Presentation at Minnesota Brightspace Ignite on April 24, 2015, by Laura M. Schwarz and NancyruthLeibold, both of Minnesota State University Mankato

1. Laura M. Schwarz, DNP, RN, CNE
Nancyruth Leibold, EdD, RN, PHN, LSN, CNE
Student Discussion
Self-Grading though
use of the D2L
Quizzing Tool
Brightspace Ignite
Presentation
4/24/2015

2.  This session will explain why and how the
Desire2Learn (D2L) quizzing tool can be used by
students to grade their own online discussions.
What you will learn

3. After participation in this session, the learner will
1. Explain why student self-grading is a sound
teaching/learning/assessment methodology.
2. Identify the steps to integrating online discussion
self-grading in the D2L learning management
system using the quizzing tool.
Objectives

4. Have you ever felt like it is painstaking and time
consuming to accurately and constructively
grade online course discussions only to have
students ignore the feedback you have given
them and not grow from it?
Problem

5.  Difficult to accurately grade every discussion
for every student
 Students sometimes do not apply instructions
and or grading rubrics
 Students sometimes do not read instructor
feedback and or do not use the feedback
to remediate
Background

6.  Frustrating and time consuming for the
instructor
 Not developmentally stimulating or
engaging for the adult learner
 Importance of rubric might not be readily
apparent to student
 May not be pedagogically sound for
adult-learner
Background

7. Have students grade their own discussions using
the D2L Quizzing Tool and a Rubric to serve as a
guide!
Aha Moment!
A Brightspace Bright Idea was born!

8.  Adult Learning Theory-Andragogy
◦ Malcolm Knowles Classic Work (1984)
Why Have Students Grade Their Own
Discussions?

9. STUDENT SELF-GRADING IS A SOUND
TEACHING/LEARNING/ASSESSMENT
METHODOLOGY

10. Knowles (1984)
1. self-motivated, self-directed
2. want to have control over their own
learning
3. feel responsible for own learning
4. internally motivated
5. need to know why learning is important
to them
6. learn from each other
Adult Learning Theory-Andragogy
(vs. Pedagogy-Children-Teacher driven)

11. o The learner is dependent
upon the instructor for all
learning.
o The teacher/instructor
assumes full responsibility
for what is taught and
how it is learned.
o The teacher/instructor
evaluates learning.
Pedagogy
o The learner is self-
directed.
o The learner is
responsible for his/her
own learning.
o Self-evaluation is
characteristic of this
approach.
Andragogy
Assumption #1 Learners Are Self-Directed
Educational Technology and Mobile Learning (n.d.)

12. AndragogyPedagogy
Teach a
Man to
Fish….and he
will eat for a
lifetime
Give a
Man A
Fish…. and
he will eat
for a day

13. “Adults are self-directed
and problem centered,
and need and want to
learn useful information
that can readily be
adopted” (Candela,
2012, p. 221)
Adult Learning Theory Premise

14. (Bonnel, 2012, p. 494)
 Self-Reflection: Provides introspection;
observing own thoughts and feelings
 Self-evaluation: uses self-reflection to
complete criteria-based appraisals
◦ conduit for students to reflect on what
they have learned and promotes
reflection in practice
Self-Reflection,
Introspection
& Self-evaluation

15.  Engage students in their own learning
through introspection and self-direction
 Engage them in evaluation of their
performance
 Engage internal motivation
 Allow them to have control
 Better able to see importance of rubric
 Ultimately motivate to improve
performance and enhance learning in the
online classroom discussion.
Purpose of Self-grading

16. Self-Grading Using the d2L Quizzing tool:
Self-
Driven
Learning
Reflection
Rubric/
Quiz

17.  Learners will be honest
 Learners will be self-motivated to study,
understand and accurately apply the
rubric
 Learners will follow-through with grading
each discussion after completion (self-
direction)
 Learners will be motivated to improve
 Discussion self-grading works in a variety of
online learning platforms & courses
Assumptions

18.  Online classroom Desire 2 Learn (D2L) platform
 Undergraduate nursing courses
 RN Baccalaureate Completion Students (Adults
aged 19-50’s)
 Trialed it first and then initiated a study: data
collection under way (IRB approved, voluntary,
anonymous)
 Over 300 learners have used Discussion Self-
Grading thus far, and we are still counting!
Setting/Population in which Implemented

19. STEPS TO INTEGRATING ONLINE DISCUSSION
SELF-GRADING IN THE D2L LEARNING
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM USING THE QUIZZING
TOOL
Self-
Grading
Step 3
Inform
Students
Step 2
Create
Quizzes
Step 1
Create
Rubric

20. Reddy & Andrade (2010)
“A document that articulates the expectations for
an assignment by listing the criteria or what
counts, and describing levels of quality from
excellent to poor”
 Three necessary components:
◦ Evaluation criteria
◦ Quality definitions
◦ Scoring strategy
Step 1: Create a Rubric

21. (Panadero & Jonsson, 2013)
 Useful in formative evaluation
 Can facilitate improved learner performance
 Assist in planning/carrying out work
 Assist in self-assessment
 Rubric combined with self-assessment helps
improve student performance
 Rubrics assist students with ability to improve
self-assessment
Step 1: Create Rubric-Why?

22. 5 criteria with detailed definitions for various
point levels:
1. Spelling, Grammar and Sentence Format.
2. Discussion Participation Timeliness and
Interaction
3. Content of Initial Posting
4. Content of Responses to Others’ Postings
5. APA format
Rubric Criteria We Used (5)

23. CRITERIA
Points
Possible
Spelling, Grammar and Sentence Format.
Sentences are well organized, complete and free of spelling and grammar errors.
(Composed in a word document and used spell and grammar check for errors before
posting to help ensure this)
1
Sentences are well organized and complete but some grammar and/or spelling errors (2 or
less per paragraph)-i.e. did not use spell and/or grammar check
.75
Sentences are complete and comprehensible, but organization needs improving to present
a coherent argument or statement and/or has grammar and/or spelling errors (3 or more
per paragraph)
.5
Sentences inadequate organization/structure, several grammar and/or spelling errors; run-
on sentences
0
Discussion Participation Timeliness and Interaction
Makes postings on at least two different days (Wed initial post due by 11:59PM, Sun.
response to two other people due by 11:59PM). Responds to at least 2 peers’ postings and
reads all posts in assigned group
1
Late first post and/or posts everything 1 day only. Responds to at least 2 peers’ postings and
reads all posts in assigned group
.75
Responds to only 1 peer’s posting .5
Does not reply to or provides minimal comments and information to other participants 0
Content of Initial Posting
Initial posting is clear and concise, completely addresses all parts of the discussion, and
demonstrates that the course content was reviewed, analyzed, understood and well
synthesized. Content was applied through use of relevant examples. Posts by 11:59PM Wed.
1
Initial posting reasonably clear and concise, addresses most, but not all of the discussion,
and demonstrates sufficient understanding, analysis and application of the content through
use of examples. Posts by 11:59PM Wed.
.75
Initial posting shows superficial understanding and analysis of the content, or is limited to substance
that could be derived from others’ postings, and/or late initial post
.25
No initial posting, or discussion was not related to the content. 0
Content of Responses to Others’ Postings
Response to others’ postings advances discussion such as: critical analysis or another
interpretation of posted idea, provide example(s) to illustrate post, provide additional
information/explanation on the topic, provide additional resources (e.g. a journal article or
URL), reflect on the content in the context of your practice, discuss how you might apply
something you learned in the post to your practice, share a related experience from work or
life
Response to others’ postings incomplete (i.e. less than 3 sentences) and/or superficial .5
Response to others’ postings limited to agreed or disagree .25
Does not respond to others’ postings 0
APA Format
Provides evidence-based, scholarly resources to support one’s position on the posed topic
or idea; resources are correctly & accurately presented in APA Format as cited in text and
referenced at the bottom of the discussion
1
Provides evidence-based, scholarly resources, but uses incorrect APA Format in text citation
and/or at the incorrect APA format for referencing at the bottom of the post
.75
Does not cite sources within the post, but does provide scholarly references at the bottom of .5
By: Laura Schwarz, DNP, RN, CNE
©2014
DISCUSSION SELF-
GRADING RUBRIC

24. Discussion Participation Timeliness and
Interaction
Makes postings on at least two different days (Wed initial
post due by 11:59PM, Sun. response to two other people due
by 11:59PM). Responds to at least 2 peers’ postings and
reads all posts in assigned group
1
Late first post and/or posts everything 1 day only. Responds
to at least 2 peers’ postings and reads all posts in assigned
group
.75
Responds to only 1 peer’s posting .5
Does not reply to or provides minimal comments and
information to other participants
0
Create Rubric-Example of One Criterion

25.  Use quizzing tool
 One quiz per discussion (e.g. 1 for each
unit/week)
 Create one question for each criterion-for
our quiz, there are 5 questions
Step 2: Create the Discussion Self-
Grading “Quiz”

26.  The Criterion forms the stem
 Description (definition) of each grading level
forms options
 Points match each option
Create Discussion Self-Grading Quiz
(Under Quiz Properties Tab)

27. Which of the following best reflects your
participation in discussion according to the rubric?
a) Makes postings on at least two different days (Wed
initial post due by 11:59PM, Sun. response to two
other people due by 11:59PM). Responds to at least 2
peers’ postings and reads all posts in assigned group
(1 point)
b) Late first post and/or posts everything 1 day only.
Responds to at least 2 peers’ postings and reads all
posts in assigned group (.75 point)
c) Responds to only 1 peer’s posting (.5 point)
d) Does not reply to or provides minimal comments and
information to other participants (0 points)
Example
Stem
Options
with
correspond
-ing points

28. Create Discussion Self-Grading Quiz in D2L

29. Create Discussion Self Grading Quiz

30.  Set parameters for start/end time so learners
can start the discussion grading toward the end
of the discussion and have it close within a few
days after the discussion closes
 Click “display in calendar”-helps as reminder
 Set timer to max time limit-120 min (quizzing tool
requires timer), don’t click “enforce” or “show
clock”
Due Dates, Timer
(under Restrictions tab)

32.  Auto-export to “grades” so grade populates
there after student completes self-grading
 Automatic Grade
 Allow Unlimited Attempts (in case of mistakes)
 Click “last attempt” under “overall grade
calculation”
Auto Grade, Auto-Export & Attempts
(Under Assessment Tab)

34.  Clear instructions attached to the grading
rubric
 Faculty-led live web-conferencing
instructions or “how-to” video instructions
 Explanation for learners on the importance
of developing the skills of self-refection & self
assessment
Step 3: Inform Students & Explain

35.  Andragogy, introspection, reflection & self- growth
concepts
 You will be grading your own discussions each
week after you have completed discussion
(through the self-grading “quiz” in d2L).
 Please read and understand the entire rubric, this
will impact your discussion grade
 Be honest, I reserve the right to change your
grade, and if I find that your grade is significantly
“inflated,” I will change it to “zero”
 “Practice” Discussion Self-Grading Quiz
 Due date for each & reminder
Talking points for informing students

36.  Over 300 Students have used so far (still
counting!)
 Discussion quality improved over instructor
grading, particularly after the first week
 Students were accurate in self-appraisal
 Student verbatim comments positive
 Most students completed the discussion
self-grading before the quiz “closed” but a
few did not and asked the instructor to re-
open or post score for them
Results

37.  Grading our own discussions is very nice. I feel
like then I don't just fill my discussions with a
bunch of crap to make it look longer.
 The self-grading was a great way for students
to learn
 Self-evaluation opportunity (was a course
positive)
 Self-grading our discussions was more
beneficial than I expected it to be! It kept me
accountable; who wants to have to take
points away from themselves? :)
Student verbatim anecdotal responses

38.  Purpose: Determine nursing students’ general
perceptions of discussion self-grading, and their
specific perceptions of the effectiveness of
discussion self-grading with application of the
discussion grading rubric and online quiz tool;
analysis of their self-grading; and achievement
in online discussions related to self-grading.
Sneak-Peak at Study Results (IRB
approved, anonymous, voluntary)

39. Question
Mean (scale
of 5)
1. The rubric used in the discussion self-grading quiz was
straight forward and easy to follow
4.60
2. The discussion grading rubric allowed me to critically
assess my discussion postings for evaluation
4.44
3. The self-grading quiz provided clear directions. 4.60
4. The self-grading quiz grading criteria were fair. 4.56
5. The self-grading quiz grading criteria were easy to
understand
4.56
6. The self-grading quiz was well organized. 4.58
Application Sub-Scale (n=43)

40. Question
Mean
(scale of 5)
7. I was honest in grading my own discussions. 4.72
8. I was an active participant in grading my own discussions. 4.63
9. I used reflective thinking in grading my own discussions. 4.19
10. I thought of ideas related to new posting knowledge 3.81
11. I thought of ideas related to peer responses 3.84
Analysis Subscale (n=43)

41. Question
Mean
(scale of 5)
12. I applied analysis skills related to new posting knowledge 3.93
13. I applied analysis skills related to my responses 4.12
14. I discovered something I had not known before 3.35
15. Provided an opportunity to reflect on the quality of my
discussion postings.
4.26
16. Provided an opportunity to reflect on the content of my
discussion postings.
4.21
Analysis Subscale (cont)

42. Question: The discussion self grading..
Mean
(scale of 5
17. motivated me to improve my discussion postings. 4.12
18. helped me to understand what to include in my initial discussion posts. 4.35
19. helped me to understand what I should be including in my responses
to others’ discussion posts.
4.28
20. motivated me to use spell check before submitting my discussion post
to the discussion board.
4.30
21. motivated me to proof my posting before submitting my discussion
post to the discussion board.
4.42
22. motivated me to post on time. 4.40
23. motivated me to post more than one time per week. 4.26
Achievement Subscale (n=43)

43.  Few studies on the topic
 Evidence presented here is anecdotal and
from one study
 Need more formal qualitative and
quantitative studies with different programs
& populations
 May not work well for those in high school or
just out of high school (adjusting to adult
learning)
Limitations & Recommendations

44.  Effective and efficient way to grade student
discussions
 Discussion quality improves with use of self-
reflection as students pay attention to the
details of the rubric
 Self-rewarding when students do well
 Immediate feedback (no need to wait for
instructor)
 Instructor should “spot-check”
discussions/grading
Conclusions

45. Thank You!
QUESTIONS?
Contact:
laura.Schwarz@mnsu.edu

46.  Bonnel, W. (2012). Chapter 27: Clinical Performance Evaluation. In
Billings & Halstead (Eds.), Teaching in nursing: A guide for faculty
(4th ed, pp. 494). St. Louis, MS: Elsevier
 Candella, (2012). Chapter 13: From Teaching to Learning. In D. M.
Billings & J. A. Halstead (Eds.), Teaching in nursing: A guide for
faculty (4th ed, pp. 212). St. Louis, MS: Elsevier
 Educational Technology and Mobile Learning. (n.d.). Awesome
chart on andragogy vs. pedagogy. Retrieved from:
http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2013/05/awesome-chart-
on-pedagogy-vs-andragogy.html
 Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
 Panadero, E., & Jonsson. A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for
formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational
Research Review, 9, 129-144.
 Reddy, Y. M. & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher
education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 435-
438.
References

47.  Clip Art & Photos courtesy of Microsoft Office
Acknowledgements