Mini-Project #1 Rubric & Feedback

Name of Project Developer: JANE PIERRE

Using the scale on the following page, in the first column of the ruric, rate from ! " #:
$% Un&erstan&ing of I'D Elements: #
(% Implementation an& Integration of I'D )actics an& 'trategies: #
*% Reflective +riting: *
#% Effectiveness an& ,raftsmanship: #
COMMENTS
The designer displayed a sophisticated understanding of the ISD process and elements. The strategies implemented in the discussion
reflected concepts learnt during the ID course. Explanation of the reflective process was clear but I found it somewhat lacking as a
project of this magnitude could have readily lent itself to some more details. few other minor typographic errors were detected in the
presentation. !verall" much effort was evident by the completed project.

1
Mini-Instructional Project Feedback Rubric
Score
nderstandin! and se o" Strate!ies#Tactics $ualit%
nderstandin! o"
IS& Ele'ents
I'(le'entation and Inte!ration o" IS&
Tactics and Strate!ies
Re"lecti)e *ritin! E""ecti)eness and Cra"ts'ans+i(
,
'hows
sophisticate&
un&erstan&ing of
the I'D process
an& elements%
Integrates a range of tactics creativel- an&
seamlessl- in the lecture% .etho&s use& go
well e-on& straightforwar& application of
techni/ues% 0arger conte1t of lesson
e1amples inclu&e& are well &efine& an& are
aptl- place& in the short"term unit%
'ophisticate& e1planation an&
evaluation of e1perience% All
necessar- components present%
Reflective +riting is insightful an&
well e1plaine&%
Instructional '-stem is highl- effective%
I&eas are engaging, clear an&
polishe&, an& show insight regar&ing
au&ience, learning conte1t an&
purpose% 2ine craftsmanship in
evi&ence%
-
'hows soli&
un&erstan&ing of
the I'D process
an& elements%
Appropriate instructional strategies are use&
an& integrate& well into the I'% 'trategies
applie& with some innovation in some cases%
0arger conte1t of lesson e1amples are
clearl- &efine& appropriatel- place& within
the short"term unit%
,lear e1planation an& evaluation
of e1perience% All necessar-
components present% Reflective
+riting is accurate an& well
e1plaine&%
Instructional '-stem is effective% I&eas
are presente& in a clear an& thorough
wa-, an& show awareness of au&ience,
conte1t an& purpose% Evi&ence of goo&
craftsmanship in evi&ence%
.
'hows a
somewhat naive
or limite&
un&erstan&ing of
the I'D process
an& elements
)he strategies an& tactics in the I' are use&
somewhat cru&el-, or onl- fit somewhat well
or sometimes in the &efine& instructional
conte1t% Description of the larger conte1t
incomplete or unclear in places3 placement of
the lesson e1amples within the short"term
unit coul& e /uestione&%
'omewhat confusing e1planation
an& evaluation of e1perience or
not thoroughl- e1plaine&% Not all
necessar- components are
present% Reflective writing is
somewhat cru&e an& not alwa-s
well e1plaine&%
Instructional '-stem is effective in
some wa-s an& not others% )here are
prolems with clarit- or setting the
conte1t% Unclear whether au&ience,
conte1t an& purpose have een 4ept in
min&% 0ittle evi&ence of goo&
craftsmanship%
1
'hows little
un&erstan&ing of
the I'D process
an& elements%
)he strategies an& tactics use& in the I' are
inappropriatel- use& or are irrelevant%
Descriptions of the larger conte1t in which
lessons are place& are missing%
.issing or incomplete e1planation
an& evaluation of e1perience,
missing components, an&
reflection lac4s evi&ence of effort
an& reflection%
Instructional '-stem is ineffective,
unpolishe&, confusing an& shows little
evi&ence of an- planning of instruction
with au&ience an& conte1t in
min&% 0ac4ing craftsmanship%
2