University Teaching 101 Peer Assessment2 Rubric

Peer Assessment 2 Grading Rubric
Evaluation Criterion #1 of 5
Course Title and Description
The assessment of students written assignments is a core responsibility of
college/university instructors. To be an effective learning activity, the instructors
assessment must include clear, specific, and constructive feedback.
For this activity to promote your own learning (as well as that of your peer), you should
consider yourself to be the Teaching 101 instructor who thus is highly motivated to help
your students learn what was good and what could be improved in each portion of their
syllabus and their syllabus preparation activity.
Using your own knowledge, based upon the information presented in this course,
especially in Week 4 and in the readings about developing course descriptions
and syllabi, please grade this section using the grading rubric provided below.
Please award points on the basis of the following rubric:
4 points: All of the following points are true or only minor problems exist.
The course title is a suitable length and is descriptive of the course. The course
description is a suitable length, is consistent with the title, clearly specifies the
overall goal of the course from the learners perspective, indicates the
level/background of the students that the course is suited for and provides a
general description of how the course will be taught.
3 points: The course description is informative, but there are minor issues of
clarity and consistency. For example, there is minor inconsistency between the
course title and the description OR more details are needed about the level of
students that the course is designed for.
2 points: Two of the criteria expected for the title and course description are not
met.
1 point: Three criteria for the title and course description are not met.
0 points: More than three criteria for the title and course description are not met
or the participant did not make an attempt to provide an answer for this question.
Please also briefly comment on the reasons for your score. There is no limit to
the feedback you can give. Please make it useful and constructive. Be respectful
of your peers work. Be careful not to give offense, but do make suggestions for
improvements.
Course Learning Objectives
especially in Week 4 and in the readings, resources, and videos about developing
course descriptions and syllabi, please grade this section using the grading
rubric provided below.
4 points: All of the following points are true or only minor problems exist.
There are 3-5 course learning objectives that are consistent with the overall goal
of the course. Objectives are briefly and clearly described in terms of what
students will be able to do. Objectives use active learning verbs. At least one of
the objectives is at a high level of applying, analyzing, or synthesizing
knowledge in Blooms Taxonomy. (For the taxonomy, see slides in Session 2 of
Week 4, Course Description and Objectives.)
3 points: One of the criteria outlined above is missing.
2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are missing.
1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are missing.
0 points: None of the criteria are met or the participant did not make an attempt
to provide an answer for this question.
improvements.
Syllabus Preparation: Alignment of Teaching Methods to Learning Styles
especially in Week 3 and in the readings, resources, and videos about learning
styles and needs assessment, please grade this section using the grading rubric
provided below.
4 points: Five methods/media are identified that would appeal to both visual and
auditory learners and the rationale for each selection is clearly stated.
3 points: There are only four methods/media identified, the methods/media listed
might appeal to either visual or auditory learners, but not both, and/or the
rationale included for each selection is not clearly stated.
2 points: There are only three methods/media identified, the methods/media

listed clearly appeal only to visual or auditory learners, and/or the rationale is
included for some of the selections is stated, but not all of the selections. Also,
the rationale for the selection(s) may not be clear.
1 point: There is only one or two methods/media identified, the methods/media

listed clearly do not appeal to either visual or auditory learners, and/or the
rationale is not included for any of the selections stated. Also, the rationale for
the selection(s) may not be clear.
0 points: The student did not make an attempt to answer the question.
improvements.
Evaluation PlanMajor Assignments, Student Assessments, and Grading
4 points: All of the following statements are true or only minor issues exist:
There are 3-5 course assignments, including examinations, and they seem
suitable for the level of the course. Based on the brief descriptions, the
assignments or exams appear to evaluate the learning that should have occurred
by the point at which they occur in the course. Each assignment accounts for a
reasonable portion of the students final grade. The overall grading plan is
presented clearly and seems reasonable and fair. No one assignment accounts
for more than 50% of the final grade.
3 points: One aspect of the criteria outlined above is not met. For example, one
of the assignments is not well described, or one of the assignments does not
seem suitable for the level of the students.
2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are not met.
1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are not met.
0 points: More than three of the criteria outlined above are not met or the
participant did not make an attempt to provide an answer for this question.
improvements.
Class Session ScheduleSession Title/Objectives, Learning Activities, Readings,
Homework Assignments
4 points: All of the following statements are true or only minor issues exist:
The class sessions are suitable for an 8-week course. Each session has an
informative descriptive title or learning objectives so it is possible to understand
what the content will be. The due dates for each major assignment or
examination is clear. Based on the titles of the sessions and/or the session
learning objectives, the content and sequence of the sessions seem to build
knowledge and skills in a systematic manner. The timing of the assignments and
examinations seems appropriate for the learning that has taken place.
3 points: One aspect of the criteria outlined above is not met. For example, too
much material is planned for an 8-week term OR the content of one or two of the
sessions is not clear.
2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are not met.
1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are not met.
0 points: The content of the sessions is not clear or more than three of the
criteria outlined above are not met or the participant did not make an attempt to
provide an answer for this question.
improvements.
5

University Teaching 101 Peer Assessment2 Rubric

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

University Teaching 101 Peer Assessment2 Rubric

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peer Assessment 2 Grading Rubric

3 points: One of the criteria outlined above is missing.

2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are missing.

1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are missing.

2 points: There are only three methods/media identified, the methods/media

1 point: There is only one or two methods/media identified, the methods/media

2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are not met.

1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are not met.

2 points: Two of the criteria outlined above are not met.

1 point: Three of the criteria outlined above are not met.

You might also like