Overall Instructor Rating: Satisfactory

Ratings explanation:

• Exemplary - A model answer in almost every way (this is given out very rarely).
• Satisfactory - Very well done; you've met the expectations of the assignment. There are some minor problems, so read my feedback well.
• Marginal Pass - You pass, but there are lots of issues to consider. Read my feedback very carefully and be sure you understand the points/issues I raise.
• Not satisfactory, redo and resubmit - The assignment was not completed appropriately. I am concerned that you do not understand the process well enough yet. To get credit for the assignment, you need to redo it, most probably on another topic. Read and consider my feedback very carefully before redoing.

Instructor's Overall Feedback:

[Note for any future readers: IDA rating upgraded to Satisfactory after student responded successfully to a revise-and-resubmit request from the instructor. The content of this IDA is still the original submission.] There's just not much here to work with in your responses. While I see that you have named some assessment tools in the How portions of some of the phases, which is a good thing, your responses are still *very* short. You have also misinterpreted the intent of the What and When portions throughout. I do realize that the lesson objective you have chosen for this activity suggests a relatively simple lesson without a lot of complexity to assessing the learning. However, overall it appears you were not very engaged with this activity. Please do the activity again and email your new version to me in a Microsoft Word document. Create a table in Word while you have the opportunity here, duplicating the format of the "grid" given by Dr. Rieber below. I think you will find that this is still a pretty straightforward process, not difficult; but it needs a little more thought and attention to the instructions and the examples given. You are creating an overall formative evaluation plan. First, note that your real objective is to generate the search skill itself. The list is an outcome of what you are trying to teach. What is being "generated" is the search procedure, not the list - we reserve the word "list" to refer to factual supporting information. So the objective should be adjusted accordingly. Meantime, note that most students added details about the Who aspect, as you observed in your buddy's work. For example, where would the experts be recruited from? Would they be subject-matter experts, learning experts, or experts about this kind of learner? You don't have to add this, but you should give thought to how this would actually work in the instruction you are designing. Also, the What portions are asking about what *aspects* of the instruction are being evaluated at each phase. We all know that the instruction is what is being evaluated. But what about the instruction, specifically? Look at the completed example in html (link below) to see what I mean. The When portions are simply about the overall formative evaluation schedule and logistics. The sequence of events is already suggested in the order of the IDA. So this just needs a little fleshing out for each phase. Again, look at the example. For the How sections, remember that we want to measure whether, and how well, learners learned what we are trying to teach them as well as any kind of user feedback that would help improve the instruction. If Teacher observation is sufficient, then explain why this is all that is needed and say something about criteria for success. Would a simple rubric help? What if the student's search only yields, say one item? Would this be considered sufficient? (I think so, if they executed the search correctly - but what do you think?) Sorry to have you do this again, but I look forward to seeing your new version. :) Greg

The objective of this activity is to plan for the formative evaluation of your instruction. As stated by Dick, Carey, and Carey (2001): "Formative evaluation is the process designers use to obtain data that can be used to revise their instruction to make it more efficient and effective. The emphasis in formative evlauation is on the collection and analysis of data and the revision of the instruction" (p. 284-285).

Using the lesson you have described in the IDA on lesson design, complete the Formative Evaluation Planning Worksheet. Using the table below, describe:

• Who will do the ongoing evaluation;
• What is being evaluated;
• When the evaluation should occur; and
• How the evaluation will be conducted (i.e. tools you will use)

Be sure to refer to Dick, Carey, and Carey Chapter 10 for specific information that can be gathered from experts (e.g. subject-matter, learning, and learner) and learners in different formative evaluation situations (e.g. one-to-one, small-group, and field trials).

Formative Evaluation Planning Worksheet

Write the instructional objectives of your lesson here (it can be more than one):

Your final response:

Using the power search option, SWBAT generate a list of book titles found by using the appropriate power search terms when searching for media center materials.

The instructor's feedback to this step:

No specific feedback given on this step.

Write your objective using the correct form. Click here for advice on writing objectives.

HTML formatting reminder: You can embed HTML tags directly in your responses. This will be help your buddies and the instructor view your information in a more readable fashion. For example, if you want a paragraph break somewhere, just enter <p>:

I will have the experts review the lesson on three levels:
<p>
1. content; 2. technical accuracy; 3. quality of instruction.
<p>
The content review will help ensure that no mistakes were made in the information provided to the learners.