Blog Post 7 Revisited: Collaborative Digital Story Assessment

Nick and I have finished our collaborative script and storyboard, and now are ready to create our digital story assessment. We both created previous assessments using the direction of Jason Ohler’s chapters on assessing digital stories, so we wanted to combine the major elements of each of our previous versions. Our assessment is based partly on the scene Ohler sets up, where parents view their student’s digital stories and ask, “Why is my child doing this and how did you grade it?”.

Q: Why are we creating our digital storytelling project?

A: Nick and I are developing a digital storytelling project for the students of the Cleveland School of the Arts. We want the students to engage with a reading of Lorraine Hansberry’s play, “A Raisin in the Sun” by producing a play of their own. Students at the Cleveland School of the Arts focus on the literary, visual, and performance arts. The students’ production will be catered to helping a classmate who has 1) read the play and found it difficult to visualize, and 2) has subsequently watched a production of the play, but cannot get past the difference in time period and setting (Chicago, 1950s) as he lives in Cleveland in 2017. Our goal is to persuade students about the possibilities of putting on their own modern, localized version of the play to help this struggling student stay engaged. Themes of the play should parallel, culminating in the students coming up with their own version of the American Dream found in Hansberry’s play.

Q: How will our digital story be graded?

A: Nick and I agreed that it would be best (and simplest) if each portion of the rubric will use our ED 386/586 4.0 scale of assessment.

Here are our agreed assessment categories:

Story– Does our story work? Does the story function as an upbeat introduction into the lesson we are offering? Will the students at the Cleveland School of the Arts  be excited about the prospects of putting on a modern, localized play to help their fellow student? Will creating a performance more in touch with their own lives excite the students and spark creativity? Is the script satisfactory? (0-4.0)

Assignment Criteria–  Does the video meet the length requirements (2.5-3.5 minutes)? Does the story localize the material for the students? Does the story help students understand the value of effective performance art like live theater? Does the video offer students a chance to reflect upon their own goals, dreams, and aspirations? Does the video appear Cleveland-centric? Do we use high quality images, smooth transitions, and appropriate music throughout? (0-4.0)

Originality, voice, creativity– Was the production creative?  Is there evidence of quality work leading towards a fresh perspective and voice? (0-4.0)

Narrative Critique– Does the script communicate effectively? Is the voice over quality clear and paced properly? (0-4.0)

Sense of Audience– Does the digital story address the students at the Cleveland School of the Arts? Does it seem like it will appropriately engage the students? (0-4.0)

Media Application/ Literacy– Was the use of media appropriate and supportive of the story?  Does the product seem polished and well thought out? Does the final product appear smooth and effortless? Does it apply techniques of media persuasion? (0-4.0)

Media Grammar/ Maturity– How many “bumps” does the story have, as defined by Ohler? (0=4.0 3-5=3.0 more than 5=2.0 or below) Are there seamless transitions, proper use of images at the correct time, is the music appropriate and not overpowering? Do images, photos, and music make sense to the audience?

Citations- Is everything that isn’t original properly cited in rolling credits? Do we take account of still photos and sound effects?