Resources

=Resources=

pinterest.com juxtapost.com scoopit.com

**Articles**

 * Burns, M., Dimock, V., & Martinez, D. (Eds.). (2000, Winter). Action + reflection = learning. Tap into Learning, 3(2). Retrieved from []


 * Table adapted from: Dalton, J. & Smith, D. (1986) “Extending Children’s Special Abilities – Strategies for primary classrooms” pp36-7. Original document can be found at: []


 * [] (Do's Don'ts for website navigation)

Bookmarks
Google Bookmarks [|www.google.com/bookmark]

**Sites**
https://capstone-edtc610.wikispaces.com/home

Rubrics
Socratic Seminar Rubric Socratic Seminar Student Observation Rubric

Discussion Rubric below (Use this file to update as your own.) (4) || Regularly contributes discussion Demonstrates evidence of understanding key concepts Provides sources for support of opinions Gives constructive feedback to the work of others Responds readily to questions and/or comments from others Stimulates discussions Readily offers new interpretations and/or varied perspectives of discussion material Ideas are expressed clearly ||  ||   || (3) || Contributes to discussion Shows evident of understanding most major concepts Offers an occasional divergetn viewpoint or challenge Usually includes support for opinions Effective communication of ideas ||  ||   || (2) || Occasionally adds to discussion Has some understanding of concepts Offers very little support for opinons Expression is unclear Very few ideas are expressed Requires prompting for contributions ||  ||   || (1) || Minimal participation in discussion Demonstrates little or no understanding of material Only opinions are cited with no support from other sources Does not respond to prompting ||  ||   ||
 * Discussion Rubric || Objectives Met || Check/Points || Comments ||
 * Advanced
 * Proficient
 * Partially Proficient
 * Unsatisfactory
 * Total ||  ||   ||

RubiStar is a free tool for teachers to use in order to create quality rubrics.
 * Writing Rubric from Regis University [[file:writingRubric - Regis University.pdf]]**
 * =====**Blog Design**===== ||
 * CATEGORY || 4 || 3 || 2 || 1 ||
 * Requirements || All requirements are met and exceeded. || All requirements are met. || One requirement was not completely met. || More than one requirement was not completely met. ||
 * Attractiveness || Makes excellent use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the presentation. || Makes good use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance to presentation. || Makes use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. but occasionally these detract from the presentation content. || Use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. but these often distract from the presentation content. ||
 * Organization || Content is well organized using headings or bulleted lists to group related material. || Uses headings or bulleted lists to organize, but the overall organization of topics appears flawed. || Content is logically organized for the most part but lacks headings or bulleted lists to further organize the content. || There was no clear or logical organizational structure, just lots of facts. ||
 * Originality || Product shows a large amount of original thought. Ideas are creative and inventive. || Product shows some original thought. || Uses other people's ideas (giving them credit), but there is little evidence of original thinking. || Uses other people's ideas, but does not give them credit ||


 * **Wiki/website rubric** ||
 * CATEGORY || 4 || 3 || 2 || 1 ||
 * Requirements || All requirements are met and exceeded. || All requirements are met. || One requirement was not completely met. || More than one requirement was not completely met. ||
 * Layout || The Web site has an exceptionally attractive and usable layout. It is easy to locate all important elements. White space, graphic elements and/or alignment are used effectively to organize material. || The Web pages have an attractive and usable layout. It is easy to locate all important elements. || The Web pages have a usable layout, but may appear busy or boring. It is easy to locate most of the important elements. || The Web pages are cluttered looking or confusing. It is often difficult to locate important elements. ||
 * Navigation || Links for navigation are clearly labeled, consistently placed, allow the reader to easily move from a page to related pages (forward and back), and take the reader where s/he expects to go. A user does not become lost. || Links for navigation are clearly labeled, allow the reader to easily move from a page to related pages (forward and back), and internal links take the reader where s/he expects to go. A user rarely becomes lost. || Links for navigation take the reader where s/he expects to go, but some needed links seem to be missing. A user sometimes gets lost. || Some links do not take the reader to the sites described. A user typically feels lost. ||
 * Color Choices || Colors of background, fonts, unvisited and visited links form a pleasing palette, do not detract from the content, and are consistent across pages. || Colors of background, fonts, unvisited and visited links do not detract from the content, and are consistent across pages. || Colors of background, fonts, unvisited and visited links do not detract from the content. || Colors of background, fonts, unvisited and visited links make the content hard to read or otherwise distract the reader. ||
 * Fonts || The fonts are consistent, easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. Use of font styles (italic, bold, underline) is used consistently and improves readability. || The fonts are consistent, easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. || The fonts are consistent and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. || A wide variety of fonts, styles and point sizes was used. ||
 * Interest || The author has made an exceptional attempt to make the content of this Web site interesting to the people for whom it is intended. || The author has tried to make the content of this Web site interesting to the people for whom it is intended. || The author has put lots of information in the Web site but there is little evidence that the person tried to present the information in an interesting way. || The author has provided only the minimum amount of information and has not transformed the information to make it more interesting to the audience (e.g., has only provided a list of links to the content of others). ||