{"id":64543,"date":"2018-09-12T19:04:27","date_gmt":"2018-09-12T23:04:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/?p=64543"},"modified":"2018-09-12T19:04:27","modified_gmt":"2018-09-12T23:04:27","slug":"a-rubric-for-evaluating-e-learning-tools-in-higher-education-anstey-watson","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/2018\/09\/12\/a-rubric-for-evaluating-e-learning-tools-in-higher-education-anstey-watson\/","title":{"rendered":"A rubric for evaluating e-learning tools in higher education [Anstey & Watson]"},"content":{"rendered":"

A rubric for evaluating e-learning tools in higher education<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0— from er.educause.edu by Lauren Anstey and Gavan Watson
\nThe Rubric for E-Learning Tool Evaluation offers educators a framework, with criteria and levels of achievement, to assess the suitability of an e-learning tool for their learners’ needs and for their own learning outcomes and classroom context.<\/em><\/p>\n

Excerpt:<\/em><\/p>\n

We organized our rubric’s evaluation criteria into eight categories (functionality; accessibility; technical; mobile design; privacy, data protection, and rights; social presence; teaching presence; cognitive presence). Each category has a specific set of characteristics, or criteria, against which e-learning tools are evaluated, and each criterion is assessed against three standards: works well, minor concerns, or serious concerns. Finally, the rubric offers individual descriptions of the qualities an e-learning tool must have to achieve a standard.<\/p>\n

Although our rubric integrates a broad range of functional, technical, and pedagogical criteria, it is not intended to be overly prescriptive. Our goal is for the framework to respond to an instructor’s needs and be adapted as appropriate. For example, when a rubric criterion is not relevant to the assessment of a particular tool, it can be excluded without impacting the overall quality of the assessment.<\/p>\n

The rubric reflects our belief that instructors should choose e-learning tools in the context of the learning experience. We therefore encourage an explicit alignment between the instructor’s intended outcomes and the tool, based on principles of constructive alignment. Given the diversity of outcomes across learning experiences, e-learning tools should be chosen on a case-by-case basis and should be tailored to each instructor’s intended learning outcomes and planned instructional activities. We designed the rubric with this intention in mind.
\n…
\nThe Rubric for E-Learning Tool Evaluation<\/a> offers educators a framework, with criteria and levels of achievement, to assess the suitability of an e-learning tool for their learners’ needs and for their own learning outcomes and classroom context. The rubric was designed with utility in mind: it is intended to help decision-makers independently evaluate e-learning tools.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A rubric for evaluating e-learning tools in higher education\u00a0— from er.educause.edu by Lauren Anstey and Gavan Watson The Rubric for E-Learning Tool Evaluation offers educators a framework, with criteria and levels of achievement, to assess the suitability of an e-learning tool for their learners’ needs and for their own learning outcomes and classroom context. Excerpt: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[53,322,32,98,71,3,119,64,102,7,14,245,195,214],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64543","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-accessibility-udl","category-adjunct-faculty","category-education-technology","category-elearning","category-faculty-staff","category-higher-education","category-instructional-design","category-it-in-he","category-learning","category-learning-ecosystem","category-mobile-learning","category-mobile-technologies","category-tools","category-universities"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=64543"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64543\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64545,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64543\/revisions\/64545"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=64543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=64543"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/danielschristian.com\/learning-ecosystems\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=64543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}