Publication Rough Draft and Peer Assessment
- Joseline Sanchez
- Nov 10, 2024
- 2 min read
I decided to write my publication rough draft on Creating a Collaborative Environment through Blended Learning because, as a bilingual teacher, I’ve seen firsthand the power of collaboration in the classroom. Many of my students, especially those learning English, frequently learn from each other, not just through language, but in how they approach problems, share strategies, and offer diverse perspectives. Collaboration goes beyond language acquisition—it’s a critical skill in any learning environment. Blended learning, which combines online and in-person instruction, is an ideal method to foster this collaboration while also preparing students for the digital world. It encourages independent thinking, allowing students to engage with content at their own pace, develop self-regulation skills, and adapt to different learning environments. By using blended learning, I can help students build the collaborative, critical thinking, and tech-savvy skills they will need for success in the future.
Peer Assessment
Our group developed a peer review rubric that outlined the specific criteria for assessing our publications. We first identified the essential components for our rough drafts and grouped them into three categories: article structure, explanation of topic/clarity, and digital tools. We assigned specific point value to each element that was required and totaled them to 50. This approach helped us clearly identify areas for improvement by looking at the feedback and scores provided by our peers. As I review the feedback and scores, my area of improvement would be target audience. I plan on reviewing my rough draft and making adjustments to better align to the needs of my audience which would be other educators or leaders in education.
My rough draft was reviewed by:
Victoria Gomez- 48
Paige Shaw- 48
Andrea Bonneau- 49
Jahir Tamayo- 47
Monica Guerrero- 46
My average score- 47.6/50
Read my full rough draft here:
Google Doc (with peer comments)
Comments