PLN7+Feedback


 * Main Page **


 * Positive Feedback**:
 * Layout/Design – Consistent use of fonts, headings, colors, etc. The information flows well down the page and the organization is clear and easy to read.
 * Navigation – Nice job adding links from your names to your blogs.
 * Planning list – I like the annotations you added to each bullet point. Rephrasing in your own words is more effective than reusing my explanations.
 * Resources list – Complete with annotations. Well done!


 * Suggested Improvements:**
 * Graphics – Don’t stick graphics at the end of a page as if they are an after-thought; instead incorporate them into the information being presented, with the goal that the graphic adds to the content.
 * Intro paragraph – The information you provide is good, but you fail to mention that PBL is hands-on, tangible-outcome-centered mode of teaching and learning. Also, consider adding wikilinks to the paragraph to deepen the information presented.
 * Planning list – Some of the information should be edited, as it is assignment-specific and not relevant to casual readers. I’ve highlighted in red an example.


 * Brainstorming **


 * Positive Feedback:**
 * Excellent job providing both a mind map and a summary paragraph, explaining the brainstorming process and what came of it.


 * Suggested Improvements:**
 * Mind map – Consider shrinking the map so it fits on the page without scrolling. You added a hyperlink to the larger image, so shrink away!
 * Navigation - your Brainstorming link at the bottom of all pages leads to PLN9's brainstorming, not your own.


 * Classroom Zoo **


 * Project description –** This information is clear and informative. You include specific criteria the children will be accountable for, which is extremely helpful if someone is trying to determine what you are teaching. You incorporate glimmers of differentiation with statements such as “we really want the children to learn facts that they want to learn,” but you need to state explicitly what that means so we can execute your vision. Unfortunately, there is no mention of technology anywhere in your description, with the exception of archiving presentations (which children will have no contact with) and watching video (which is not meaningful technology integration).


 * Outcome –** This is NOT supposed to be information about behavioral objectives (which is what is provided here), but instead is supposed to clearly describe the TANGIBLE THING the children create (the diorama/summary/presentation). Also, because you are including a presentation on similar/different animal characteristics, you need to incorporate some sort of assessment into your outcomes, testing for knowledge comprehension and retention, or a synthesis/reflection activity so the kids can assimilate what has been presented. Otherwise, why take the time to present the information?


 * Curriculum –** There is not enough information provided here. You need to state the exact standard your project fulfills, not direct us to the document where we have to discern which standard is met. Also, you are missing all the connections…what about Language Arts (writing summaries), Art (building 3D models), social studies (cultures affected by animals), technology (using computers, etc.), and possibly many more?


 * Driving Question –** This is a good start, but the question needs refining to elicit higher-level thinking, and it is possible there is more than one. A stronger DQ would be: “How has your animal adapted to its environment?” or “What if your animal had not adapted to its current environment? Would it still be alive today?”


 * Technology –** This list is accurate, but does not fully reflect the possibilities. What if the children could choose the mode for the final project? Instead of a shoe box, maybe some kids could render a 3D image on the computer or create a live-action video, writing a skit and acting out the parts. It would be good to provide more explanation about each piece of technology used.

While not a requirement, this page was an excellent addition to your wiki. It shows me a sample of how you might present information to your students. The annotations for the links are very helpful.
 * Bonus Page: Animal Guide**


 * Summary **

There are many successful components of this wiki. You applied consistent design and layout tactics throughout the pages. Your brainstorming process was very thorough. The project is clearly described and children will enjoy completing it. There needs to be more meaningful technology integration for this PBL activity to be considered “technology-rich.” The students need to employ more resources than just research (which is not explained well). The classroom zoo idea could easily be expanded to incorporate technology seamlessly…why not take a few virtual field trips? What if the children create the environments electronically? The kids should be writing throughout the project…how about making the journals blogs or e-books? The project itself is sound, but I want you to “think outside of the [diorama] box.”

//NOTE: Due to the way you divided up the work, I have to assess you collaboratively on all criteria. If you are concerned about this, please speak to me so I can explain further.//

Mrs. Langston