University of Macau General Education Program CISG114 Web ...

rouleaupromiseΑσφάλεια

5 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 9 μήνες)

78 εμφανίσεις

University of Macau
General Education Program
CISG114 Web Technology and Life
Department of Computer & Information Science
Faculty of Science & Technology

Learning Syllabus


Part (A) Course Outline

Elective GE course in IT and Knowledge Society – Science and Information Technology

Catalog description:
3.0 credits (lectures: 2 x 1.5 hours). This course exposes students to the impact in our daily lives of modern Web
technologies such as Blogs, Podcasts, Wikis, RSS, Social Bookmarks/Networking, Virtual Worlds, e-Business
Models, and e-government initiatives. The course is designed to help the causal computer users understand the
latest in free and inexpensive Web tools and their power for research, collaboration, and communication. It
discusses the history, background, and perspectives of Web 2.0 technologies to demystify the jargons connected
with the latest Web phenomena. This course also shares some core topics with other General Education courses in
the category of “Information Technology and Knowledge Society”: namely, IT and knowledge society basics; ethics
and social responsibility in the information age; the digital divide in the 21
st
century; and issues of information
literacy and competency.

Course type:
General Education for Year 1 and Year 2 students

Prerequisites: None

Textbook(s) and other required material:
Bell, A. (2009). Exploring Web 2.0: Second generation interactive tools – Blogs, podcasts, wikis, networking,
virtual worlds, and more. Georgetown, TX: Katy Crossing Press.

References:
Evans, A., & Coyle, D.M. (2009). Introduction to Web 2.0. Prentice Hall.
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. International Society for Technology in
Education.
Vossen, G. & Hagemann, S. (2007). Unleashing Web 2.0: From concepts to creativity. Morgan Kaufmann.

Desired mental and practical makeup:
1. Experience in group-based project work.
2. Use of e-Learning platforms such as Moodle.
3. Mentality that learning is not a spectator sport, but a down-to-earth learn-to-learn process of learning-by-doing.

Course objectives:
• To help students become literate in the fundamental understanding of the latest Web technologies (Web 2.0)
associated with the Internet era, including the impact in their daily living using modern-day examples.
• To encourage students to formulate and express their views on the design of Web tools and applications in
modern society, through case study, written work, oral presentations and classroom discussions.
• To raise students' awareness of the impact of Web technologies on their daily living and the wide-spread focus of
the Web influence in various sectors in modern living, through critical discourses on the use of Web tools for
purposeful human endeavors.
2


Topics covered:
• Introduction (2 hours): Coming to Terms with Web 2.0 in our Daily Living
• Common Module 1 (2 hours): Introduction to IT and Knowledge Society
• Common Module 2 (2 hours): Ethics and Social Responsibility in the Information Age
• Common Module 3 (2 hours): The Digital Divide in the 21
st
Century
• Common Module 4 (2 hours): Information Literacy and Competency
• Topic 1 (2 hours): Blogs, Wikis, and Photo Sharing
• Topic 2 (2 hours): RSS, Podcasting, and Social Bookmarking
• Topic 3 (2 hours): Mashups and Virtual office Applications
• Topic 4 (2 hours): Tagging, Folksonomy, and Social Web
• Topic 5 (2 hours): Social Networking and e-Business Models
• Topic 6 (2 hours): e-Government and e-Learning
• Topic 7 (2 hours): Putting Web 2.0 into Perspectives


Class/laboratory schedule:
Timetabled work in hours per week
Lecture Tutorial Practice
No of teaching

weeks
Total hours Total credits
No/Duration of
exam papers
3 0 0 14 42 3.0 1 / 3 hours
14-Week Semester: Two weekly 90-minute lectures

Student study effort expected:
Class contact:
Lecture 42 hours
Tutorial 0 hours
Hands-on practice 0 hours
Other study effort
Self-study 20 hours
Homework assignment 14 hours
Project / Case study 14 hours
Total student study effort 90 hours

Assessment for student learning:
Items for Assessment Total Semester Percentage (100%)
Homework and Class Participation
• Individual assignments (5%)
• Pair assignments (10%)
• Team assignments (10%)
25%
Project Work 25%
Online and Collaborative Learning Activities 10%
Mid-Term Examination (Evaluation) 20%
Final Examination 20%

Assessment for course objectives:
The assessment to meet course objectives will be done in a formative and summative manner on the basis of the
following items of interest:
• All related measures included in Assessment for Student Learning (above);
3

• All related assessment data (electronic records of homework, assignments, presentations, digital stories,
online discussions, wiki collaborative writing, and self as well as peer review reports for measuring student
learning from UMMoodle course site;
• The course portfolio established on UMMoodle site of CISG114, throughout the semester, keeping track of
the course enactment details, lesson-by-lesson.

Course Outline (Refer to our UMMoodle site for detailed learning activities):
Weeks

Topic Course work

1
Introduction – Inception Period to measure student background knowledge and to
position for immediate kick-off of course learning
Coming to Terms with Web 2.0 in our Daily Living
Online
learning
records on
UMMoodle
course site
1
Elaboration of CISG114 Learning-Centered Syllabus with intended learning
outcomes and topics of interest clearly delineated, together with the peculiar design
of student learning experience, in terms of individual, pair, and group learning
episodes in the context of Web technology and life; Kick-off of inquiry-based
learning, through subsequent research agendas

Wiki
collaboration
records on
UMMoodle
course site
2, 3, 4

Inquiry Agendas (001-004), inquiring about
• Introduction to IT and Knowledge Society
• Ethics and Social Responsibility in the Information Age
• The Digital Divide in the 21
st
Century
• Information Literacy and Competency

Inquiry
Agenda
reports
submitted
electronically
on
UMMoodle
course site
plus wiki
online
learning
records
5, 6, 7

Inquiry Agendas 005, inquiring about
• Blogs, Wikis, and Photo Sharing
• RSS, Podcasting and Social Bookmarking
• Mashups and Virtual Office Applications


Inquiry
Agenda
reports
submitted
electronically
on
UMMoodle
course site
plus wiki
online
learning
records
8, 9,
10

Inquiry Agendas 006, inquiring about
• Tagging, Folksonomy, and Social Web
• Social Networking and e-Business Models
• e-Governments and e-Learning
• Putting Web 2.0 into Perspectives

Inquiry
Agenda
reports
submitted
electronically
on
UMMoodle
course site
plus wiki
online
4

learning
records
11, 12

Self and Peer Review of Student Work in inquiry-based learning through the
submitted reports of Inquiry Agendas (001 – 006), plus the student class
presentation videos (or digital stories) and PowerPoints, as well as the wiki
collaboration records; student efforts expected: 10 hours

Self and Peer
review for
Inquiry
Agenda
reports
submitted
electronically
on
UMMoodle
course site
plus wiki
online
learning
records
11, 12

Semester Project to organize student evidences of learning and to create student e-
portfolios of work accomplished, on UMMoodle site of CISG114. Digital stories for
semester projects as a way to present the same to be collected to demonstrate
student performance in expected learning.


All the
related
student
online
learning
records
established
on
UMMoodle
course site
related to the
six Inquiry
Agendas
(001-006)
13
Final Examination Review (three hours) to cover the materials learned throughout
the semester

14
Preparation of Course Portfolio as an important archive of course enactment and
student learning to accrue evidence for formative course evaluation



Course delivery:
50% Information Security study through lecture and discussion, plus in-class exercises; 50% through online and
collaborative learning-by-doing, especially via group project work such as team learning with case studies


Coordinator:
Prof. Chi Man Pun, Ph.D.

Persons who prepared this description:
Dr. Kam Hou Vat
_________________________________________________________________________





5

Part (B) General Course Information and Policies


Instructor: Dr. Kam Hou Vat Office: N327C
Office Hour: TBA Phone: 83974379
Email:
fstkhv@umac.mo


Course : CISG114 Web Technology and Life
Time/Venue : TBA


Grading Distribution:

Percentage Grade Final Grade Percentage Grade Final Grade
100 - 93
A
92 - 88
A−
87 - 83
B+
82 - 78
B
77 - 73 B− 72 - 68
C+
67 - 63
C
62 - 58 C−
57 - 53
D+
52 - 50
D
below 50
F


Comment:
The objectives of the lectures are to explain and to supplement the text material. Students are responsible
for the assigned material whether or not it is covered in the lecture. Students who wish to succeed in this
course should read the assignments prior to the lecture and should work all homework and in-class
exercises. Students are encouraged to look at other sources (other texts, and literature items) to
complement the lectures and text.

Homework Policy:
The completion and correction of homework is a powerful learning experience; therefore:
• There will be approximately 6 major homework assignments.
• Homework is due one or two weeks after assignment unless otherwise noted.
• No late homework is accepted, unless an application is filed prior to submission with valid reason
• The course grade will partly be based on the average of the homework grades.

Course Project:
The project is probably the most exciting part of the course and provides students with meaningful
experience to extend and enhance their learning:
• The requirements will be announced and discussed in class.
• The project will be presented towards the end of semester, including a digital story to be submitted
by students.

Examinations:
Two exams (mid-term and final) will be held in the semester, with the midterm being 2-hour and the final
being 3-hour.



6

Part (C) Design of Learning Experience

Instructor: Dr. Kam Hou Vat Office: N327C
Office Hour: TBA Phone: 83974379
Email:
fstkhv@umac.mo


Course : CISG114 Web Technology and Life
Time/Venue : TBA


Course Design Philosophy


The learning design in CISG114 is performed with several pedagogical objectives in mind, including:

• develop student responsibility in active learning
• make learning meaningful to student future study or vocational goals
• promote overt knowledge construction with down-to-earth practices
• perform learner assessment to stimulate further learning
• showcase learner achievements in terms of accessible records

In other words, I need a method of teaching, besides the conventional lectures with discussion, which
could facilitate student learning to come close to the above-mentioned objectives. My past experience in
constructivist design of student learning in the major courses from FST-DCIS, points me to the potential
of problem-based learning (PBL) whose effective use has rendered many a flexibility and possibility in
producing student learning under different course scenarios.

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)


PBL could be considered as one form of collaborative learning, in which students, divided into small
groups, are actively engaged in opportunities for knowledge seeking, for problem solving, and for the
collaborating necessary for effective learning. At the heart of PBL are some real-world problems (or
scenarios) used to motivate students to identify and research the issues and principles they need to know
to work through those problems. The design of a PBL learning experience addresses many of the
recommended and desirable outcomes of a quality undergraduate education, such as the ability to perform
the following:

• Think critically and be able to analyze and solve complex, real-world problems
• Find, evaluate, and use appropriate learning resources
• Work cooperatively in teams and small groups
• Demonstrate versatile and effective communication skills, both verbal and written
• Use content knowledge and intellectual skills acquired at the University to become continual learners

The notion of PBL is based on the premise that students learn more effectively when they are presented
with a problem to solve rather than just being given instructions to absorb. Pedagogically, it is important
that students be given opportunities to identify and search for the knowledge they need to approach the
problem.

PBL Cycle of Collaboration


7

• Problem analysis stage – Students, divided into small groups and assigned a facilitator, are
respectively presented a problem scenario to explore, without much instruction given. They generate
ideas about possible solutions to the problem based on what they already know. They then define
what they need to know by identifying the key learning issues and formulate an action plan to tackle
the problem.

• Information gathering stage – A period of self-directed learning follows. Students are responsible for
searching for relevant information. They are largely engaged in just-in-time learning as they are
seeking for information when their need to know is greatest.

• Synthesis stage – After a specified period of time, students reconvene and reassess the problem based
on their newly acquired knowledge. They become their own experts to teach one another in the group;
they use their learning to re-examine the problem. In the process, they are constructing knowledge by
anchoring their new findings on their existing knowledge base.

• Abstraction stage – Once the students feel that the problem task has been successfully completed,
they discuss the problem in relation to similar and dissimilar problems in order to form
generalizations.

• Reflection stage – At this stage, students review their problem-solving process through conducting a
self- and/or peer-evaluation. This stage is meant to help students’ meta-cognitive ability as they
discuss the process and reflect on their newly acquired knowledge.

Essentially, PBL revolves around a focal problem, group work, feedback, and class discussion, skill
development and continuous reporting. The instructor’s role, after the upfront lectures, is to organize and
pilot this cycle of learning activity, guiding, probing and supporting student initiatives along the way so
as to empower them to be responsible in their own learning.

PBL Assessment Criteria to Measure Student Learning


It is my experience that the effectiveness of PBL could be evaluated in part by its ability to explain
practice. Over the years of the PBL way to encourage student learning, the following criteria have been
identified, in order to partially measure the learning outcomes accomplished by students, with respect to
the process of problem diagnosis, action intervention, and reflective learning:

• Learning is an active and engaged process. Instead of being told what to do or how to solve problems,
students within a PBL atmosphere are to generate their own learning issues. It is expected that a sense
of ownership should be born leading to greater cognitive engagement. Students are actively engaged
in working at tasks situated in an authentic setting which should lead to greater ability in transfer to
other real-world contexts.

• Learning is a process of knowledge construction. PBL purports that learners construct their own
knowledge. The constructivist epistemology states that the known is internal to the knower and is
subjectively constructed based on individual responses to experience. Thus, in order to harness the
reality of learning, we need to consider the opportunity to find knowledge for oneself, contrast our
understanding of that knowledge with others’ understanding, and then refine or re-structure
knowledge as more relevant experience is gained.

• Learners function at a meta-cognitive level. Constructivist learning focuses on initiative thinking
activities rather than working on the right answer the teacher wants. Students generate their own
8

strategies for problem formulation and possible solutions. The instructor’s role is that of a facilitator,
a guide or a coach, probing students’ thinking, monitoring their activities, and generally keeping the
process moving. Thus, PBL should promote meta-cognition through encouraging students to reflect
upon the problem-solving process. It is believed that reflection on recent experiences is an effective
method of learning.

• Learning involves social negotiation. The constructivists accept that knowledge is socially negotiated.
The quality or depth of our understanding can only be determined in a social environment where we
can see if our understanding can accommodate the issues and views of others and to see if there are
points of view which we could usefully incorporate into our understanding. The important support of
a learning community where ideas are shared and discussed and understanding enriched is critical to
the development of self-directed learning among PBL students.

Mechanism to Keep Evidence of Student Learning


To support the assessment of PBL student learning throughout the course delivery, we are to make the
best use of our UMMoodle environment, which is to provide electronically a course space,
accommodating (or hosting) different group spaces, and sufficient number of individual personal spaces
for each student in class. Namely, each student should have his or her own Personal e-Space inside our
Moodle course e-Space, and each PBL team is also assigned a Group e-Space under the same course e-
Space. Such e-Spaces are installed to keep track of students’ learning activities, such as personal
journaling, group brainstorming, and collaborative project development.

Besides the basic UMMoodle environment, the use of portfolios as a tool for assessing student learning is
planned. Such student portfolios are designed to provide authentic evidence of what students know,
believe, and are able to do. Assessment of student learning is considered authentic when it focuses on real
performance and mastery of a field of knowledge, as evidenced by some constructed responses to some
real-world problem scenarios of interest. It is believed that the use of portfolios could transform the way
to interact with and engage students in the learning process.

Since the portfolio is to document what students know and are able to do as a result of the course learning,
students are expected to collect and select pieces of their own work over a period of time as evidence of
completing their learning objectives. Usually, students also have to write a rationale to explain why they
think the selected pieces are their best work. Teachers exercise their advising and mentoring role in the
process, recognizing that when instruction is personalized through the UMMoodle environment, this type
of authentic forms of assessment can appropriately characterize student performance.

Typically, a student portfolio may include different types of learning artifacts produced by the student:
essays and other writing samples; logs or journals, or blogs; notes and reflections; observation checklist
(teacher and students); peer evaluations; photographs related to projects; reading inventories and lists;
reports (personal or group work); self-evaluations; solutions to problems; reflections on personal items of
achievement; video and audio recordings of presentations and performances; and worksheets, and many
others to be named. More relevantly, the use of electronic portfolios (e-portfolios) is getting more
common to encourage active learning on the parts of students. It is intended that through the use of the
Moodle environment, students can really appreciate the use of e-portfolios to demonstrate their learning,
skills development and record their achievements over time, ready to be showcased to any selected
audience.




9

Part (D) OBTL Approach in Course Delivery

Instructor: Dr. Kam Hou Vat Office: N327C
Office Hour: TBA Phone: 83974379
Email:
fstkhv@umac.mo


Course : CISG114 Web Technology and Life
Time/Venue : TBA



The OBTL Approach


OBTL is short for Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning. It is a course delivery approach that
encourages a deep and meaningful way for students to learn. In the field of education, OBTL represents a
learner-centered approach to curriculum and course design that focuses on what the students are expected
to learn and to do, rather than what the teacher expects to teach and to do. Operationally, OBTL is mainly
powered up through the constructive alignment of three important elements in actions: ILO’s (intended
learning outcomes), TLA’s (teaching and learning activities), and AT’s (assessment tasks), including the
provision of assessment rubrics (AR’s):

• Intended Learning Outcomes (ILO’s) are what students are expected to be able to do at the end of a
lecture, a course, a project, a field trip or a program of study. They are expressed from the student
perspective, in the form of some action verbs (identifying the learning outcomes), and related to
criteria for assessing student performance. They are referred to as ILO’s because in good learning
environments, students may also learn many additional things about the academic subject, working
with others, dealing with difficult people, teamwork, and other living and learning skills such as
adaptability with emerging Web technologies and social media, which are not necessarily included in
the ILO’s.

• Teaching and Learning Activities (TLA’s) are activities designed by academic staff (course
instructors) to help students achieve the learning outcomes of the course, of the tutorials, of the lab
sessions, of the lectures, of the projects, or of the field trips. The TLA’s must be explicitly related to
each ILO. For example, if an ILO is that students will develop the ability to solve particular types of
problems, lecturing students about how to solve such problems will not be sufficient. Students will
need practice, support and feedback in solving such problems.

• Assessment Tasks (AT’s) are procedures designed to assess the related ILO’s after the specific TLA’s
are identified that will help students achieve the ILO’s. Oftentimes, creating the appropriate AT’s is
an iterative process involving different levels of review, revision, and development. For example, if
an ILO is that students will develop skills in oral communication, then asking student to write an
essay about oral communication does not assess the related ILO. Students need to engage in an act of
oral communication which is assessed accordingly. Thereby, AT’s could come in various forms such
as essay-type assignments, projects, presentations, quizzes, role-plays, e-portfolio collection, and
many others, our teachers ask students to do to demonstrate evidence that a particular ILO has been
achieved.

• Assessment Rubrics (AR’s) are standards (or criteria) explicitly devised to measure the performance
of student achievement in the context of ILO’s. They must be developed after the AT’s have been
identified. For example, a course of study might define an ‘A’ as showing evidence of original
10

thought or being able to critically analyze evidence, but a ‘D’ as being able to reproduce what was
taught with no evidence of critical analysis or original thought. Each grade needs to have a grade
descriptor, describing explicit differences between the grades. And grades, as a form of criterion-
referenced assessment, are meant to describe what students can or cannot do rather than how their
performance compares to other students.

At the University of Macau (UM), the outcomes-based approach to student learning is an expression of
UM’s commitment in elite undergraduate education (http://www.umac.mo/curriculum_reform/), taking
into account the holistic concerns of student development. This outcomes-based education (OBE)
approach calls for the articulation of what we expect our students to learn and to become, and the
collection of evidence to determine whether our students have acquired the learning expected. It is
believed that clear understanding and articulation of intended learning outcomes (ILOs) should facilitate
the design of an effective curriculum and appropriate assessments to measure student achievement, as
well as to provide strategic planning of personalized learning processes for individual students. Yet, this
approach implies (indeed, demands) active participation from students (not just teachers) in the content
and process of the conversational practice and knowledge construction in class. Both students and
teachers must take joint responsibility for learning.
Student responsibility involves
:
• Preparing for lectures by doing the reading indicated for each lecture;
• Participating in discussions during class time, and during our online forum discussions;
• Active involvement in journaling your learning, asking questions and finding answers;
• Being courageous and speaking your mind
Teacher responsibility as facilitator involves
:
• Designing and guiding the collaborative learning process;
• Facilitating in-class conversational practices;
• Steering our course of learning;
• Providing inputs and feedbacks where necessary


















11

Part (E) OBTL Details for CISG114


Instructor: Dr. Kam Hou Vat Office: N327C
Office Hour: TBA Phone: 83974379
Email:
fstkhv@umac.mo


Course : CISG114 Web Technology and Life
Time/Venue : TBA


Intended Learning Outcomes (ILO’s)


Upon completion of this course, students should be able to:
1. Conduct discourse to make sense of IT in today’s Knowledge Society;
2. Compare different Web 2.0 tools to perform research, engage in collaboration, and participate in
communications;
3. Discuss and Illustrate the use of:
• Weblogs to keep a learning journal for reflective practice;
• Wikis to facilitate project collaboration;
• photo-sharing and social bookmarking to share resources over the Web;
• RSS to access frequently updated content on the Internet;
4. Use social networking software to:
• create personal profile for specific purpose;
• share messages with friends;
• join networks for school, or work;
• manage different information open for sharing;
5. Differentiate the application context of:
• metadata, tags, tagging and folksonomy;
• mashups (re-mixings) provided by different Internet applications vendors such as Google,
Amazon, Flickr, and eBay to create customized applications;
• e-learning support for course management, with such software as the Moodle and Sakai;
• social Web through exploring why people participate online and the psychology behind them;
• e-business models using examples such as storefront model, auction model, portal model;
• the variety of Web services offered by private and public enterprises in serving the needs of their
clientele, through their respective electronic customer- and citizen- relationship management
strategies, in the context of e-enterprises and e-governments.
6. Work productively as part of a team and, in particular, communicate and present information
effectively in written and electronic form in a collaborative environment.


Teaching and Learning Activities (TLA’s)


• TLA01: Lectures – This is a typical lecture setting but efforts are made to insert short questions
regarding the lesson so that students have opportunities to discuss with one another. From time to
12

time, students are asked to discuss among themselves for couple of minutes regarding a topic that has
been taught, and are invited to pose their answers online through our UMMoodle course environment
(online forum). This is to give students some space to relax between topics and provide a review of
the lesson.

• TLA02: Small Group Discussion – This also includes the case of pair-based discussion involving only
two students. Basically, divided into small groups during the discussion activity, students develop and
practice higher-order cognitive skills as they explain, analyze, reflect, evaluate and theorize the
working and trends underpinning issues of Web technology in today’s world, especially regarding
impact on our daily living. Each discussion group is equipped with a scribe volunteered by one of the
group members to keep track of the learning issues raised, for subsequent class sharing. Typical
length for this TLA02 varies ranging from 15 to 30 minutes.

• TLA03: Students-Led Class Forum – This is an extension of TLA02, in which selected groups of
students will be responsible for leading a whole class discussion, based on a specific topic of interest.
The group leading the forum is equipped with a moderator, a scribe, one to two discussants,
depending on the group size, as well as a reporter or camera person to video-record the forum
episodes. Typical length for this TLA03 varies ranging from 30 to 45 minutes.

• TLA04: Online Activities – These activities are mainly performed online with Internet access to
search for materials, to identify resources, to complete assignments, to finish project and to housekeep
important findings for subsequent learning, such as for TLA02, TLA03, and TLA01 (getting ready for
lectures). Such activities may be performed during class hours, and/or outside of class hours.

• TLA05: Outside Classroom Activities – These activities are designed to enhance interaction between
teacher and students, and among students themselves, such as inter-group meetings, to prepare for
project work. Typically, the instructor would have several meetings with each group of PBL students
to consult group work.

• TLA06: Learning-by-Doing Activities – These are mainly assignment or project-based work designed
to integrate your skills and knowledge accrued up to a certain point of the semester learning. They
include work assigned for an individual, pair-based, or teamwork completion.


Assessment Tasks (AT’s)


• AT01: In-Class Participation and Discussion (10%) – Students are required to critically discuss,
share, and present the assigned topics inside the classroom. Students may work individually, pair up,
or in group as advised to participate in the discussion topics and issues. They are expected to think
and learn how to engage in an exchange of ideas to construct their understanding of knowledge and
not just to memorize facts, and to regurgitate the same. Students are expected to point out agreements
or disagreements, to raise appropriate questions and to brainstorm solutions to problems. Extra marks
are awarded to those who can draw relevant implications to apply examples in their daily life.
UMMoodle resources (forums, journals, wikis, and blogs) are required to track the discussion details,
progress, and/or preparation.

• AT02: Homework Exercises and Assignments (15%) – Homework exercises and assignments are
given to students to assess student understanding and knowledge on topics listed in the course
schedule. As indicated in Part (A), there will be individual, pair, and team-based exercises and
assignments to complete throughout the semester. All the assignments must be submitted through our
13

UMMoodle course environment, and some must be completed directly in our UMMoodle course site,
too.

• AT03: Group Project (25%) – This is the semester project requiring group-based collaborative work
covering also both pair and individual work. It is truly a holistic exercise requiring personal
responsibility, pair accountability, and team-based collaboration, in order to complete the respective
portions of the same. It is an exercise designed to assess the integrative ability of the individual
student, the pair, and the team as a whole, in the form of constructed responses, to be documented
online through the UMMoodle environment. The assessment is composed of two parts: a) instructor
assessment, and b) peer assessment, based on the artifacts produced (findings, report, presentation,
digital story) and made available online in the UMMoodle course site.

• AT04: Online and Collaborative Learning Efforts (10%) – The assessment of online and
collaborative learning efforts is done on a per exercise basis. Essentially, all the class work (in-class
participation and discussion) and homework assignments are done or submitted through the
UMMoodle course site. In regard to how excellently and consistently such work have been completed,
the AT04 score will be assigned accordingly based on the assessment requirement to be elaborated on
each exercise.

• AT05: Mid-Term Test (20%) – This test is scheduled during a 90-minute class, lasting for about 80
minutes. It is to be written on the UMMoodle course site, designed to measure the students’ grasp of
the key concepts and knowledge elaborated throughout the first half of the semester.

• AT06: Final Examination (20%) – The final exam is a three-hour in-class examination to be written
on the UMMoodle environment. It comprises essay-type questions, and students are required to
provide constructed responses, mostly based on some mini-case studies.
























14

Assessment Rubrics (AR’s)


Rubric for Evidence of Learning in Inquiry Assignments

Score Descriptor: Quality of Information brought as
Evidence of Learning
4 •
Students developed and carefully documented
information gathered from a varie
ty of quality
print and electronic sources, including
various blogs, wikis, and other soft
documents
• Sources are relevant, balanced, and include
critical readings relating to the research
agenda activities
• Primary sources are included, not just linked
3 • Students gathered information from a variety
of appropriate and relevant sources, both
print and electronic (from UMMoodle site of
CISG113)
2 • Students gathered information from a limited
range of sources and displayed less than
adequate effort in identifying and including
quality resources
1 • Students gathered information that lacked
relevance, quality, depth, and balance










15

Rubrics to Assess Forum Participation for Small Group Discussion (Online also)

Criteria Score "0" Score "1" Score "2" Score "3" Score "4"
Group discussion
posting
Did not enter
discussion
Poorly developed
ideas: does not
add to the
discussion
Developing ideas

Well developed
ideas
Well
developed
ideas (at least
one full
paragraph) and
introduces new
ideas
Discussion
responses to host
and other
students
Did not enter
discussion
Interacts once
with either the
host or other
students
Interacts at least
twice with host
and/or other
students
Interacts at least
three times with
host and/or other
students
Interacts
multiple times
with host
and/or other
students
Evidence of
critical thinking
(application,
analysis,
synthesis, and
evaluation)
Did not enter
discussion
Poorly developed
critical thinking
Beginnings of
critical thinking
Some critical
thinking evident

Clear evidence
of critical
thinking
(application,
analysis,
synthesis, and
evaluation



























16

Oral Presentation (also Digital Story): Scoring Guide
1. Organization

o 4 points - Clear organization, reinforced by media. Stays focused throughout.
o 3 points - Mostly organized, but loses focus once or twice.
o 2 points - Somewhat organized, but loses focus 3 or more times.
o 1 point - No clear organization to the presentation.
2. Content: Currency & Releance

o 4 points - Incorporates relevant course concepts into presentation where appropriate.
o 3 points - Incorporates several course concepts into presentation, but does not incorporate key
concepts which are relevant to presentation.
o 2 points - Incorporates one or two course concepts into presentation. Some course concepts
discussed are not relevant to topic.
o 1 point - Course concepts are not integrated into presentation or are not appropriately integrated.
3. Quality of Slides/Media

o 4 points - Slides/media support the presentation, are easy to read and understand. Slides contain no
spelling or grammatical errors.
o 3 points - Most of the slides/media are easy to read and understand. Others contain too much
information or have illegible font. One or two spelling or grammatical errors are present.
o 2 points - Half of the slides/media are easy to read and understand. Others contain too much
information or have illegible font. Three to five spelling or grammatical errors are present.
o 1 point - Most of the slides/media are difficult to read and understand. More than five spelling and
grammar errors exists.
4. Quality of Conclusion

o 4 points - Clearly organized conclusion that wraps up the topic well, ties speech together and has a
note of finality. Smooth transitional flow from body of presentation into conclusion.
o 3 points - Conclusion is not complete or organized. Transitional flow from body of presentation to
conclusion is not smooth.
o 2 points - Disconcerting flow from body of presentation into conclusion. Speaker moves from
body of presentation into conclusion without a smooth, consistent flow.
o 1 point - Conclusion omitted. Speech just ends, it does not feel complete. Presentation does not
end in a smooth manner.
5. Voice Quality and Pace

o 4 points - Voice is clear, easy to hear and understand. Speaker enunciates. Pace is neither too fast
nor too slow.
o 3 points - Problems exist with either enunciation or pace, but these problems occur for less than
about 20% of the speech.
o 2 points - Problems exist with either enunciation or pace, but these problems occur for more than
50% of the speech, but not more than 80% of the speech.
o 1 point - Voice is not clear, hard to hear and understand. Speaker mumbles. Pace is either too fast
or too slow.
6. Professionalism

o 4 points - Clothing is proper, speaker is poised and well prepared. Lack of distracting mannerisms
by speaker during presentation. Audience is able to focus entirely on information offered in
presentation without distraction by the speaker.
o 3 points - Clothing is proper or neat. Speaker lacks some confidence and/or relies on note cards
less than 20% of the time. A minimum number of distracting mannerisms during presentation.
Focus by audience is interrupted by speaker's mannerisms less than 20% of the time.
o 2 points - Clothing is proper or neat in appearance. Speaker lacks confidence and/or relies on note
cards more than 50% of the time but not more than 80% of the time. A moderate number of
distracting mannerisms during presentation. Focus by audience is interrupted by speaker's
mannerisms more than 50% of the time but not more than 80% of the time.
o 1 point - Clothing is not appropriate and/or appearance is unkempt. Speaker reads entire
presentation. Mannerisms are extremely distracting to the audience at least 80% of the time of the
presentation. Mannerisms are so distracting that the audience finds it difficult to concentrate on
presentation.
17

Assessment Rubric for Final Report in Inquiry Assignment
Writing Rubrics Style and Format Mechanics Content and
Organization
4 - Exemplary • Fulfill the
requirements for a
"3"
• Models the
language and
conventions used in
related
scholarly/profession
al literature
• Would meet the
guidelines for a
professional
publication
• Fulfill the
requirements for a
"3" and writing is
essentially error
free in terms of
mechanics
• Writing flows
smoothly from one
idea to another
• Transitions help
establish a sound
scholarly argument
and aid the reader
in following the
writer's logic
• Fulfill the
requirements for a
"3" and writing
excels in
organization and
presentation of
ideas related to the
topic
• Raises important
issues or ideas that
may not have been
represented in the
literature cited
• Would serve as a
good basis for
further research on
the topic
3 - Accomplished
• While there may be
many minor errors,
consistency in style
and format is
maintained
throughout the
writing
• Demonstrates
thoroughness and
competence in
documenting
sources; the reader
would have little
difficulty referring
back to cited
sources
• Style and format
contribute to the
comprehensibility
of the writing
• While there may be
minor errors, the
writing follows
normal conventions
of spelling and
grammar
throughout
• Errors do not
interfere
significantly with
comprehensibility
• Transitions and
organizational
structures such as
subheadings are
used that help the
reader move from
one point to another

• Follows basic
requirements for the
writing
• Topic is timely and
carefully focused
• Clearly outlines the
major points related
to the topic; ideas
are logically
arranged to present
a sound scholarly
argument
• Writing is
interesting and
holds the reader's
attention
• Does a credible job
summarizing
related literature
2 - Developing • Paper lacks
consistency of style
and/or format
• It may be unclear
which references
are direct quotes
and which are
paraphrased. Based
on the information
• Frequent errors in
spelling, grammar
(such as
subject/verb
agreements and
tense), sentence
structure and/or
other writing
conventions make
• While the writing
represents the major
requirement, it is
lacking in
substantial ways
• The content may be
poorly focused or
the scholarly
argument weak or
18

provided, the reader
would have some
difficulty referring
back to cited
sources
• Significant
revisions would
contribute to the
comprehensibility
of the writing
reading difficult
and interfere with
comprehensibility
• Writing does not
flow smoothly from
point to point; lacks
appropriate
transitions
poorly conceived
• Major ideas related
to the content may
be ignored or
inadequately
explored
• Overall, the content
and organization
needs significant
revision to
represent a critical
analysis of the topic

1 - Beginning

Fails to demonstrate
thoroughness and
competence in
documentation
• Lack of appropriate
style and format
make reading and
comprehensibility
problematic
• Writing contains
numerous errors in
spelling, grammar,
and/or sentence
structure that make
following the logic
of the writing
extremely difficult

• Analysis of existing
scholarly/profession
al literature on the
topic is inadequate

• Content is poorly
focused and lacks
organization
• The reader is left
with little
information about
or understanding of
the writing's topic












19

Citation Guidelines


Each finding must be associated with proper citation for valid sources from which the findings are
extracted, such as from:
o Book with one author
￿ Author, A.A. (2005). Title of work. Location/City, State: Publisher.
o Book with two authors
￿ Author, A.A., & Author, B.B. (2005). Title of work. Location/City, State:
Publisher.
o Book with more than two authors
￿ Author, A.A., Author, B.B., & Author, C.C. (2005). Title of work. Location/City,
State: Publisher.
o Journal article
￿ Sawyer, S., & Tapia, A. (2005). The sociotechnical nature of mobile computing
work: Evidence from a study of policing in the United States. International
Journal of Technology and Human Interactions, 1 (3), 1-14.
o A publication in press
￿ Junho, S. (in press). Roadmap for e-commerce standardization in Korea.
International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research.
o Edited book
￿ Zhao, f. (Ed.). (2006). Maximize business profits through e-partnerships.
Hershey, PA: IRM Press.
o Chapter in an edited book
￿ Jaques, P.A., & viccari, R.M. (2006). Considering studetns' emotions in
computer-mediated learning environments. In Z. Ma (Ed.), Web-based intelligent
e-learning systems: Technologies and applications (pp.122-138). Hershey, PA:
Information Science Publishing.
o Report from a university
￿ Broadhurst, R.G., & Maller, R.A. (1991). Sex offending and recidivism (Tech.
Rep. No. 3). Nedlands, Western Australia: University of Western Australia,
Crime Research Centre.
o Published proceedings
￿ Deci, E.L., & ryan, R.M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in
personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol. 38.
Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
o Unpublished doctoral dissertation or mater's thesis
￿ wilfley, d. (1989). Interpersonal analyses of bulimia: Normal-weight and obese.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
o A presented paper
￿ Lanktree, C., & Briere, J. (1991, January). Early data on the Trauma Symptom
checklist for children (TSC-C). Paper presented at the meeting of the American
Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, San Diego, CA.
o Web site
￿ VandenBos, G., Knapp, S., & Doe, J. (2001). Role of reference elements in the
selection of resources by psychology undergraduates. Journal of Bibliographic
Research, 5, 117-123. Retrieved October 13, 2001, from
http://jbr.org/articles.html
20

• When citing a source in your writing, you will need to state the authors' surnames along with the
year of publication. Please note the following:
o If you have several references cited within the same parenthesis, the citations should be
listed in alphabetical order. You will note that 1) each citation is separated by a
semicolon, and 2) ampersands (&) are used instead of the word "and."
￿ Example: In most organizations, data resources are considered to be a major
resource (Brown, 2002; Krall & Johnson, 2005; Smith, 2001).
o If an author's name is mentioned directly within the text of your manuscript as part of a
sentence, please note that only the year is placed within parenthesis.
￿ Example: Brown (2002) states that the value of data is recognized by most
organizations.
o If you directly quote another individual's work, you must also provide the page of the
source from which the quote was taken.
￿ Example: "In most organizations, data resources are considered to be a major
organization asset"(Smith, 2001, pp. 35-36) and must be carefully monitored by
the senior management.
￿ Example: Brown (2002) states that "the value of data is realized by most
organizations" (p.45).
o Under no circumstances should in-text citations be numbered.
￿ Incorrect: In most organizations, data resources are considered to be a major
resource [15; 30; 84].
￿ Correct: In most organizations, data resources are considered to be a major
resource (Brown, 2002; Krall & Johnson, 2005; Smith, 2001).
o If a direct quote that you wish to include in your manuscript is more than 40 words long,
please be sure to format your quote as a block quote (a block quote uses no quotation
marks, and its margins are indented from the left; also, you will notice that the period at
the end of the sentence comes before the parenthetical in-text citation):
￿ Example: As an ever-growing number of people around the world have gained
access to e-mail and Internet facilities, it has become clear that the
communicative environment provided by these tools can foster language learning.
E-mail facilitates access to speakers of one's target language. (Vinagre & Lera,
2007, p.35).
￿ It may also benefit you to consult the following pages of APA's Web site for
frequently asked questions and other tips:
￿ http://www.apastyle.org/faqs.html
￿ http://www.apastyle.org/previoustips.html
• Each piece of evidence should preferably come with Reflective Comments to annotate why such
findings are important, especially when such findings are to support the accomplishment of an
ILO or a set of ILOs; kindly explain the rationale of including such findings, and the learning
acquired.