poor opportunities for tracking performance, monitoring improvement, testing knowledge on a regular basis), There are no opportunities for formative feedback on learning (i.e. you can make your own by using parts of theses. The tool can be embedded within an LMS, perhaps with with limited functionality, but can not be fully integrated. The tool has an interface that may be confusing to either instructor or learner; there is limited opportunity for personalization. Users may encounter limited or altered functionality depending on the up-to-date operating system being used. A place was made available for the reflection of achievement data and other helpful notes for future implementation of lesson. Tinkering: Development of the rubric was a collaborative effort that drew upon the collective knowledge of team members in the Teaching Support Centre and eLearning Team in ITS.

eLearning tools are defined as any digital technology, mediated through the use of a computing device, deliberately selected to support student learning. Either instructors are the only users required to provide personal information to set up an account; or the tool has been vetted through appropriate channels to ensure strict adherence to local, institutional, or personal policies/standards for protecting the collection and use of student personal data by a third party group. Two main types of rubrics are to be …

The tool can only be accessed in an LMS through a hyperlink or static representations of the tool (e.g file export), rather than a functional version of the tool itself. eLearning tools are defined as any digital technology, mediated through the use of a computing device, deliberately selected to support student learning.

Bookmark this rubric for future reference. Technical: considers the basic technologies needed to make a tool work. Teacher chooses a technology tool to enhance student learning. All users (instructors and learners) must provide personal information to a third party in creating an account and there is some question or concern of the adherence to local, institutional, or personal policies/standards for protecting the collection and use of such data by the third party group. Teacher sets up conditions of the lesson to support technology integration and has accounted for student privacy and safety.

Blank Rubric for Use Software: Manufacturer: …

The tool requires a past or version of a browser extension or software. The rubric has been applied in two key contexts: Thoughtful Technology: Due to the way the rubric incorporates practice, pedagogy, and technological considerations, the rubric offers a framework for thoughtful integration of technology in the classroom. Teacher aligns student objectives and standards with lesson and plans for proper formative or summative assessment integration. Literature Informed: The rubric incorporated practice wisdom with literature as drawn from various areas of pedagogical and technological considerations for eLearning and technology use. Please change the rubric status to. In collaboration with my colleague, Dr. Gavan Watson, we developed a Rubric for eLearning Tool Evaluation to support multi-dimensional evaluation of functional, technical, and social aspects of eLearning resources and tools. technology rubrics and checklists. Contents Blank Rubric for Use..... 3 Software Review – Camtasia Studio® 8 ..... 5 Software Review – SnagIt®..... 8 Software Review – SoftChalk..... 11 References: ..... 14. Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website. Retrieved from, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, Github archive " acciptrid / Rubric-for-E-Learning-Tool-Evaluation", Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/, https://teaching.uwo.ca/pdf/elearning/Rubric-for-eLearning-Tool-Evaluation.pdf, https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/9/a-rubric-for-evaluating-e-learning-tools-in-higher-education, http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rubric_for_eLearning_Tool_Evaluation&oldid=74584, The tool can be scaled to accommodate any size class with the flexibility to create smaller sub-groups or communities of practice, The tool can scaled to accommodate any size class but lacks flexibility to create smaller sub-groups or communities of practice, The tool is restrictive to a limited number of users and cannot be scaled. Core features of the main tool are functional on the mobile app but advanced features are limited. The rubric supports a multi-dimensional evaluation of functional, technical, and pedagogical aspects of eLearning Tools. No difference in functionality between apps designed for different mobile operating systems. Watson (2018) [1]

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam.

The mobile platform cannot be used in any capacity offline. The mobile app functions poorly such that core features are not reliable or non-existent. “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. here are some helpful ones. i have used over the years in various grants . Required fields are marked *, Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. Proper use of the tool does not require equipment beyond what is typically available to instructors and students (computer with built-in speakers and microphone, internet connection, etc. “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.” [1]. The tool can be accessed, either through the download of an app or via a mobile browser, regardless of the mobile operating system and device. The teacher is familiar with the technology integrated into the lesson and plans for logistics of integration. Rubric for E-Learning Tool Evaluation by Lauren M. Anstey & Gavan P.L.