Directions: For this assignment, you will evaluate one of your classmates' Action Research Final using the rubric below. Please makes sure you provide a score for each component and type qualitative feedback in the box provided. You will provide feedback to the colleague you selected, .
Rubric/Guide for Action Research Study … EDG 6920
|
Level 1 Not Acceptable (< 3 pts) |
Level 2 Needs Improvement (4-6 pts) |
Level 3 Meets Standards (7-8 pts) |
Level 4 Exceeds Standards (9-10 pts) |
|
|
Candidate included a narrative of results obtained from analyzing data collection. |
· Narrative includes poor evidence of credibility of findings , objectivity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general population, and triangulation of data. |
· Narrative includes some evidence of credibility of findings , objectivity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general population, and triangulation of data. |
· Narrative includes sufficient evidence of credibility of findings , objectivity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general population, and triangulation of data. |
· Narrative includes strong evidence of credibility of findings , objectivity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general population, and triangulation of data. |
|
Candidate was able to articulate and develop the Data Analysis, and presentation of findings within the context of the overall action research project. |
· Analysis techniques are not appropriate for the data; · Findings from raw data are not well summarized; · Findings are not clearly articulated; · Invalid or incomplete interpretation of data; · Trends or patterns in data not clearly identified; · Analysis is not reflective in terms of the context and learning & teaching; |
· Analysis techniques used are minimally appropriate for the purpose and scope of the project; · Findings from raw data are summarized but needs a more clear and systematic format; · Partial interpretation of data; · Trends or patterns in data marginally identified; · Analysis is reflective in terms of the context or relates to professional and personal development; · Findings section include graphs or tables without APA style; |
· Analysis techniques used are appropriate for the purpose and scope of the project; · Findings from raw data are summarized in a clear and systematic format; · Valid interpretation of data; · Trends or patterns in the data clearly identified; · Analysis is reflective in terms of the context and relates to professional and personal development; · Findings include clearly articulated graphs or tables in APA style; |
· Analysis includes techniques beyond normal scope of action research; · Interpretation of data shows synthesis or previous and current research in the research context; · Trends or patterns clearly identified in the data; · Analysis is deeply reflective in terms of the context and relates to professional and personal development in collaboration with diverse stakeholders in the area; · Relationships among data are presented graphically; |
|
Candidate effectively presented and discussed the action research project with a diverse set of stakeholders. |
· Inadequate description of meaning of findings. · Interpretation of impact of intervention is missing; · Findings not tied to research; · Discussion does not relate findings to the context or to learning and teaching; |
· Marginal description of meaning of findings; · Interpretation of impact of intervention is valid but minimally explained; · Findings not tied well to research · Discussion relates findings to the context or to learning and teaching; |
· Adequate description of meaning of findings; · Interpretation of impact of intervention is valid; · Findings confirm or refute previous research; · Discussion relates findings to the context and to learning and teaching; |
· Description of meaning of findings pushes knowledge and understanding of the subject; · Discussion includes a thick description of the relationship between the findings and the context and to learning and teaching within the context of the learning environment; |
|
Candidate effectively provides the reader and stakeholders with an Overall Reflection and Conclusion that if implemented will benefit the overall educational community. |
· Little or no reflection; · Reflection offered is superficial; · Limitations are not recognized; |
Reflection on action research process address some of these or does not adequately explain: · what the study has shown, how the problem or issue has been resolved; · limitations of the study; · ways the research study could be improved; · suggestions for future research; · ways your future teaching & practice is informed; |
Reflection on action research process includes: · what the study has shown, how the problem or issue has been resolved; · limitations of the study; · ways the research study could be improved; · suggestions for future research; · ways your future teaching/practice is informed; · how the action researcher was transformed to be a wiser and more effective practitioner through the research experience; · how the action researcher benefited from collaborating with other professionals in the field; |
Reflection ties the study to new potential directions in the field Reflection on action research includes: · how the action researcher was transformed to be a wiser and more effective practitioner through the research experience; · how the action researcher could initiate leadership in the field; · critical reflection of the transformative experience at personal, social, and cultural levels; · how the action researcher benefited from collaborating with other professional in the field and intends to continue the collaboration in her/his professional life; · Implications · limitations |
|
Candidate provides the instructor/s with a graduate level action research project that follows all academic Writing standards for research (APA Style 7th edition). |
· Citations not correct; · Academic language not used; · Poorly organized; · Unclear; |
Some but not all of the following: · use of proper citations; · demonstrates ability to use academic language; · clear focus, well organized; · conceptual clarity; |
· Use of proper citations; · Demonstrates ability to use academic language; · Clear focus, well organized; · Conceptual clarity; |
Clearly developed analysis and argument that shows relationships between all the components of the research |
|
Rating = /50 |
||||
|
Total points = ______________ |
|
Qualitative Summary: |
|
Please explain the above overall rating of your peer’s action research paper. Make sure to also include what you appreciate about their research and what specific suggestions you have to improve it. |
,
Rubric/Guide for Ac/on Research Study … EDG 6920
Level 1
Not Acceptable (< 3 pts)
Level 2
Needs Improvement (4-6 pts)
Level 3
Meets Standards (7-8 pts)
Level 4
Exceeds Standards (9-10 pts)
Candidate included a narrative of results obtained from analyzing data collection.
• Narra$ve includes poor evidence of credibility of findings , objec$vity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general popula$on, and triangula$on of data.
• Narra$ve includes some evidence of credibility of findings , objec$vity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general popula$on, and triangula$on of data.
• Narra$ve includes sufficient evidence of credibility of findings , objec$vity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general popula$on, and triangula$on of data.
• Narra$ve includes strong evidence of credibility of findings , objec$vity of the researcher, transferability of evidence to the general popula$on, and triangula$on of data.
Candidate was able to articulate and develop the Data Analysis, and presentation of findings within the context of the overall action research project.
• Analysis techniques are not appropriate for the data;
• Findings from raw data are not well summarized;
• Findings are not clearly ar$culated;
• Invalid or incomplete interpreta$on of data;
• Trends or paEerns in data not clearly iden$fied;
• Analysis is not reflec$ve in terms of the context and learning & teaching;
• Analysis techniques used are minimally appropriate for the purpose and scope of the project;
• Findings from raw data are summarized but needs a more clear and systema$c format;
• Par$al interpreta$on of data; • Trends or paEerns in data
marginally iden$fied; • Analysis is reflec$ve in
terms of the context or relates to professional and personal development;
• Findings sec$on include graphs or tables without APA style;
• Analysis techniques used are appropriate for the purpose and scope of the project;
• Findings from raw data are summarized in a clear and systema$c format;
• Valid interpreta$on of data;
• Trends or paEerns in the data clearly iden$fied;
• Analysis is reflec$ve in terms of the context and relates to professional and personal development;
• Findings include clearly
• Analysis includes techniques beyond normal scope of ac$on research;
• Interpreta$on of data shows synthesis or previous and current research in the research context;
• Trends or paEerns clearly iden$fied in the data;
• Analysis is deeply reflec$ve in terms of the context and relates to professional and personal development in collabora$on with diverse stakeholders in the area;
• Rela$onships among data are presented graphically;
Candidate effec/vely presented and discussed the ac/on research project with a diverse set of stakeholders.
• Inadequate descrip$on of meaning of findings.
• Interpreta$on of impact of interven$on is missing;
• Findings not $ed to research;
• Discussion does not relate findings to the context or to learning and teaching;
• Marginal descrip$on of meaning of findings;
• Interpreta$on of impact of interven$on is valid but minimally explained;
• Findings not $ed well to research
• Discussion relates findings to the context or to learning and teaching;
• Adequate descrip$on of meaning of findings;
• Interpreta$on of impact of interven$on is valid;
• Findings confirm or refute previous research;
• Discussion relates findings to the context and to learning and teaching;
• Descrip$on of meaning of findings pushes knowledge and understanding of the subject;
• Discussion includes a thick descrip$on of the rela$onship between the findings and the context and to learning and teaching within the context of the learning environment;
Rubric/Guide for Ac/on Research Study … EDG 6920
Candidate effec/vely provides the reader and stakeholders with an Overall Reflec/on and Conclusion that if implemented will benefit the overall educa/onal community.
• LiEle or no reflec$on; • Reflec$on offered is
superficial; • Limita$ons are not
recognized;
Reflec$on on ac$on research process address some of these or does not adequately explain:
• what the study has shown, how the problem or issue has been resolved;
• limita$ons of the study; • ways the research study
could be improved; • sugges$ons for future
research; • ways your future teaching &
prac$ce is informed;
Reflec$on on ac$on research process includes:
• what the study has shown, how the problem or issue has been resolved;
• limita$ons of the study; • ways the research study
could be improved; • sugges$ons for future
research; • ways your future teaching/
prac$ce is informed; • how the ac$on researcher
was transformed to be a wiser and more effec$ve prac$$oner through the research experience;
• how the ac$on researcher benefited from collabora$ng with other professionals in the field;
Reflec$on $es the study to new poten$al direc$ons in the field Reflec$on on ac$on research includes:
• how the ac$on researcher was transformed to be a wiser and more effec$ve prac$$oner through the research experience;
• how the ac$on researcher could ini$ate leadership in the field;
• cri$cal reflec$on of the transforma$ve experience at personal, social, and cultural levels;
• how the ac$on researcher benefited from collabora$ng with other professional in the field and intends to con$nue the collabora$on in her/his professional life;
• Implica$ons Candidate provides the instructor/s with a graduate level action research project that follows all academic Writing standards for research (APA Style 7th edition).
• Cita$ons not correct; • Academic language not
used; • Poorly organized; • Unclear;
Some but not all of the following:
• use of proper cita$ons; • demonstrates ability to use
academic language; • clear focus, well organized; • conceptual clarity;
• Use of proper cita$ons; • Demonstrates ability to use
academic language; • Clear focus, well organized; • Conceptual clarity;
Clearly developed analysis and argument that shows rela$onships between all the components of the research
Ra/ng = /50
Level 1
Not Acceptable (< 3 pts)
Level 2
Needs Improvement (4-6 pts)
Level 3
Meets Standards (7-8 pts)
Level 4
Exceeds Standards (9-10 pts)
Rubric/Guide for Ac/on Research Study … EDG 6920
Total points = 32/50 ______________
Level 1
Not Acceptable (< 3 pts)
Level 2
Needs Improvement (4-6 pts)
Level 3
Meets Standards (7-8 pts)
Level 4
Exceeds Standards (9-10 pts)
Qualitative Summary:
Rubric/Guide for Ac/on Research Study … EDG 6920
Please explain the above overall rating of your peer’s action research paper. Make sure to also include what you appreciate about their research and what specific suggestions you have to improve it.
I found the research topic to be interesting and pertinent to today’s educational environment. The merging of SEL and gaming educational technology is an important topic since school spend a vast amount of money on computer programs and it is important to show its efficacy. The lit review was well developed. The studies used were current and relevant to the topic.
In my opinion, the standard set by the rubric was met in all criteria with the exception of the fourth: Candidate effectively provides the reader and stakeholders with an Overall Reflection and Conclusion that if implemented will benefit the overall educational community.
Overall, I had a few questions about the data analysis: 1. There is a graph labeled Exercise, but I am not sure that that refers to. The x and y axis are not labeled, so I am unsure what that data
represents. 2. I did not see a section on the limitations of the study or the reflection offered by the author. 3. How are attentiveness and engagement observed and analyzed in the study?
