As long as it is still too hot to do much else than sweat (no AC) as I listen to the roar of the many fans, I might as well try to get a handle on another assignment as when the heat breaks I need to go into a big push mode to make up cognitive time loss on the course project. Previous summers I would just pack up and be off to a library or coffee shop and set up for hours of intense working. Not this summer due to the pandemic. I need to sweat it out at home and rearrange time and activities to match what the heat does to mind and body.

Once again I need to do a bit of searching on terms to know what the assignment is about. This time its Claim, Connect, Action feedback approach. Yes, I can guess what that is but I’d rather have some sense of confidence that I’m correct. I’ll start with ReVISION Learning – oh, interesting. When I check out the ABOUT US I see my professor is one of the contributing consultants. That should serve as a credibility check. First, Claim, Connect, Action feedback appears to be used for observing and giving feedback on teaching. I understand the class assignment as applying it to feedback on students’ online discussion posts. Brief takeaway then: Feedback (on discussion post) needs to include: Claim(s) against specific attributes of the post (this I would assume would be based on a rubric students are given for what a discussion post should include); Connect the claim(s) to the actual observation (as in mention both the rubric criteria and specific wording in the post); and give Actionable suggestions (how that particular post might be edited to better match a given level of the rubric … here I assume it might be better to make suggestions that would move the student to the next level up … not necessarily to the top level).

Now I need a rubric. There are lots of rubrics on the Web. I do a search w/.edu and look at anywhere from a half to a baker’s dozen. In this case I see a range of quite simple to complex … the complex ones look to me more like they are intended to score a decent length paper rather than a discussion post. A few are titled rubric but I would call them checklists with points. Others seem very general (quality of post, relevance of post, contribution of post) … and a bit too-open for scorer-bias. I’m drawn back to one that is, to me, a checklist. I go back to one I’ve used before … summarize the body of posts, add a new interpretation or clarification or illustration or thought-line, bonus – summarize own post with a question that can prompt additional posts. I do another search for scoring checklists + .edu. First one up has thirteen criteria [really?].

The rubric522-Discussion-PostRubric

The prompt – View the following video https://youtu.be/qcRWkkSvfj0 [6:38] While viewing, pay attention to buzz-words, the illustrated flow and consequences, and personal actions presented. Are there parallels on a more personal f2f basis? Be sure to review the rubric before posting your response.