Plantilla para evaluación del trabajo proyectado("rúbrica")
Mi documento de evaluación para la realización del proyecto está en mi wiki de trabajo con alumnos así que aquí os dejo el enlace.
La reproduzco aquí y os la explico brevemente. Cada entrada tiene un valor de 10 puntos que se subdividen en cuatro grados de excelencia. La suma va a la escala y da el resultado.
Webquest: What about London?.
Secundaria y Bachillerato
Manuel Francisco Carro
Evalutation.
This is how your productions will be assessed. Use this rubric to help you improve.
||Not Fair 1 25% | Fair 2 50% | Good 3 75% | Excellent
4
100% | ||
PosterVisual impact | Unorganised layout, unattractiveNo good | Organised layout, attractive | Organised, Attractive layout, decorated | Organised, Attractive, DecoratedFascinating. | 10 |
Poster /PresentationTask compliance | 3 missing elements | 2 missing elements | 1 missing element | All elements present:Title, map, photos, text 1, text 2 | 10 |
Poster / Presentation Text 1 | Missing elements | 2 missing elements | 1 missing element | No omissions (see Task or Process for the elements that should be included) | 10 |
Poster / PresentationText 2 | Brief (less than 4 sentences), clear, too many mistakes for 2 sentences. It explains (at least one reason). but doesn’t suggest /urge to visit convincingly. | Longer (less than 6 sentences), clear, fewer mistakes for nº sentences. It explains (at least two reasons). but doesn’t suggest /urge to visit convincingly | Medium length (less than 10 sentences), clear, few mistakes for the length. It explains (at least two reasons).and does suggest convincingly. | Long (more than 10 sentences), clear, almost no mistakes for length. It explains (at least three reasons).and does suggest convincingly | 10 |
PresentationExtension and audio | 3 slidesNo voice for comments/music | 4 slides No voice for comments/music | 4 slidesVoice or music | 5 o5 6 slidesMusic or voice | 10 |
PresentationSpeed control | Too fast to be read and enjoyed.Too slow | Fast speed making reading and enjoyment better than previous one but even so, uncomfortable | Medium speed.Comfortable but would help if slower | Suitable speed.It can be read, enjoyed comfortably. | 10 |
PresentationColours-fonts-size/quality of photos/transitions | Colour selections made it difficult to see.Small size of photoToo absorbing transitions and effects (more relevant than information) | Colour selections made it difficult to see.Medium size of photoCorrect transitions and effects (less relevant than information) | Colour selections made it easy to see.Medium size of photoCorrect transitions and effects (more relevant than information) | Correct selections made it easy to see.Suitable size of photoCorrect transitions and effects (more relevant than information) | 10 |
Puncutality and timetable complianceGroup efficiency | 3 additional sessions needed | 2additonal sessions needed | 1 additional session needed | No additional session needed, the 7 sessions were respected. | 10 |
Score key:
1-49 Not Fair
50-69 Fair
70-79 Good
80 Excellent.
Permitidme que os recuerde los
Criterios de evaluación
Los criterios son:
Frecuencia de participación, calidad de la participación (ambas controladas por los instrumentos de evaluación colaborativa y coevaluación), calidad expresiva oral, calidad expresiva escrita, calidad de la síntesis, calidad de la presentación y maquetado. La evaluación consta de tres partes, a saber:
Elemento de ayuda para comprobación de trabajos.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario
Gracias por tu atención. MFCarro