I want my engineering class to be project based. So I’m currently reading Setting the Standard for PBL.
One of the first challenges for me is to make sure that students are learning the stuff I want them to learn. It seems to me that it’s all about documentation. I want them to be able to show me what they’ve learned at different points in the project. In Setting the Standard, the authors describe “checkpoints” in projects. At each of these checkpoints, student work can be critiqued for quality and then revised. The critiques should come from other students, teachers, and (when possible) experts in the field. I think if I design a good rubric, it could be used for these critiques, but also to document key knowledge and understandings based on standards. Here’s the plan:
First, a rubric that includes knowledge/skills/understandings. That way the person filling it out knows what to look for. But I am thinking it should be an all or nothing score (no numbers or other indicators). Either the artifact shows evidence of the skill or it doesn’t. If you’re not sure, then it doesn’t. All sides know ahead of time that this won’t affect the group’s grade on the project, it’s just for documentation.
Next, a feedback section on the rubric. This includes what products should have been created (different for each group, so they probly have to create this part). Here, there is only a description of the perceived quality of the product and some suggestions for improvements. This part is all about getting the group to focus on craftsmanship and quality. Again, both sides know this doesn’t affect the grade.
With these two parts of the rubric completed, each student will have a clear picture of what they’ve learned as well as what revisions to make to their product to improve quality.
So what do they turn in?
- Each student turns in a project checkpoint. This includes all products their group has created for the project as well as several two part rubrics. The method of submitting will be determined by the nature of the project.
- Each student turns in the rubrics that they have completed for another group.
So what goes in the gradebook?
Right now I am thinking that none of the info from the rubric needs to go in the gradebook. The students will get credit for two things:
- Turning in a project checkpoint. The grade is not based on the quality or quantity of products included, just that it’s turned in. The rubrics need to be included, but the score is not based on what the rubrics say (just that they are included). Documentation is the key!
- Turning in the rubric and critique they did of another group’s checkpoint entry.
Because students tend to value what they get grades for, this signals to them that what I value is documentation of the process and critique and revision, not initial quality of their products.
What I still need to think through:
What do I do when a student turns in a project checkpoint that does not show evidence of revision based on previous critiques? Do they lose points or is it enough to have turned something in? Will I even need to worry about this once the right culture is established?
What does the feedback section of the rubric look like? Does it need to be different for each project or group? Or can it be standardized?