Webheads in Action Online Convergence 2005

 

Proposal Rating Rubric

 

Three peer reviewers will review each proposal submission (task and proposals to be divided among available volunteers) and will have the opportunity to provide comments to the submitting author if the proposal needs some improvement, but the reviewers' identities will remain confidential. All proposal reviewers will use the following evaluation criteria and scoring rubric:

 

 

Title:  __________________________________

 

Criterion

 


Meets criterion
3

Needs some improvement
2

Needs much improvement
1

Does not meet criterion
0

Comments

1.Do the title and abstract clearly

describe the session?

The title and abstract succinctly describe the session.

The title and abstract give a broad picture of what the session might entail.

The title and abstract indicate little about what the session might entail.

One or both are missing OR the title or abstract does not reflect what the proposal describes

 

2. Is the proposed topic timely and/or appropriate?

The proposal represents 
issues of immediate 
relevance and 
importance.

The proposal focuses on issues appropriate to the field over the last decade.

The proposal focuses on out-of date materials and or practice.

The proposal does not establish relevance or importance to the field.

 

3. Is the session based on best/recommended practice within the educational /technological field?

The session is solidly based on best or recommended practice in these fields

The session is somewhat based on best or recommended practice in these fields

The session makes little reference to best or recommended practices in the field.

The proposal does not establish a relationship to best or recommended practices.

 

4. Is the summary  clearly written?

The summary is succinctly written while clearly describing how the presentation will be developed

The summary somewhat describes how the presentation will be developed

The summary does not clearly indicate how the presentation will be developed

The summary is incomplete or missing.

 

5. Will this session positively contribute to the conference and the field?

The session will make significant, memorable contributions toward the conference  and effective educational practices.

The session will contribute somewhat to the conference and to effective educationa  practices.

The session will offer minimal contribution to the conference and to effective educational practices.

The proposal does not establish how the session will contribute to the conference or to effective educational practices.

 

6. Are the tool(s) and venue(s) selected for the presentation the most appropriate to the topic and format of the presentation?

The venue(s) and tool(s) selected seem to be the best choices for the topic and format of presentation.

The venues or tools selected are not the best choice for the format of the presentation

The venues or tools selected do not seem appropriate for the format of the presentation

No venue(s) or tool(s) specified

 

 

 

Total score  = _____________

 

12 -18          Accept as-is

 

8 -11            Request further clarification

 

0 7    --        Not acceptable / incomplete