Engage in collaborative, supportive relationships that enhance one’s own and others’ learning.
- Learners may only minimally engage with their classmates and instructor except when required to do so, and may avoid conflict or engage in it unproductively.
- Learners engage more willingly with others.
- Learners engage willingly with others, give and receive support, and successfully negotiate conflict.
- Learners actively seek out and engage in collaborative relationships and are skilled mentors to their peers.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage this interpersonal development by modeling healthy interactions and through a dialogical approach that keeps interaction among learners central to the learning process. This learning outcome and rubric are drawn from the ELLI’s Relationships/Interdependence dimension and from the intrapersonal dimension of the self-authorship literature. Because IDEA courses focus to a greater extent than most courses on collaboration, interdependence, and mentorship than on autonomy, the learning outcome and rubric also focus here.
Learners who score highly on this dimension are good at managing the balance between being sociable and being private in their learning. They are not isolated, nor are they dependent. They like to learn with and from others, and to share their difficulties, when it is appropriate. They acknowledge that there are important other people in their lives who help them learn, though they may vary in who those people are, e.g. family, friends or teachers. They know the value of learning by watching and emulating other people, including their peers. They make use of others as resources, as partners and as sources of emotional support. They also know that effective learning may also require times of studying — or “dreaming” — on their own. The opposite pole is dependence or isolation. Some learners are more likely to be stuck either in their over-dependency on others for reassurance or guidance; or in their lack of engagement with other people.
Similarly, it is a crucial aspect of mature relationships (the interpersonal dimension) that require respect for both self and other. Self-authored persons have the developmental capacity for interdependence, or the ability to respect one’s own and others’ needs, negotiate multiple perspectives, and engage in genuinely mutual relationships (Kegan, 1994). Thus, self-authorship on all three dimensions reflects the integrated developmental capacities that are inherent in the cognitive, identity, and relational maturity required for college graduates to be effective workers, parents, family members, and citizens (Baxter Magolda, 2004c).
Collaboration and Leadership
Balance collaboration and facilitation during group discussions, activities, and projects.
- Learners may consistently defer to others and refuse the mantle of leadership, or dominate discussions and decisionmaking during activities and projects.
- Learners have taken tentative steps towards either stepping up as leaders, or sharing leadership.
- Learners generally assume or share leadership when appropriate, but may still at times feel insecure or overly confident in their growing facilitation skills, and may offer too little or too much guidance and structure. As collaborators, learners may still at times resist being led.
- Learners are confident, compassionate, and fair leaders and facilitators who are attentive to the group. They are also supportive collaborators who are attentive and responsive to others’ leadership.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage the development of leadership abilities by modeling good leadership and yielding opportunities to lead activities and discussions to learners.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn partly from a rubric that was published by Bowling Green State University in 2002 and has been widely reused by other institutions.
Levels of Leadership Quality
“Leading” involves guiding a group to achieve its goal. It does not require formal authority or power, but is more a matter of influence, integrity, spirit, and respect. Leadership quality in this course will be evaluated using the features defining the four levels shown below. A passing grade for leadership quality will be achieved by participating at Level 2.
Level 1 Leadership (Beginner)
- Gives an impression of reluctance or uncertainty about exercising leadership
- Focuses exclusively on the task to be accomplished without regard to the people, or focuses exclusively on the interpersonal relations and attitudes of people in the group without regard to the task
- Asks for ideas or suggestions without intending to consider them
- May show favoritism to one or more group members
- Takes the group off track
Level 2 Leadership (Novice)
- Shows occasional signs of insecurity about leading, or is overly confident about own leadership skills
- Gives too much attention to the task or to interpersonal relations in the group
- Asks for ideas and suggestions but neglects to consider them
- Lets the group ramble or stray off track too much, or keeps the group so rigidly on track that relevant issues or concerns are ignored
- Has an agenda and goals for the group
Level 3 Leadership (Proficient)
- Looks comfortable and confident in exercising leadership duties
- Circulates a prepared agenda in advance
- Balances the need for task accomplishment with the needs of individuals in the group
- Listens actively and shows understanding by paraphrasing or by acknowledging and building on others’ ideas
- Shows respect to all group members
- Shares information openly
- Assigns tasks by seeking volunteers, delegating as needed
- Checks for agreement, acceptance, buy-in
- Gives recognition and encouragement
Level 4 Leadership (Advanced)
- All of the positive features of proficient leadership, plus:
- Engages all group members
- Keeps the group on track by managing time, providing coaching or guidance, using humor, or resolving differences, as needed
- Intervenes when tasks are not moving toward goals
- Involves the group in setting challenging goals and planning for their accomplishment
- Helps others to provide leadership
Contribute value to the well-being of our communities.
- Learners may not feel like they are an integral part of their communities, and may solely pursue individual achievement and gain.
- Learners have begun to develop ties to the various communities to which they belong.
- Learners demonstrate an awareness and understanding of the needs of the communities in which they belong.
- Learners find ways to collaborate with and contribute to their communities to address community needs.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage learners to choose projects that enable them to work with and for the communities of which they are a part.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn from the Building and Sustaining Community dimension of the Core Competencies identified by the Kwantlen Centre for Co-op Education and Career Services.
Building and Sustaining Community
- Seeks others to work with collaboratively. Develops, nurtures and sustains communities to achieve common good through working with a variety of groups to address issues.
- Demonstrates an attitude and willingness to learn about self and others
- Manages relationships with clear input and congeniality
- Works to understand and identify individual and group level dynamics
- Builds and maintains connections between people online and in person
- Empowers others by keeping them informed
- Seeks networking opportunities to expand community and provide new learning opportunities
- Works towards building bridges between teams
Take personal responsibility for actions and decisions as they affect others.
- Learners do not yet take personal responsibility for their actions, shifting the blame to others, and may not have thought much about the wider effects of their actions.
- Learners take responsibility for their actions within their immediate contexts.
- Learners demonstrate an awareness of the impact of their actions on wider contexts: on society and on the environment.
- Learners make choices that reflect their growing awareness of the impact of their actions on wider contexts.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage personal responsibility by placing a particular focus on social responsibility and sustainable design.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn from the Global Awareness dimension of the Core Competencies identified by the Kwantlen Centre for Co-op Education and Career Services.
- Recognizes how beliefs and actions fit within the context of a greater community.
- Accepts responsibility for own actions
- Demonstrates respect for a diversity of ideas and utilizes the information gained from exploring the diversity
- Builds equitable relationships
- Evaluates ethical aspects of tasks and work and applies ethical courses of action
- Participates in activities that contribute to building community
- Considers the impact to all people of personal actions to each new scenario
Engage in processes of ethical reasoning and decision-making when faced with complex ethical dilemmas.
- Learners primarily take into account what is best for them when engaging in ethical reasoning. Learners engage in snap decision-making, even when confronted with complex ethical dilemmas.
- Learners have begun to take others’ perspectives into account in their ethical decision-making, but do so primarily to maintain relationships and gain approval.
- Learners demonstrate ethical reasoning that centers around societal good, but may still be rule-bound.
- Learners engage in sophisticated ethical reasoning and decision-making that transcends rules, is based on universal principles (such as justice and respect for human dignity), and takes the concerns of all stakeholders into account.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage ethical awareness through developing relational skills such as perspective-taking that are essential to good ethical reasoning and engaging with complex real-world problems that have ethical components.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn from Kohlberg’s stages of moral reasoning. Kohlberg defines three major levels and seven sublevels. We have condensed these into four for consistency with other rubrics.
I. Pre-conventional Level
At this level, the child is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but he interprets the labels in terms of either the physical or hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward, exchange of favors) or the physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. The level is divided into the following three stages:
Stage 0: Egocentric judgement. The child makes judgements of good on the basis of what he likes and wants or what helps him, and bad on the basis of what he does not like or what hurts him. He has no concept of rules or of obligations to obey or conform independent of his wish.
Stage 1: The punishment and obedience orientation. The physical consequences of action determine its goodness or badness regardless of the human meaning or value of these consequences. Avoidance of punishment and unquestioning deference to power are values in their own right, not in terms of respect for an underlying moral order supported by punishment and authority (the latter is stage 4).
Stage 2: The instrumental relativist orientation. Right action consists of what instrumentally satisfies one’s own needs and occasionally the needs of others. Human relations are viewed in terms such as those of the marketplace. Elements of fairness, reciprocity, and equal sharing are present, but they are always interpreted in a physical, pragmatic way. Reciprocity is a matter of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”, not loyalty, gratitude, or justice.
II. Conventional Level
At this level, the individual perceives the maintenance of the expectations of his family, group, or nation as valuable in its own right, regardless of immediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only one of conformity to personal expectations and social order, but of loyalty to it, of actively maintaining, supporting, and justifying the order and identifying with the persons or group involved in it. The level consists of the following two stages:
Stage 3: The interpersonal concordance or “good boy-nice girl” orientation. Good behavior is what pleases or helps others and is approved by them. There is much conformity to stereotypical images of what is majority or “natural” behavior. Behavior is frequently judged by intention — “he means well” becomes important for the first time. One earns approval by being “nice”.
Stage 4: The “law and order” orientation. The individual is oriented toward authority, fixed rules, and the maintenance of the social order. Right behavior consists in doing one’s duty, showing respect for authority, and maintaining the given social order for its own sake.
III. Post-Conventional, Autonomous, or Principled Level
The individual makes a clear effort to define moral values and principles that have validity and application apart from the authority of the groups of persons holding them and apart from the individual’s own identification with the group. The level has the two following stages:
Stage 5: The social-contract legalistic orientation (generally with utilitarian overtones). Right action tends to be defined in terms of general individual rights and standards that have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole society. There is a clear awareness of the relativism of personal values and opinions and a corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside from what is constitutionally and democratically agreed upon, right action is a matter of personal values and opinions. The result is an emphasis upon the “legal point of view”, but with an additional emphasis upon the possibility of changing the law in terms of rational considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in terms of stage 4 “law and order”). Outside the legal realm, free agreement, and contract, is the binding element of obligation. The “official” morality of the American government and Constitution is at this stage.
Stage 6: The universal ethical-principle orientation. Right is defined by the decision of conscience in accord with self-chosen ethical principles that appeal to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. These principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical imperative); they are not concrete moral rules like the Ten Commandments. At heart, these are universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity, and equality of the human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons.
Speaking to an Audience
Speak confidently and comfortably in front of groups, and plan for, monitor, and adapt to one’s audience.
- Learners may show reluctance to speak in front of groups. In presentations, they may neglect to account for their audience when planning their presentation, and may read directly from notes and slides.
- Learners have become more willing to speak up in groups. In presentations, they may make eye contact, but still rely heavily on notes and slides.
- Learners are comfortable speaking in front of groups. They can deliver a well-organized, practiced presentation, referring to, but not reading from, notes or slides. Although content is largely predetermined, they do monitor and adapt to their audience to some extent during delivery.
- Learners are comfortable and confident in speaking extemporaneously, interacting with their audience and responding appropriately to verbal and nonverbal cues.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage the development of oral communications through regular interaction with groups in a safe and collaborative environment.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn partly from the Delivery dimension of the Oral Communication VALUE Rubric. However, IDEA courses typically go a step further by requiring students to not only produce static presentations, but participate in and facilitate group activities and discussions. We have therefore focused more on developing interaction and relationships between speakers and their audiences.
- Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) detract from the understandability of the presentation, and speaker appears uncomfortable.
- Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation understandable, and speaker appears tentative.
- Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation interesting, and speaker appears comfortable.
- Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation compelling, and speaker appears polished and confident.
Writing for an Audience
Accurately and empathetically analyze audience perspectives, motivations, values, and concerns. Successfully address these audience characteristics in written communications that use forms, organization, style, language, and tone appropriate for one’s audience.
- Learners may not express their ideas well in writing; they may make frequent language and mechanical errors, lack organization, and misjudge the expectations of their audience.
- Learners make fewer language and mechanical errors, demonstrate basic organization, and show some awareness of audience expectations.
- Learners make few errors, and produce a well-organized piece of writing that largely addresses audience expectations.
- Learners express themselves clearly and accurately in writing, using forms, style, language, and tone appropriate for their audience.
The activities undertaken in IDEA are designed to encourage this development through producing writing in a variety of formats, chosen by learners and intended for a real-world audience.
This learning outcome and rubric are largely drawn from the Written Communication VALUE Rubric, particularly the Context of and Purpose for Writing, Genre and Disciplinary Conventions, and Control of Syntax and Mechanics dimensions.
Context of and Purpose for Writing
Includes considerations of audience, purpose, and the circumstances surrounding the writing task(s).
- Demonstrates minimal attention to context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., expectation of instructor or self as audience).
- Demonstrates awareness of context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., begins to show awareness of audience’s perceptions and assumptions).
- Demonstrates adequate consideration of context, audience, and purpose and a clear focus on the assigned task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with audience, purpose, and context).
- Demonstrates a thorough understanding of context, audience, and purpose that is responsive to the assigned task(s) and focuses all elements of the work.
Genre and Disciplinary Conventions
Formal and informal rules inherent in the expectations for writing in particular forms and/or academic fields.
- Attempts to use a consistent system for basic organization and presentation.
- Follows expectations appropriate to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s) for basic organization, content, and presentation.
- Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s), including organization, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.
- Demonstrates detailed attention to and successful execution of a wide range of conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s) including organization, content, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices.
Control of Syntax and Mechanics
- Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage.
- Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors.
- Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the portfolio has few errors.
- Uses graceful language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is virtually errorfree.
Apply an understanding of cultural differences to create shared meaning based on those differences.
- Learners may only partially and superficially understand cultural differences, primarily through first impressions, secondhand knowledge, and stereotypes about other cultures.
- Learners have become aware of significant and subtle cultural differences between their own cultures and new cultures. They may, however, have difficulty accommodating to new cultures.
- Learners have begun to make sense of cultural differences and appreciate, respect, and behave sensitively toward new cultures.
- Learners demonstrate the ability to truly empathize with other cultural perspectives, viewing them from the inside and using these perspectives to create shared meaning.
IDEA places a particular focus on direct interaction with new cultures to encourage learners to develop intellectual and empathic understandings of those cultures.
This learning outcome and rubric are drawn from the Skills dimension of the Intercultural Knowledge and Competence VALUE Rubric and literature on intercultural awareness.
Verbal and nonverbal communication:
- Has a minimal level of understanding of cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication; is unable to negotiate a shared understanding.
- Identifies some cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication and is aware that misunderstandings can occur based on those differences but is still unable to negotiate a shared understanding.
- Recognizes and participates in cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication and begins to negotiate a shared understanding based on those differences.
- Articulates a complex understanding of cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication (e.g., demonstrates understanding of the degree to which people use physical contact while communicating in different cultures or use direct/ indirect and explicit/ implicit meanings) and is able to skillfully negotiate a shared understanding based on those differences.
Intercultural awareness can be considered as a process of attitudinally internalizing “insights about those common understandings held by groups that dictate the predominant values, attitudes, beliefs, and outlook of the individual” (Adler, 1987, p. 31). This process can be integrated into three levels: (1) awareness of superficial cultural traits, (2) awareness of significant and subtle cultural traits that contrast markedly with ours, and (3) awareness of how another culture feels from the insider’s perspective (Hanvey, 1987).
The first level is the understanding of another culture based mainly on stereotypes. The awareness in this level tends to be superficial and often partial. Information about the culture comes from media, tourism books, textbooks, or first impression…
In the second level of intercultural awareness we begin to know significant and subtle cultural traits that are sharply different from our own through direct or secondhand experience… In the first phase of this level the experience of cultural conflict may lead to depression, helplessness, hostility, anxiety, withdrawal, or disorientation, but at the same time it provides us a chance to further recognize and understand another’s culture… In the second phase of the second level of intercultural awareness, through rational and ntellectual analysis, we come to understand that cultural differences can be justified from the other culture’s perspective. In other words, differences in cultural traits begin to make sense to us… According to Thomas and Althen (1989), in this phase sojourners begin to appreciate and respect the new culture and to develop sensitivity towards cultural differences. Cultural differences in this phase are processed with a positive aspect…
Finally, the third level of intercultural awareness requires the ability of empathy to help us see the culture from an insider’s perspective... Empathy allows us to estimate what is inside another’s mind and to share their experience (Barnlund, 1988).
Deakin Crick, R., Broadfoot, P., & Claxton, G. (2004). Developing an effective lifelong learning inventory: the ELLI project. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(3), 247-272. ↩
Baxter Magolda, M. B., & King, P. M. (2007). Interview strategies for assessing self-authorship: Constructing conversations to assess meaning making. Journal of College Student Development, 48(5), 491-508. ↩
Kwantlen Centre for Co-operative Education & Career Services. (2012, Feb 22). 8 Core Competencies and Descriptions. ↩
Kwantlen Centre for Co-operative Education & Career Services. (2012, Feb 22). 8 Core Competencies and Descriptions. ↩
Kohlberg, L., & Hersh, R. H. (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory into practice, 16(2), 53-59. ↩
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. (1998). A review of the concept of intercultural awareness. Human Communication, 2(1), 27-54. ↩