Example assessment & marking criteria
Assessment type:
KN artefact & exegesis
Subject:
INF532 Knowledge Networking for Educators
This subject examines the educational practices of connected learning environments within distributed networks of
people and institutions, including schools, information organisations and online communities. Knowledge
networking (KN) is introduced as an active and complementary partnership of online tools, information access,
information distribution and pedagogic practices, which are underpinned by social, ubiquitous, blended and
personalised learning. Research foundations and case studies will define the value and function of personal
knowledge networks. The subject examines tools and opportunities to produce, circulate, curate and comment on
new media and explore the affordances of popular peer-culture tools and community-based knowledge for
connected learning.
On successful completion of this subject, students will be able to:
 understand the life-cycle of information, its history and its future;
 locate and evaluate a range of innovative online tools and spaces for creative knowledge production and
learner engagement;
 use a suite of new media tools for information management, content creation, content curation, collaborative
work, and connecting social networks and communities of practice within and beyond the school;
 describe and critique the interplay between formal and informal learning in physical and digital venues, and
approaches such as the flipped classroom;
 build on knowledge networking to strengthen school-based classroom engagement and learning through
intentional and reflective online instructional design;
 design, develop and deploy products, tools or strategies that show an understanding of education
informatics; and
 utilise a personal learning network to enhance professional growth, personal knowledge management and
collective intelligence practices.
Subject learning
outcomes:
Assessment task:
Value& length:
Task description:
Knowledge networking artefact and exegesis
50%, 1800 words for exegesis + KN artefact
This assignment is applied in nature and consists of two parts.
PART A: Knowledge Networking Artefact
Part A requires you to produce a digital knowledge networking artefact that embodies an aspect of knowledge
networking. You are required to produce a podcast, soundscape, photographic series, short video, animation or
design artefact that provides a group of teachers or a class of students with instruction on developing an aspect of
their knowledge networking skills and understanding. Your selection of topic and the nature of your knowledge
networking artefact must be negotiated with and approved by your Subject Coordinator via email in Week 5 of the
session.
Your digital artefact must be uploaded on the Web and the URL providing the location of your artefact must be
shared with the class via the INF532 subject site at the beginning of Week 10.
PART B: Exegesis (1800 word essay)
Part B requires you to construct a short written exegesis on the purpose and impact of your artefact in supporting
knowledge networking. You are to critically examine the content, and creative and digital production employed to
construct your KN artefact, and demonstrate your artefact supports and extends knowledge networking for learning
and teaching.
Rationale:
Recommended format for a written exegesis
Write in paragraph form and use the following sections as a guide only:
1. Introduction – a brief outline of the artefact you are writing about, why it is important to you/your audience,
what aspects you will concentrate on.
2. Artefact design – a short section on the relationship of the form, content and digital design to the purpose
and function of the work. The relationship between ideas and practical considerations (between inspiration
and execution) should be included here.
3. Context of the artefact – a short section on the context of the work, including physical, creative, educational
and digital contexts. This section should draw on theory.
4. Critical exposition - Extensive section which discusses the artefact in detail, closely analysing each aspect of
the work in relation to the ideas and theories expressed in sections 2 & 3.
5. Conclusion – a brief statement summarising concluding comments about the design, construction, relevance
and impact of the knowledge networking artefact.
This assignment provides students with opportunities to:
 demonstrate their understandings by applying the theory of KN to a practical learning context ;
 explore a range of tools to create a KN artefact;
 reflect on their ability to use KN to develop curriculum that embraces both formal and informal learning
contexts; and
 reflect on how KN theory applies in practice.
Marking criteria & standards of performance
Developed by Judy O’Connell & Barbara Combes
PART A: Knowledge networking artefact (
Levels of
achievement
marks)
High Distinction (>85%)
Low
High
Distinction (75-84%)
Low
High
Credit (65-74%)
Low
Pass (50-64%)
High
Low
Working towards (<50%)
High
Low
High
Criterion 1: Student
demonstrates effective
use of digital tool/s for
creative knowledge
construction.
Demonstrates a
comprehensive understanding
of the nature and features of
the tools utilised to create the
knowledge networking (KN)
artefact. KN artefact provides
a quality learning experience
that provides multiple
opportunities for learner
engagement. KN topic clearly
articulated for the target
audience and includes
innovative elements that
facilitate learner engagement.
Demonstrates a consistent
understanding of the nature
and some of the features of
the tools utilised to create the
KN artefact. KN artefact
provides a range of learning
activities that provide
opportunities for learner
engagement. KN topic is clear
and for the target audience
and includes some elements
that encourage learner
engagement.
Evidence of an understanding
of some of the features of the
tools utilised to create the KN
artefact. KN artefact provides
a limited range of learning
activities for learner
engagement. KN topic is clear
and elements of the design do
not meet the needs of the
target audience.
Evidence of a basic
understanding of how to use a
digital tool to create the KN
artefact. KN artefact provides
a number of similar learning
activities for learner
engagement. KN topic is
unclear and elements of the
design do not meet the needs
of the target audience.
Evidence of poor
understanding of a KN artefact
and how it can be used for
creative knowledge
construction.
Criterion 2:
Demonstrates an
understanding of
instructional design
and the application of
KN theory to the
creation of practical
learning spaces.
Demonstrates a thorough and
comprehensive knowledge of
the elements of instructional
design as applied to the
selected KN topic and the
target audience. Demonstrates
evaluation, analysis and
synthesis of KN theory.
Artefact represents a
sophisticated application of the
theory to practice in the
creation of an innovative and
engaging, practical learning
space.
Demonstrates a sound
knowledge of the elements of
instructional design as applied
to the selected KN topic and
target audience. Demonstrates
analysis of KN theory. Artefact
demonstrates the application
of the theory to practice in the
creation of an engaging,
practical learning space.
Evidence of a developing
knowledge of the elements of
instructional design as applied
to the selected KN topic and
target audience. Demonstrates
a developing knowledge of KN
theory. Artefact demonstrates
limited application of the
theory to practice in the
creation of a practical learning
space.
Evidence of a developing
knowledge of the elements of
instructional design as applied
to the selected KN topic. Fails
to consider the needs of the
target audience. Demonstrates
a limited knowledge of KN
theory. Artefact demonstrates
basic application of the theory
to practice in the creation of a
learning space.
Evidence of a weak
understanding of the elements
of instructional design. KN
topic poorly articulated. Fails
to consider the needs of the
target audience. Demonstrates
poor knowledge of KN theory
and fails to apply the theory to
practice in the creation of a
learning space.
Mark for Part A:
General Comment:
Part B: Exegesis (1800 word essay) (
Levels of
achievement:
marks)
High Distinction (85+)
Distinction (75-84%)
Credit (65-74%)
Pass (50-64%)
Working towards (<50%)
Criterion 3: Student
demonstrates
knowledge of KN
theory, concepts and
practice to critically
evaluate artefact
content and design.
Comprehensive reflection,
clearly and concisely written.
Includes an analysis of KN
theory, concepts and practice.
Evaluates critically the
strengths and weaknesses of
the artefact purpose, content
and design. Includes a
sophisticated analysis of how
the artefact supports and
extends KN for learning and
teaching and how the artefact
could be improved.
Demonstrates wider reading
beyond course readings, texts
and resources and cites
evidence to support reflection.
Reflection provides a
description and developing
analysis of KN theory,
concepts and practice.
Includes relevant reflection on
the strengths and weaknesses
of the artefact purpose, content
and design. Evidence of
developing analysis of how the
artefact supports and extends
KN for learning and teaching.
Demonstrates wider reading
beyond course readings, texts
and resources and cites
evidence to support reflection.
Reflection is a narrative
description of KN theory,
concepts and practice.
Includes developing discussion
that includes the strengths and
weaknesses of the artefact
purpose, content and design.
Evidence of understanding of
how the artefact supports and
extends KN for learning and
teaching. Employs course
readings, texts and resources
to support reflection.
Narrative description of the
main elements of KN theory
with limited reference to
practice. Discussion limited to
a description of the process
undertaken to construct the
artefact. Limited evidence of
understanding of how the
artefact supports and extends
KN for learning and teaching.
Draws from course readings,
little evidence of exploration
beyond set texts and
resources.
Evidence the student does not
understand the task. Lacks
focus, narrative description of
process rather than reflection.
No support from the literature.
Criterion 4: Student
applies and integrates
critical analysis to
articulate writer’s
viewpoint and
recommendations
based on discussion of
the artefact design and
learning space
created.
Strong evidence of
independent investigation,
original questioning and
analysis. Independently takes
and understands multiple
perspectives and through
these can provide an insightful
and/or exhaustive critical
discussion of the issues at
hand.
Evidence of independent
investigation, and original
questioning and analysis.
Independently takes and
understands multiple
perspectives and through
these can provide an insightful
critical discussion of the issues
at hand.
Some evidence of independent
investigation, original
questioning and analysis.
Takes and understands
multiple perspectives and
through these can provide a
critical discussion of the issues
at hand.
Little evidence of independent
investigation, original
questioning and analysis.
Attempts to take and
understand multiple
perspectives.
No evidence of independent
investigation, or original
questioning. No attempt to
take and understand multiple
perspectives.
Mark for Part B:
General Comment:
Part C: Research and Writing Skills ( marks)
Levels of
achievement:
Criteria:
Demonstrates
quality research
and academic
writing skills using
appropriate
scholarly
conventions.
Mark for Part C:
General Comment:
High Distinction (>85%)
Draws from the literature
beyond the readings to support
justifications. Demonstrates
sophisticated critical research,
analysis and synthesis skills,
using ideas and principles
beyond those introduced in the
module. Argument flows, writing
and referencing free from error,
demonstrating an outstanding
level of research undertaken.
Distinction (75-84%)
Draws from the literature
beyond the readings to support
justifications. Demonstrates
competent analysis using ideas
and principles beyond those
introduced in the module.
Argument flows, writes with
clarity. Use of scholarly
conventions reflects a high level
of research undertaken. Few
errors in referencing.
Credit (65-74%)
Assignment well informed by
the readings and goes beyond
key texts. Evidence of analysis
using ideas and principles
introduced in the module. Use
of scholarly conventions reflects
a sound level of research
undertaken. Infrequent errors
and minor omissions in
referencing.
Pass (50-64%)
Draws from course readings.
Descriptive narrative with some
discussion using ideas and
principles introduced in the
module. Use of scholarly
conventions reflects an
adequate level of research
undertaken. Errors and
omissions in reference list.
Working towards (<50%)
No evidence of research in the
course literature. Descriptive
narrative and includes frequent
unsupported facts and opinions.
Use of scholarly conventions
reflects the level of research
undertaken which was minimal.
Many errors and omissions in
reference list.