May 2021: middle project
Assessment Rubric: ERASMUS+ Project
TECNOLOGY INTO EUROPEAN HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE
by the driving teams from both schools
PEDAGOGICAL INNOVATION |
Activities are varied. Pupils’ initiative, creativity and autonomy are fostered. |
1 | None | There are no references to methodological aspects and they cannot be clearly inferred from the project plan. |
2 | Improvable | Most part of the project is based on lecture-type lessons run by the teacher. There is no space for pupils’ autonomous work. |
3 | Good | The project has been designed so that pupils interact with their partners. Work is organized in various ways; individual work, pairs, international teams… |
4 | Very good | The project promotes interactive and collaborative pedagogical approaches. Learning methods are clearly identified: information gathering, comparative studies, problem-solving, collaborative creation…). |
USE OF TECHNOLOGY |
How will technology be used during the project? The use of technology should be adapted to the circumstances of the pupils; age, school facilities… It should have a clear impact in the achievement of the objectives of the project. |
1 | None | The use of technological tools is not planned. |
2 | Improvable | The use of basic tools tailored to the activities and objectives is planned, but it will mostly be teachers that employ them. |
3 | Good | Tools planned are tailored to the activities and objectives, as well as the age of the pupils, who will use them regularly. |
4 | Very good | Creative uses of technology are promoted. There is a clear space for pupils’ initiative and autonomous work. |
CURRICULAR INTEGRATION |
Contents and objectives of the Project are directly related to the curriculum,not as an extra task to it. Most part of the pupils’ work will be developed during school time. |
1 | None | There are no references to curricular aspects and they cannot be clearly inferred from the project plan. |
2 | Improvable | Areas covered by the project are mentioned as well as contents and curricular objectives, but vaguely. |
3 | Good | The contents and objectives are described specifically. There is a clear relation between the project and curricular areas. |
4 | Very good | Contents, objectives and methodology are described in some detail. Information is given about how the project is integrated into the evaluation of the subjects involved. |
COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION EXCHANGE |
Communication and information exchange processes are considered here. They can be among individuals, small or big groups… Activities such as voting, contests, etc. -aiming at making pupils take contact with their partners’ productions- are included here. |
1 | None | No communication between partners is proposed. |
2 | Improvable | Communication will be made almost exclusively by teachers, and it will be limited to the exchange of finalized products. Only a few pupils will use the communication channels. |
3 | Good | Pupils will communicate through mail, chats o video conferences. The goals of these activities are mutual knowledge, language practising or motivation. |
4 | Very good | Pupils will communicate through varied tools. Communication activities will address at operational objectives: group organization, distribution of tasks, exchanges of essential information for the activities… |
COLLABORATION AMONG SCHOOLS |
Collaborative activities go beyond mere communication. Pupils are not only receivers of information, but also team members, co-authors and co-workers. Collaboration implies the mutual necessity of pupils in partner schools to fulfil their tasks. |
1 | None | No collaboration between partners is proposed. |
2 | Improvable | Pupils will work in one-nationality groups. Their final products will be shared with partner schools. |
3 | Good | Pupils will work in one-nationality groups. Their final products will be necessary for their partner schools to proceed with their tasks, so they will be shared. |
4 | Very good | Pupils will work in one nationality and also in international groups. They will work in collaboration and will interact from the beginning of the work process, not only exchanging already finished products. |
RESULTS and IMPACT |
What pedagogical objectives are posed? Is there an assessment and evaluation plan? What final products are expected and how they relate to the pedagogical objectives? Is there a dissemination plan? |
1 | None | No planned objectives or expected results are mentioned. |
2 | Improvable | The planned objectives and expected results are described, but vaguely. |
3 | Good | The objectives and results are described specifically. Project evaluation mechanisms are mentioned. |
4 | Very good | Evaluation mechanisms are described with some detail. A documentation compilation plan is foreseen, as well as the dissemination of the project and its results inside and outside the educational community. |
DISSEMINATION |
Is there a dissemination plan? What types of communication channels are used? All the products have reached the educational community? |
1 | Vaguely | No planned communication channels are used. |
2 | Good | The products are spread using some communication channels, but not all the results. |
3 | Very Good | The dissemination plan has been designed. All the products are spread specifically through different communication channels. |