Tool+Evaluation

Constructivist Checklist: WEB 2.0 TOOL
|| === ===

Yes
|| ===== =====

No
|| ===== =====

Somewhat
|| === ===

Potentially
||
 * =====1) Tool is student directed, with choices provided and encourages the role of=====

the teacher as a facilitator
||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * =====2) Tool provides space for collaboration amongst learners.===== ||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * =====3) Tool allows for knowledge construction and creation.===== ||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * =====4) Tool would be adaptable to authentic learning situations.===== ||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * =====5) Tool provides space for reflection and meta cognitive activity.===== ||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * =====6) Tool could be used for active rather than passive learning.===== ||  ||   ||   ||   ||
 * COMMENTS: ||  ||   ||   ||   ||

As a team we narrowed down the criteria to evaluate the WEB 2.0 tools that are revealed in the WEBQUEST.
There are many resources online that you can use or refer to when evaluating whether or not a lesson or tool has the potential to work within a constructivist framework. Below is a list of links that you may wish to refer to now or in the future which can help guide you in your journey through a constructivist approach.

@http://web.archive.org/web/20080310181203/http:/edpsychserver.ed.vt.edu/workshops/tohe1999/online.html

@http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/credit-d.html

h@ttp://www.luanneholder.com/upload/Holder_competency_rubric.pdf

@http://blogs.ubc.ca/supateletec530/files/2012/07/Rubric2.jpg

@http://reciprocality.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/etec-530-assignment-2-robdeabreu-rubric-tool-of-the-trade.pdf

@http://blogs.ubc.ca/etec530constructivism/sample-page/