Peer Assessment

This rubric is designed to help you assess the quality of your proposed teaching activity that integrates open educational resources (OER). The assignment is worth a total of 20 points, of which 15 points are awarded by the instructor, and 5 points are awarded by participants through peer review.

I. Assessment conducted by the instructor (maximum 15 points)

The instructor will evaluate the assignment using the criteria below. The total grade is the sum of points awarded across all criteria.

1. Subject, teaching level, and learning objectives (maximum 3 points)

• 3 points: The subject, teaching level, and learning objectives are clearly defined.
• 0 points: Information about the subject, teaching level, or learning objectives is missing, unclear, or insufficiently developed.

2. Open Educational Resources (OER) (maximum 3 points)

• 3 points: Relevant OERs are clearly identified, their integration is explained in detail, and adaptation and licence compliance are appropriately considered.
• 1 point: OERs are identified, but the explanation of their integration, adaptation, or licensing is limited or insufficient.
• 0 points: OERs are not identified or are not relevant to the activity.

3. Pedagogical approach and methods (maximum 3 points)

• 3 points: The pedagogical approach and methods are clearly described, logically linked to the use of OERs, and meaningfully support the chosen pedagogical model.
• 1 point: The pedagogical approach is described, but its connection to OERs is unclear or insufficiently explained.
• 0 points: The pedagogical approach is unclear or missing.

4. Learning assessment (maximum 3 points)

• 3 points: Appropriate assessment methods are clearly described, with consideration given to the impact of resource openness.
• 1 point: Assessment methods are identified, but the impact of resource openness is not addressed.
• 0 points: Assessment methods are unclear or missing.

5. Potential challenges and solutions (maximum 3 points)

• 3 points: Realistic challenges are identified, and concrete, feasible solutions are proposed.
• 0 points: Challenges and solutions are not described or are inadequately addressed.

II. Assessment conducted by participants (maximum 5 points)

Participants will assess each other’s work using the criteria below. The total participant grade is the sum of points awarded.

1. Subject, teaching level, learning objectives, and challenges/solutions (maximum 1 point)

• 1 point: The proposal is clear and relevant, with well-defined objectives and clearly stated challenges and solutions.
• 0 points: The proposal is unclear, inconsistent, or missing one or more required elements.

2. Open Educational Resources (OER) (maximum 2 points)

• 2 points: The proposal demonstrates excellent integration of OERs, with clearly explained adaptation and licence compliance.
• 1 point: OER integration is present but insufficiently explained or implemented.
• 0 points: OER integration is superficial or unclear.

3. Pedagogical approach and methods (maximum 1 point)

• 1 point: The pedagogical approach and methods are clearly described and logically linked to the use of OERs.
• 0 points: The pedagogical approach is unclear, missing, or not linked to OERs.

4. Learning assessment (maximum 1 point)

• 1 point: Appropriate learning assessment methods are clearly described.
• 0 points: Assessment methods are missing or insufficiently explained.

Total points:

• Instructor: _____/15 points
• Participants: _____/5 points

Total: _______/20 points

Grade ranges:

• 17-20 points: Excellent – The proposal is exceptionally well developed, innovative, and ready for implementation.
• 14-16 points: Very Good – The proposal is well developed, with minor omissions that can easily be addressed.
• 10-13 points: Good – The proposal is solid but requires significant revision in certain areas.
• Below 10 points: Significant Revision Required – The proposal requires extensive review and revision.