix Survey system. You are correct that all your judgments go to the student, unmediated. This includes your judgments about the utility of the rubric. The effect is to include the learner in the dialog about the yardstick being used to measure the learning. Peers are using this same instrument to give peer feedback so they are also joining the conversation by answering the questions about the utility of the rubric.

As things stand, Rich will get a richer report of the data, just because we can do that for the instructor role. The report will help understand how different parts of the community are commenting differently, see for example our analysis of the feedback last semester for ideas.

As a post-hoc analysis we will also be be able to give Rich information like this from last semester, showing how different groups raters agree or differ.

Thanks for asking good clarifying questions.

]]> By: Nils Peterson http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/test-drive-the-harvesting-gradebook/#comment-136 Nils Peterson Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:00:23 +0000 http://wsuctlt.wordpress.com/?p=227#comment-136 Submitted my email: I have checked it out, and it's pretty intriguing. Here's how it looks to me after about fifteen minutes of reading, without yet participating. - Rich built blogging into his course assignments, and told his students this was out there for the public to read and review - with the rest of Earth, I'm invited to read his criteria (over about three entries), then read the student work, then follow the "survey" links to scoring rubrics At that point, by comparing the students' responses to Rich's published standards, I can grade their work on-line. Is that about right? I wanted to make sure I was following it before I started clicking on rubrics. So that's my first question -- do I have the right idea about this? Second question has to do with this part of the January post quoting Gary: "The Harvesting Gradebook collects copies of the assessments for the gradebook, but leaves the student work in situ." So, as I click on these rubrics I'm sending my judgments to two places, right? To the student, unmediated, and to Rich, for the gradebook collection of assessments. Decades from now the blog I reacted to may be gone (since the Harvesting Gradebook never made a copy), but my evaluation of it may still be attached to the course records. Does that part sound right? I feel like your office is in the 2050s. Thanks for inviting me, Doc Brown. Ken Submitted my email:
I have checked it out, and it’s pretty intriguing. Here’s how it looks to me after about fifteen minutes of reading, without yet participating.

- Rich built blogging into his course assignments, and told his students this was out there for the public to read and review
- with the rest of Earth, I’m invited to read his criteria (over about three entries), then read the student work, then follow the “survey” links to scoring rubrics

At that point, by comparing the students’ responses to Rich’s published standards, I can grade their work on-line. Is that about right? I wanted to make sure I was following it before I started clicking on rubrics. So that’s my first question — do I have the right idea about this?

Second question has to do with this part of the January post quoting Gary: “The Harvesting Gradebook collects copies of the assessments for the gradebook, but leaves the student work in situ.” So, as I click on these rubrics I’m sending my judgments to two places, right? To the student, unmediated, and to Rich, for the gradebook collection of assessments. Decades from now the blog I reacted to may be gone (since the Harvesting Gradebook never made a copy), but my evaluation of it may still be attached to the course records. Does that part sound right?

I feel like your office is in the 2050s. Thanks for inviting me, Doc Brown.

Ken

]]>