When I first realized this course (5317) would be devoted to writing for publication, I immediately set my sights on creating content that would provide immediate benefits to teachers. I knew I wanted to write something they could take and use in their classrooms tomorrow – not just an idea, but tangible resources. During my time in the classroom, my favorite assignment was having students create podcasts to show their learning. Back then, students would often rely on their phone recorders or, if they possessed tech-savvy skills, seek out online recording platforms. Today, with resources like Microsoft Flip and Canva readily available, students have even more exciting and engaging options for recording. Furthermore, I wanted teachers to see that student-created podcasts don’t have to be a large production and can be accomplished through simple, easy-to-follow steps.
During this writing process, my collaboration group created peer assessment criteria.
Peer Assessment Criteria:
Alignment with Learning Priority (10 points):
● Justification: The extent to which the draft prioritizes learning over technology, ensuring that technology serves as a catalyst for enhanced learning experiences.
Engagement with Thought Leaders (10 points):
● Justification: Evaluation of the integration and application of ideas from influential thought leaders, including Dewey, Bruner, Vygotsky, Papert, Piaget, and Roger Schank, to support arguments and perspectives.
Clarity of Voice and Perspective (10 points):
● Justification: Assessment of the clarity and coherence of the author's voice and perspective, including the articulation of authentic experiences, insights, and visions for the educational context.
Integration of Cognitive Processes (10 points):
● Justification: Analysis of the incorporation of cognitive processes such as prediction, modeling, experimentation, evaluation, diagnosis, planning, causing, judgment, influence, teamwork, negotiation, and describing, to strengthen arguments and illustrate key points.
Publication Readiness (10 points):
● Justification: Evaluation of the draft's readiness for publication, considering adherence to submission requirements, clarity of structure, and potential for contribution to relevant journals or publications.
Scoring Rubric:
● 45-50 points: Exceptional - The draft demonstrates outstanding alignment with assessment criteria, providing valuable insights and contributions.
● 35-44 points: Satisfactory - The draft meets most assessment criteria adequately, with room for improvement in certain areas.
● 25-34 points: Developing - The draft exhibits some alignment with assessment criteria but lacks depth or clarity in key areas.
● 0-24 points: Insufficient - The draft fails to meet fundamental assessment criteria, requiring significant revisions to align with expectations.
Score & Reflection:
Average Score: 48
Two members of my collaboration group have completed the peer review process, providing valuable feedback that I intend to incorporate into the final draft. One particularly notable comment came from a team member who highlighted that my "perspective, passion, and knowledge carry more weight" than that of the learning theorist. I’m interested to see if this is something I should consider. Another great suggestion was to include information for teachers regarding the cost, device needs, and what age/grade I would suggest to start podcasting.
Overall, this peer review was extremely beneficial and provided the opportunity for valuable feedforward. I am excited to continue my publishing journey in hopes it will be accepted!
コメント